GPU Shipments Down Last Quarter

[Wreckage]

http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/16322#jazz

JPR says Nvidia managed to take back some market share from AMD. Nvidia's slice of the overall GPU market rose from 27.8% in the third quarter to 30.7% in the fourth, while AMD's share fell from 20.6% to 19.3%.

I actually thought shipments would be down a lot more than this, given the economy.

 

[Pelu]

maybe they are planning to sink those things at the bottom of the sea and claim insurance...

 

[SlowSpyder]

Gain market share, but warnings of 40-50% revenue drop from the prior quarter. Nvidia must be selling their cards at a loss, or very close. From the numbers there , it looks like Nvidia took most of the share from the mobile space, it says AMD increased it's share in the desktop space just over 1% but lost almost 4% in the laptop space.

Intel's market share also rose three points to reach a hefty 59.2%

Just think, 60% of the computers sold this quarter struggle with Quake 3.

But based on Intels numbers, I can see why Larabree is such a threat to AMD and Nvidia... if they bundle that with their motherboards/chipsets/processor to OEM's (being multi core I guess they can just build different levels of performance into what they sell and price accordingly) they can just sell it like they do their current integrated graphics.

Interesting none the less.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Gain market share, but warnings of 40-50% revenue drop from the prior quarter. Nvidia must be selling their cards at a loss, or very close.

Well ATI might be selling at even a bigger loss as their profits were down and they were around $15 million in the hole (wiping out their only profit since AMD bought them).

I think NVIDIA made a smart move by pursuing the mobile market so aggressively. As that market seems to be growing compared to the desktop market. Now that they have moved on to 55nm I expect their margins to get better. ATI already made that move so I don't see them benefiting any further.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I doubt AMD is selling their cards at a bigger loss... the 4870 hit the market at $299, here we are 7 months later and it's still very close to $200. The GTX280 was a $650 card that was selling for half of that a month later.

No disagreement about the mobile market. It's a money maker and Nvidia is smart to put some resources into getting their piece of the pie there. They can take exisiting tech and tweak it for the mobile market and charge a premium for it being a 'mobile' part. Definitely a good move on their part.

 

[Cookie Monster]

This is what happens when you sign a deal with Apple for the entire macbook line. I doubt its the desktop products effecting the marketshare.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Gain market share, but warnings of 40-50% revenue drop from the prior quarter.

Well-

Jon Peddie Research reports that shipments slipped to just 72.35 million in the fourth quarter of 2008?that's down from 111.26 million the previous quarter

That is a 35% drop. Given that this is largely attributed to the economic downturn, I would suspect that higher end parts are selling at slightly lower rates then their less expensive counterparts in relative terms atm.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

That is a 35% drop. Given that this is largely attributed to the economic downturn, I would suspect that higher end parts are selling at slightly lower rates then their less expensive counterparts in relative terms atm.

Yep amd will likely not survive in any recognizable form and nvidia will likely follow them. They have backed a dead horse.

 

[vj8usa]

Originally posted by: ronnn
Yep amd will likely not survive in any recognizable form and nvidia will likely follow them. They have backed a dead horse.

What? You think the GPU is "a dead horse"?

 

[taltamir]

i am surprised they aren't getting bailout money.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: taltamir
i am surprised they aren't getting bailout money.

Way to go, now they will probably ask. :disgust:

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
I doubt its the desktop products effecting the marketshare.

Actually they still have the larger market share for desktop as well.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Gain market share, but warnings of 40-50% revenue drop from the prior quarter.

You can gain market share while still losing volume.

Originally posted by: ronnn
Yep amd will likely not survive in any recognizable form and nvidia will likely follow them. They have backed a dead horse.

Is this anything like "PC gaming being dead" that we've been hearing for years?

 

[BladeVenom]

Of course if you go by the whole year, AMD's growth is down 23.8% while Nvidia's growth is down 34.3%. Sis and Via are falling like lead balloons, -61% and -71.9%.
http://www.techspot.com/news/3...harply-in-Q4-2008.html

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
This is what happens when you sign a deal with Apple for the entire macbook line. I doubt its the desktop products effecting the marketshare.

Actually the macbook deal by itself wouldn't be enough to explain Nvidia's increase in market share, as Nvidia only saw 1.1% gain in the mobile segment but almost 3% increase in total market share, with close to 1:1 ratio between laptop to desktop GPUs. Its obvious the gains in the desktop segment from both Nvidia and AMD came at Intel's expense, but it also clearly shows RV770 didn't have nearly the impact on the desktop GPU market AMD had hoped.

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I doubt AMD is selling their cards at a bigger loss... the 4870 hit the market at $299, here we are 7 months later and it's still very close to $200. The GTX280 was a $650 card that was selling for half of that a month later.

You're forgetting AMD is selling the same chip in a mid-range part with the 4850 at $120-150 and even in the sub-$100 range with the 4830, which is clearly going to hurt their margins. Nvidia on the other hand is selling all of their high-end GT200 GPUs for at least as much as the highest RV770. Nvidia has just reduced their high margins toward break-even, but in doing so, they've also squeeze much of the profit out of AMD's already weak margins on RV770. The current market climate certainly hasn't helped, but I still think AMD missed a great opportunity by underpricing their parts at RV770 launch.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: chizow
You're forgetting AMD is selling the same chip in a mid-range part with the 4850 at $120-150 and even in the sub-$100 range with the 4830, which is clearly going to hurt their margins. Nvidia on the other hand is selling all of their high-end GT200 GPUs for at least as much as the highest RV770. Nvidia has just reduced their high margins toward break-even, but in doing so, they've also squeeze much of the profit out of AMD's already weak margins on RV770. The current market climate certainly hasn't helped, but I still think AMD missed a great opportunity by underpricing their parts at RV770 launch.

Bear in mind that those HD 4850 and HD 4830 are chip with defective parts in the die, instead of being discarded, they're used for those SKU's, also they're about 60% smaller than any GT200 and the GT200b chip which seems to have the same die size and transistor count because both uses the same heatspreader, but what nVidia is doing with the defective chips? Discarding them. . .

The HD 4870 debuted at $299 and today isn't far behind from it's original price, but the GTX 280 is sold currently by almost half of it's $699.00 introductory price.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: evolucion8
Bear in mind that those HD 4850 and HD 4830 are chip with defective parts in the die, instead of being discarded, they're used for those SKU's

Actually there are no defects in the 4850 compared to the 4870, other than potential speed binning its exactly the same die. Defects in the 4830 are questionable as well, as shown with its launch where AMD was miraculously able to increase yields and SP overnight to improve product performance and positioning.....

Its also questionable given Nvidia's ability to shift their entire GTX 260 product line from 192 to 216 SP so shortly after launch, along with complete GT200b B3 cores with both the GTX 295 and GTX 285.

also they're about 60% smaller than any GT200 and the GT200b chip

And how much less do they sell for compared to the GTX 260, 280 or 285? More than 60%.

which seems to have the same die size and transistor count because both uses the same heatspreader

I guess every LGA775 chip also has the same die size and transistor count because the size of the heatspreader? Clearly no. GT200b has the same transistor count, but is ~25% smaller than 65nm from the 55nm shrink.

but what nVidia is doing with the defective chips? Discarding them. . .

The same thing ATI is doing with the 4850 and 4830, self-neutering them and reducing price to meet market demand, except Nvidia is still selling their low end for as much as ATI's high-end, which makes other costs of revenue like PCB, memory, VRMs, packaging, marketing, etc that much more important in maintaining margins and profitability.

The HD 4870 debuted at $299 and today isn't far behind from it's original price, but the GTX 280 is sold currently by almost half of it's $699.00 introductory price.

Actually the original 512MB 4870 is very close to 50% of its launch price, which is a similar drop from the GTX 280's drop from $650. The big difference of course is that the GT200 clearly had much more margin built into its price. For example, a 200% margin on $650 is clearly going to be much more than a 200% margin on $300. Once you start squeezing those margins, those profits quickly evaporate, especially when you had smaller gross margins to begin with as was the case with ATI and its low pricing on RV770.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: chizow

Actually there are no defects in the 4850 compared to the 4870, other than potential speed binning its exactly the same die. Defects in the 4830 are questionable as well, as shown with its launch where AMD was miraculously able to increase yields and SP overnight to improve product performance and positioning.....

Yeah, sorry for the confussion, the HD 4850 is about speed binning. The HD 4830 came with 560 stream processors instead of the 640, but that happened with the HIS version, AMD no longer sell cards under it's ATi brand AFAIK, I don't recall other brands having that issue.

Its also questionable given Nvidia's ability to shift their entire GTX 260 product line from 192 to 216 SP so shortly after launch, along with complete GT200b B3 cores with both the GTX 295 and GTX 285.

Nobody here knows why that happened, it's all speculation. It can be that nVidia underestimated the HD 4800 performance, or simply nVidia was miraculously able to increase yields and SP overnight to improve product performance and positioning...

And how much less do they sell for compared to the GTX 260, 280 or 285? More than 60%.

In the end, we all know that ATi cards are cheaper to manufacture, hence better profits, no matter how much nVidia charges for it's cards, is clearly evident that ATi is earning more money for each card sold than nVidia currently with it's GTX200 line, but if we talk about a total volume of cards sold that's a different story, nvidia cards are selling well, but not well enough to avoid it's partners to sell ATi cards like XFX and Gainward.

I guess every LGA775 chip also has the same die size and transistor count because the size of the heatspreader? Clearly no. GT200b has the same transistor count, but is ~25% smaller than 65nm from the 55nm shrink.

I just stated that to prove that the GPU itself didn't got much smaller, LGA775 is a totally different platform which must adhere to certain standards for broad compatability with reference and aftermarket coolers. The GPU itself is just 20% smaller, but the information specifically is a bit hard to find.

The same thing ATI is doing with the 4850 and 4830, self-neutering them and reducing price to meet market demand, except Nvidia is still selling their low end for as much as ATI's high-end, which makes other costs of revenue like PCB, memory, VRMs, packaging, marketing, etc that much more important in maintaining margins and profitability.

I don't see a low end SKU based on the GT200 chip, so a little of help here please..., unless if you are talking about the GeForce 8 and 9 series of cards, the HD 4850 and HD 4830 are very competitive with them, and the incoming HD 4700 series will make it better...

Actually the original 512MB 4870 is very close to 50% of its launch price, which is a similar drop from the GTX 280's drop from $650. The big difference of course is that the GT200 clearly had much more margin built into its price. For example, a 200% margin on $650 is clearly going to be much more than a 200% margin on $300. Once you start squeezing those margins, those profits quickly evaporate, especially when you had smaller gross margins to begin with as was the case with ATI and its low pricing on RV770.

HD 4870 512MB at 50% of its launch price? LOLL, I haven't seen an HD 4870 being sold between $150.00 to $175.00 yet, while is true about the profits quickly evaporate, is a moot point because the ATi card still cheaper to manufacture, you can't compare and use the same ruler to both SKU's because is simply not possible. May be that can apply to the HD4870X2, but the money is not in the high end market, is in the midrange were the cards are sold between $75.00 and $150.00 and ATi is very competitive there, but the nVidia's image as having the fastest single GPU currently makes it look better. I bet that most nvidia's income comes from it's 9 series of cards than anything else, enthusiasts is a niche market, but the noisiest one, not everybody can spend more than $200.00 on a videocard.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: evolucion8
Yeah, sorry for the confussion, the HD 4850 is about speed binning. The HD 4830 came with 560 stream processors instead of the 640, but it happened with the HIS version, AMD no longer sell cards under it's ATi brand AFAIK, other brands of HD 4830 came with no problems whatsoever.

Oh its only details, no biggy I guess.

Nobody here knows why that happened, is all speculation. It can be that nVidia underestimated the HD 4800 performance, or simply nVidia was miraculously able to increase yields and SP overnight to improve product performance and positioning...

Yes, that's the obvious conclusion, not because the chips were crippled by default, just as RV770 chips aren't crippled by default.

In the end, we all know that ATi cards are cheaper to manufacture, hence better profits, no matter how much nVidia charges for it's cards, is clearly evident that ATi is earning more money for each card sold than nVidia currently with it's GTX200 line, but if we talk about a total volume of cards sold that's a different story, nvidia cards are selling well.

Cheaper, sure, how much cheaper though? Again, once you start cutting margins on a lower priced part, you start bumping into variable costs that extend beyond differences in the GPU, ie everything else that goes into makng and selling a video card.

If variable costs are similar and one part sells for 2x as much, obviously the part that sells for 2x as much yields more profit. You don't even have to look at Nvidia parts to come to this conclusion, just look at 4850 and 4870. How much difference do you think there is in price. Between the GDDR5 and better stock cooler, do you really think both parts were equally profitable at $200 and $300 price points? Of course not.

I just stated that to prove that the GPU itself didn't got smaller enough, LGA775 is a totally different platform which must adhere to certain standards for broad compatability with reference and aftermarket coolers. The GPU itself is just 20% smaller, but the information specifically is a bit hard to find.

The GPU did shrink though, the size of the heatspreader doesn't mean anything, they might've kept a similar package size to minimize re-design costs or changes in cooler/PCB design.

I don't see a low end SKU based on the GT200 chip, so a little of help here please...

It should be obvious, you claimed ATI had a use for defective parts as lower-binned parts, but claimed Nvidia didn't. The GTX 260 proves that is false, and also shows Nvidia's "defective" GPU sells for as much as ATI's high-end "flawless" GPU.

HD 4870 512MB at 50%? LOLL, I haven't seen an HD 4870 being sold between $150.00 to $175.00 yet, while is true about the profits quickly evaporate, is a moot point because the ATi card still cheaper to manufacture, you can't compare and use the same ruler to both SKU's because is simply not possible. May be that can apply to the HD4870X2, but the money is not in the high end market, is in the midrange were the cards are sold between $75.00 and $150.00 and ATi is very competitive there, but the nVidia's image as having the fastest single GPU currently makes it look better.

PowerColor 4870 512MB $165 after MIR
Plenty of others there for $175 or less on Newegg. You keep claiming the 4870 is more profitable, the same as you and others have said since launch, except what you're saying simply hasn't been backed by financials or market share reports. This latest report simply confirms it, AMD's attempts to undercut Nvidia have neither increased their market share relative to Nvidia, nor has it returned them to profitability.

As for mid-range and profitability, of course that's where the majority of cards are sold, but that's not necessarily true about profits. Reality of it is, a single GPU sold at $600 might generate more profit than 10 low-end GPUs, again, because of variable costs that are rather inflexible eating into margins.

I'll give you a clear example. Last quarter, Nvidia still posted a profit, despite the claims of GT200 being unprofitable with a higher gross margin % than the previous quarter. How was this possible despite GT200's unprofitability? Simple, even though their GPU profits were down, their GPGPU profits and margins were way up. How? A single GT200-based Tesla or Quadro card sold for $2000 would make up for the profit lost from 3-4 GTX 280 due to lower margins from price cuts. Same GPU, clearly very different profit margins.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

The HD 4870 debuted at $299 and today isn't far behind from it's original price, but the GTX 280 is sold currently by almost half of it's $699.00 introductory price.

Huh. Makes you wonder how NVIDIA was profitable these last 2 years and ATI was not. Could it be that ATI has been selling their cards at a loss? Yes, yes it could.

