As I've thought about the points of the OP, the things that crossed my mind are:
Prologue: Fusion / APU / Sandy Bridge-like CPU-integrated graphics don't necessarily need to reach or overcome discreet high-end card performance to make the discrete cards disappear.
Thought process involved:
1.) For the "add-on" market / AIB future to disappear, the only thing that needs to happen is that the APU (CPU+GPU) graphics capability be so completely good enough so as to totally replace all discrete cards for HTPC use, and still be better off than console graphics (both aren't very hard to do). When cards up to this gen's 5670-level are obsolete (or, if talking about next gen, whatever the equivalent card may be at that time), the highest volume parts of the discrete market will disappear.
2.) The highest volume part may not necessarily be the one that contributes the most income, if the profit margins are not structured as such. However, for discrete cards to not totally disappear when the highest volume (entry level) cards are effectively taken away by Fusion/APU/SB products, the remaining discrete card segments (midrange + high-end) should have enough revenue (regardless of volume) such that all R&D + manufacturing costs are offset and profit is achieved.
3.) If we assume that: a.) midrange + high-end brings more profit than the entire low-end, or b.) midrange+high-end profits are still enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs while earning a profit, then there is no danger to the discrete card market.
4.) However, if we assume that: a) midrange + high-end brings less profit than the entire low-end, and b.) therefore midrange + high-end profit is not enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs for discrete cards (especially high-end cards), then there is a very real danger to the discrete card market. In such a scenario it doesn't matter to the companies (AMD, NVIDIA) even if there are still people like us who would gladly buy a 5970 or GTX 480 if there aren't enough of us to pay for the R&D costs and turn a profit.
Those are the thoughts that came to mind. I am not privy to the profits that each discrete card segment delivers, so I do not know which is more likely. All I can seem to determine are which things matter, and which things don't, in determining if discrete cards will have a future or not:
Things that matter:
1.) If low-end will really be completely consumed by Fusion/APU/SB-like products
2.) If midrange+high-end will be enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs for discrete cards in case the low-end will disappear c/o Fusion/APU/SB.
Things that don't matter by themselves:
1.) That Fusion/APU/SB graphics will never reach high-end discrete performance
2.) That graphics demand will keep on increasing (moving target)
As for Kepler and Maxwell, even at the worst case scenario where starting next year SB and Fusion eat up the entire low-end market, the sooner part (Kepler?) will most likely still have a healthy market to look forward to and be released. After all, most of its R&D costs will have been paid already, and not releasing the product will just be throwing away the billon(s) they spent.
As for Maxwell, since the effects of Fusion/APU/SB on the market will most likely only show itself by 2012 (late 2012 probably; before that, a lot of consumers will still have good CPUs, so there is still a healthy market for low-end discrete cards - at least, that is my assumption for the moment, pending more information). By that time, R&D costs for Maxwell will already have been >50% invested. They will most likely release it as well the next year.
Bottomline:
-Kepler and Maxwell, even with Fusion/APU/SB, will probably still get released.
-Beyond them, 2015+, it all depends on the factors I've outlined in the earlier part of this post. If the remaining discrete segments can sustain them, then add-on cards will remain. If not, then they may slowly die-off despite enthusiasts like us clamoring for it to not go away.
There are a few other possibilities that may happen as an offshoot of the two general scenarios. For example, instead of disappearing, discrete cards (which would then only be midrange + high-end as we know them today) may simply become more expensive, in an attempt to increase the profit margins so as to make the whole endeavor worthwhile for the companies involved.
Prologue: Fusion / APU / Sandy Bridge-like CPU-integrated graphics don't necessarily need to reach or overcome discreet high-end card performance to make the discrete cards disappear.
Thought process involved:
1.) For the "add-on" market / AIB future to disappear, the only thing that needs to happen is that the APU (CPU+GPU) graphics capability be so completely good enough so as to totally replace all discrete cards for HTPC use, and still be better off than console graphics (both aren't very hard to do). When cards up to this gen's 5670-level are obsolete (or, if talking about next gen, whatever the equivalent card may be at that time), the highest volume parts of the discrete market will disappear.
2.) The highest volume part may not necessarily be the one that contributes the most income, if the profit margins are not structured as such. However, for discrete cards to not totally disappear when the highest volume (entry level) cards are effectively taken away by Fusion/APU/SB products, the remaining discrete card segments (midrange + high-end) should have enough revenue (regardless of volume) such that all R&D + manufacturing costs are offset and profit is achieved.
3.) If we assume that: a.) midrange + high-end brings more profit than the entire low-end, or b.) midrange+high-end profits are still enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs while earning a profit, then there is no danger to the discrete card market.
4.) However, if we assume that: a) midrange + high-end brings less profit than the entire low-end, and b.) therefore midrange + high-end profit is not enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs for discrete cards (especially high-end cards), then there is a very real danger to the discrete card market. In such a scenario it doesn't matter to the companies (AMD, NVIDIA) even if there are still people like us who would gladly buy a 5970 or GTX 480 if there aren't enough of us to pay for the R&D costs and turn a profit.
Those are the thoughts that came to mind. I am not privy to the profits that each discrete card segment delivers, so I do not know which is more likely. All I can seem to determine are which things matter, and which things don't, in determining if discrete cards will have a future or not:
Things that matter:
1.) If low-end will really be completely consumed by Fusion/APU/SB-like products
2.) If midrange+high-end will be enough to sustain R&D and manufacturing costs for discrete cards in case the low-end will disappear c/o Fusion/APU/SB.
Things that don't matter by themselves:
1.) That Fusion/APU/SB graphics will never reach high-end discrete performance
2.) That graphics demand will keep on increasing (moving target)
As for Kepler and Maxwell, even at the worst case scenario where starting next year SB and Fusion eat up the entire low-end market, the sooner part (Kepler?) will most likely still have a healthy market to look forward to and be released. After all, most of its R&D costs will have been paid already, and not releasing the product will just be throwing away the billon(s) they spent.
As for Maxwell, since the effects of Fusion/APU/SB on the market will most likely only show itself by 2012 (late 2012 probably; before that, a lot of consumers will still have good CPUs, so there is still a healthy market for low-end discrete cards - at least, that is my assumption for the moment, pending more information). By that time, R&D costs for Maxwell will already have been >50% invested. They will most likely release it as well the next year.
Bottomline:
-Kepler and Maxwell, even with Fusion/APU/SB, will probably still get released.
-Beyond them, 2015+, it all depends on the factors I've outlined in the earlier part of this post. If the remaining discrete segments can sustain them, then add-on cards will remain. If not, then they may slowly die-off despite enthusiasts like us clamoring for it to not go away.
There are a few other possibilities that may happen as an offshoot of the two general scenarios. For example, instead of disappearing, discrete cards (which would then only be midrange + high-end as we know them today) may simply become more expensive, in an attempt to increase the profit margins so as to make the whole endeavor worthwhile for the companies involved.
Last edited: