[Motley Fool] 3 Reasons AMD is Falling Apart Before Our Eyes

[Hitman928]

Let's all pray AMD stays alive and well, or we'll I'll be paying 5,000 USD for our my future Titans

FTFY
No way I'm following that rabbit down its hole. Even if prices doubled from where they are now, it would probably be the end of PC gaming for me, I just don't game enough anymore for that kind of investment.

 

[3DVagabond]

Let's all pray AMD stays alive and well, or we'll be paying 5,000 USD for our future Titans

If we think progress is slow now, imagine if there was only one major GPU vendor.

 

[rgallant]

Let's all pray AMD stays alive and well, or we'll be paying 5,000 USD for our future Titans

no kidding , the titan x is 1350.00 CAD+ 13% tax already
http://www.ncix.com/detail/evga-geforce-gtx-titan-x-d3-107147.htm

 

[ShintaiDK]

no kidding , the titan x is 1350.00 CAD+ 13% tax already
http://www.ncix.com/detail/evga-geforce-gtx-titan-x-d3-107147.htm

You can thank your local currency for that, not nVidia.

 

[Red Hawk]

Motley Fool's website is basically clickbait, in my experience.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Nvidia is responsible for their product prices. This has nothing to do with currency

 

[sandorski]

You can thank your local currency for that, not nVidia.

Indeed. It could be as cheap as $999....

 

[Keysplayr]

no kidding , the titan x is 1350.00 CAD+ 13% tax already
http://www.ncix.com/detail/evga-geforce-gtx-titan-x-d3-107147.htm

$1076.00 US + tax. NCIX could be gouging.

 

[Keysplayr]

If Nvidia becomes the only game in town, I'm sure prices will go up a bit. But I'm also sure that Nvidia still wants to sell GPUs. If they price them out of range, then those that used to buy in any given bracket will either buy a lower performing card, or find a new hobby. Alienation is probably not on Nvidia's to-do list. IMHO.

 

[3DVagabond]

You can thank your local currency for that, not nVidia.

LOL Who set the price? That post is sig worthy.

 

[Techhog]

You can thank your local currency for that, not nVidia.

Is this a joke? I know about your... "affiliation", but come on! $1000 isn't acceptable.

 

[Techhog]

If Nvidia becomes the only game in town, I'm sure prices will go up a bit. But I'm also sure that Nvidia still wants to sell GPUs. If they price them out of range, then those that used to buy in any given bracket will either buy a lower performing card, or find a new hobby. Alienation is probably not on Nvidia's to-do list. IMHO.

Or consumers just won't get high-end chips until 2-3 years later, or at least for $1500-2000 one year later with the Gxxx4 chip being $800+.

 

[frozentundra123456]

We see the same argument in the cpu forum. If AMD went out of business, I think gpu prices would rise only moderately because nVidia has to sell a reasonable number of chips. As long as performance increases are as moderate as they have been lately, consumers would simply not upgrade. Now if one or the other manufacturers came out with a doubling of performance, with no competition, perhaps then they could demand an exorbitant price, especially if DX12 or 4K drive up the gpu processing games can use.

But I really dont buy into the panic mode some posters go into at the thought of AMD going out of business. Not saying I want it to happen or think it will, but I dont think it would be the disaster some people project it to be. Both cpu and dgpu markets are mature enough that prices will be held down by flat or decreasing demand, no matter what.

 

[Enigmoid]

Or consumers just won't get high-end chips until 2-3 years later, or at least for $1500-2000 one year later with the Gxxx4 chip being $800+.

The market would move to consoles if GPU prices ever went that high.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

We see the same argument in the cpu forum. If AMD went out of business, I think gpu prices would rise only moderately because nVidia has to sell a reasonable number of chips. As long as performance increases are as moderate as they have been lately, consumers would simply not upgrade. Now if one or the other manufacturers came out with a doubling of performance, with no competition, perhaps then they could demand an exorbitant price, especially if DX12 or 4K drive up the gpu processing games can use.

But I really dont buy into the panic mode some posters go into at the thought of AMD going out of business. Not saying I want it to happen or think it will, but I dont think it would be the disaster some people project it to be. Both cpu and dgpu markets are mature enough that prices will be held down by flat or decreasing demand, no matter what.

-Agreed. AMD are effectively "out of business" as far as most CPU segments are concerned and Intel has provided very reasonable performance for very reasonable prices.

Would things be better if AMD were competitive and firing on all cylinders in the CPU space? Of course. We would be getting better performance for less money.

Are things the nightmare scenario often painted with $2000 i3's and your firstborn for an i5 or i7? No. Intel wouldn't be able to sell anything and would go out of business in short order, or a competitor would arrive on the scene to reap the untapped demand (Yes yes, x86 patents and such, I'm sure the US Govt would turn a blind eye to avoid being had by the cajones by a single US Corp).

The GPU space is not inherently different. These are luxury products, not commodities that people need to make it through daily life. Nvidia can't charge $3000 for middle of the line GPU performance the way someone might be able to charge the same if they had a monopoly on, say, water.

I'm drunk and ranting. Apologies.

 

[5150Joker]

-Agreed. AMD are effectively "out of business" as far as most CPU segments are concerned and Intel has provided very reasonable performance for very reasonable prices.

Would things be better if AMD were competitive and firing on all cylinders in the CPU space? Of course. We would be getting better performance for less money.

Are things the nightmare scenario often painted with $2000 i3's and your firstborn for an i5 or i7? No. Intel wouldn't be able to sell anything and would go out of business in short order, or a competitor would arrive on the scene to reap the untapped demand (Yes yes, x86 patents and such, I'm sure the US Govt would turn a blind eye to avoid being had by the cajones by a single US Corp).

The GPU space is not inherently different. These are luxury products, not commodities that people need to make it through daily life. Nvidia can't charge $3000 for middle of the line GPU performance the way someone might be able to charge the same if they had a monopoly on, say, water.

I'm drunk and ranting. Apologies.

Excellent points, with the exception of slight increases in price, I don't think the market would change much from how it is right now with the absence of AMD in the GPU space. One could argue that AMD has been absent nearly 2 years now (especially in the notebook space) with nothing new and even in the summer it's looking like rebrands + 390/380X. During that time NVIDIA has released Maxwell 1 and 2 and now full GM200 with Titan X so their release schedule hasn't shifted. Titan X is reaching the upper limit of what consumers (even the heavy spenders) are willing to go and I think NVIDIA knows that.

Also, if NVIDIA were to gain total monopoly over AIB, it would mean higher income and more R&D expenditure (NVIDIA already spends 30%), more money to use to negotiate foundry space, with less components and proprietary standards for devs and consumers to worry about. I don't think it would necessarily be all negatives if something like that did happen.

 

[Silverforce11]

-Agreed. AMD are effectively "out of business" as far as most CPU segments are concerned and Intel has provided very reasonable performance for very reasonable prices.

No they haven't.

My i5-2500K rig (which can OC easily to 4.6Ghz!) has no discernable performance loss compared to my i5-3570K (barely able to do 4.4Ghz) rig or even i5-4690K (doesn't even want to get above 4.3Ghz) rig. Back then I got the 2500K for ~$250 (AUD). I got the 3570K for $299 and now the 4690K is $330.

I mean 5% gains one generation to the next for higher prices isn't what I think of when I define progress.

 

[Keysplayr]

The market would move to consoles if GPU prices ever went that high.

Exactly my thoughts. Nvidia, or any company WANTS to sell you their products. Not price it out of a range that gamers have become used to.

 

[Keysplayr]

No they haven't.

My i5-2500K rig (which can OC easily to 4.6Ghz!) has no discernable performance loss compared to my i5-3570K (barely able to do 4.4Ghz) rig or even i5-4690K (doesn't even want to get above 4.3Ghz) rig. Back then I got the 2500K for ~$250 (AUD). I got the 3570K for $299 and now the 4690K is $330.

I mean 5% gains one generation to the next for higher prices isn't what I think of when I define progress.

I'm still on 2500K. You should have waited until the upgrade in performance was worth the money. I.E. Skylake. Someone said due in August.
Ivy was 5% ish over Sandy.
Haswell was 5% ish over Ivy
Broadwell rumored to be 5 to 10% over Haswell.
Plus whatever Skylake's entire new platform brings add's up to enough % over my Sandy for me to finally upgrade.

 

[crashtech]

Seems to be a lot of posters trying to convince themselves that a market without competition will be A-OK, but I'm not really convinced. I wonder how Intel and Nvidia would like being carved up into smaller units by the federal government? I think the author is engaged in some short term thinking with this attempt to drive AMD even lower. Careful what you wish for.

 

[Keysplayr]

Seems to be a lot of posters trying to convince themselves that a market without competition will be A-OK, but I'm not really convinced. I wonder how Intel and Nvidia would like being carved up into smaller units by the federal government? I think the author is engaged in some short term thinking with this attempt to drive AMD even lower. Careful what you wish for.

Read closer. That's not what you're seeing at all. I see opinions ranging from "you'll be paying 5000 for a top end Nvidia GPU", to "not the end of the world but with some adjustments".
Show me one person who actually says that no competition will be A-OK. Or even trying to convince themselves of it.

 

[crashtech]

Read closer. That's not what you're seeing at all. I see opinions ranging from "you'll be paying 5000 for a top end Nvidia GPU", to "not the end of the world but with some adjustments".
Show me one person who actually says that no competition will be A-OK. Or even trying to convince themselves of it.

Ah, difference of perception, perhaps. Here are some of the words that impelled my response:

If Nvidia becomes the only game in town, I'm sure prices will go up a bit. But I'm also sure that Nvidia still wants to sell GPUs. If they price them out of range, then those that used to buy in any given bracket will either buy a lower performing card, or find a new hobby. Alienation is probably not on Nvidia's to-do list. IMHO.

We see the same argument in the cpu forum. If AMD went out of business, I think gpu prices would rise only moderately because nVidia has to sell a reasonable number of chips. As long as performance increases are as moderate as they have been lately, consumers would simply not upgrade.

Are things the nightmare scenario often painted with $2000 i3's and your firstborn for an i5 or i7? No. Intel wouldn't be able to sell anything and would go out of business in short order, or a competitor would arrive on the scene to reap the untapped demand (Yes yes, x86 patents and such, I'm sure the US Govt would turn a blind eye to avoid being had by the cajones by a single US Corp).

Excellent points, with the exception of slight increases in price, I don't think the market would change much from how it is right now with the absence of AMD in the GPU space.

Sure seems like everything is gonna be just peachy.

 

[Silverforce11]

I'm still on 2500K. You should have waited until the upgrade in performance was worth the money. I.E. Skylake. Someone said due in August.
Ivy was 5% ish over Sandy.
Haswell was 5% ish over Ivy
Broadwell rumored to be 5 to 10% over Haswell.
Plus whatever Skylake's entire new platform brings add's up to enough % over my Sandy for me to finally upgrade.

That's my point. Without competition, Intel is just competing with itself and it causes stagnation. They can release 5% iterations endlessly and steadily creep up the price. Intel's focus has been mobiles & notebooks for so long because nothing challenges them on desktops.

Without AMD GPUs to force NV to excel & innovate, what is stopping them from doing a similar stunt as Intel has been doing for the past few generations? Nada.

 

[Leyawiin]

It was typical Motley Fool click bait, but anyone would be in complete denial if they thought AMD was in a healthy state. They've been treading water for years. Huffing and puffing about what an Intel shill Ashraf Eassa is doesn't change that basic fact. I will say its pretty impressive how well AMD has tread water for the last six to seven years. They should be commended.

 

[5150Joker]

That's my point. Without competition, Intel is just competing with itself and it causes stagnation. They can release 5% iterations endlessly and steadily creep up the price. Intel's focus has been mobiles & notebooks for so long because nothing challenges them on desktops.

Without AMD GPUs to force NV to excel & innovate, what is stopping them from doing a similar stunt as Intel has been doing for the past few generations? Nada.

Intel recently slashed a billion from it's quarterly outlook didn't it? They blamed Windows XP but that could also be due to the stagnant nature of advancements and things being "good enough". NVIDIA can't afford those kinds of hits so they would have to keep pumping out GPUs at a similar pace if they want to keep revenues up.