 

[evolucion8]

chizow, Unfortunately AMD still incurring in expenses when it bought ATi, also it's CPU market is not doing well, but when they talked about financial results and stuff like that, they talked AMD as a whole company, not only it's graphic division. I'm pretty sure that ATi is the only profitable thing currently in AMD and I don't think that Tesla or Quadro cards are sold in great masses, how many corporations or regular customers buy lots of these cards? The money is in the mainstream market, I don't think that a company will sell low end cards at loss, and will overprice their high end line of cards to recoup. Remember that once nVidia sell their GPU's to companies like XFX, eVGA etc, their bussiness is done and the money is in their bank. The OEM companies are the one who will have to take charge to sell their videocards, and the GeForce 8 and 9 series is practically oversaturated and there is were nvidia is making money.

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: evolucion8

The HD 4870 debuted at $299 and today isn't far behind from it's original price, but the GTX 280 is sold currently by almost half of it's $699.00 introductory price.

Huh. Makes you wonder how NVIDIA was profitable these last 2 years and ATI was not. Could it be that ATI has been selling their cards at a loss? Yes, yes it could.

Asides the HD 2900XT, the HD 3x00 series sold well enough to help ATi a bit, and the HD 4xxx series even better, AMD fiscal results is about the company as a whole, not about their graphic division only, but I won't argue with you, I know where are you coming from, seeing ATi burning in hell will cheer you up, so you can shell $650.00 for the new GTX 380!!!

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Asides the HD 2900XT, the HD 3x00 series sold well enough to help ATi a bit, and the HD 4xxx series even better, AMD fiscal results is about the company as a whole, not about their graphic division only

Their graphics division has taken a loss 7 of the last 8 quarters. So it's not just the "company as a whole" as you say.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: evolucion8
chizow, Unfortunately AMD still incurring in expenses when it bought ATi, also it's CPU market is not doing well, but when they talked about financial results and stuff like that, they talked AMD as a whole company, not only it's graphic division. I'm pretty sure that ATi is the only profitable thing currently in AMD and I don't think that Tesla or Quadro cards are sold in great masses, how many corporations or regular customers buy lots of these cards? The money is in the mainstream market, I don't think that a company will sell low end cards at loss, and will overprice their high end line of cards to recoup. Remember that once nVidia sell their GPU's to companies like XFX, eVGA etc, their bussiness is done and the money is in their bank. The OEM companies are the one who will have to take charge to sell their videocards, and the GeForce 8 and 9 series is practically oversaturated and there is were nvidia is making money.

Again, you can look at AMD's itemized income statement from subsidiaries to get an idea of how their GPUs sold and while their Graphics Division has posted small profits, that's before any impairments are allocated.

Same for Nvidia's itemized income statement, as I already mentioned, Nvidia's Tesla and Quadro group (PSB Division) posted 2x as much profit as the GPU division on 40% of the revenue. P.24 of their Q3 2009 10-Q The whole point is you don't need to sell a lot of these cards to make an enormous profit, that's exactly the same premise behind a $600+ halo product while offering cheaper products with lower margins to the masses.....

As for OEMs, well, that's some very inaccurate information you're getting there. Just look at how rebates are handled or the current inventory overstock situations now. You think OEMs ate that entire $125 rebate for early GTX 280 purchases? Of course not, Nvidia either gave them a credit for future shipments or subsidized the entire rebate. You think Intel is sandbagging their OEMs with the overstock of P45/X48 based boards? Of course they can't, they've pushed back launch of P55 to give vendors a chance to burn off excess inventory. What's the point of launching new product if your partners aren't buying and selling it? We're seeing this across the entire PC industry and it all follows the trend of fewer PCs sold in Q4, which has slowed the entire supply chain.

 

[evolucion8]

Now with the economy crisis currently, it will be even worse to get rid of the excess inventory.