NV: Everything under control. 512-Fermi may appear someday. Yields aren't under 20%

[waffleironhead]

He must love my sig then *LOL*

Especially because the joke is on you. You are generating page clicks for him just by having that there.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Especially because the joke is on you. You are generating page clicks for him just by having that there.

Not really, only fools that would visit his site anyways does it :sneaky:

 

[waffleironhead]

Not really, only fools that would visit his site anyways does it :sneaky:

Thats the whole point He doesnt care WHO visits, as long as people do. Thats how he gets revenue, and you sir a making money for him. :awe:

 

[CitanUzuki]

semi accurate you say? Ill check it out, thanks guys!

 

[SlowSpyder]

And what do you suppose is the reasoning behind it selling for MSRP? Maybe they thought "hey, we have to sell it for this much because yields are crap and we can only make money this way".
Or maybe they saw Fermi and thought "hey, we have no need whatsoever to lower prices, in fact we can edge them up slightly again because there's no pressure from the competition". It can go both ways. Saying ATI yields are crap because their cards are priced high relative to launch at a time when the competition is putting no pressure on them doesn't mean much.

I was going post something more or less along the lines of what you said. Yields were bad when TSMC was having it's issues (not sure how cleared up those are) and AMD raised prices. People continued to buy the 58x0 at the inlated MSRP, so AMD isn't likely to lower it when there is no competition. Than Fermi does launch... again, given the prices the Fermi parts sell for, why would AMD touch prices? The GTX470 is what, 7% faster on average and $50 more? I don't see why AMD would change prices even if yields were stellar.

semi accurate you say? Ill check it out, thanks guys!

 

[T2k]

Especially because the joke is on you. You are generating page clicks for him just by having that there.

Psst... :sneaky:

 

[Lonbjerg]

At least he is not here now :twisted:

 

[Dribble]

I thought everyone knew that?:\

Ah, I never knew that, mind you I put Tk2 on ignore a long time ago. Reading back he talks himself up on threads about himself. How sad.

 

[Madcatatlas]

wizards first rule was that people are stupid right? They will belive in what they want to belive in.

 

[A_Dying_Wren]

I was going post something more or less along the lines of what you said. Yields were bad when TSMC was having it's issues (not sure how cleared up those are) and AMD raised prices. People continued to buy the 58x0 at the inlated MSRP, so AMD isn't likely to lower it when there is no competition. Than Fermi does launch... again, given the prices the Fermi parts sell for, why would AMD touch prices? The GTX470 is what, 7% faster on average and $50 more? I don't see why AMD would change prices even if yields were stellar.

Idk, if AMD took the two step process of releasing a 5890 which competed with the GTX 480 and slashed prices across the range they could do serious harm to Nvidia which would bring me immeasurable joy and another $50 when I buy a comp in a few weeks.

Not that I want Nvidia dead of course. Competition is ideal which isn't what we're getting at all. What however would be great is if Nvidia got hammered for their excessively poor choices concerning Fermi (I'm looking at you GPGPU). Its certainly not to any gamer's advantage if GPU companies start shifting over to GPGPU. As Fermi shows extremely well, dual priorities mean lots of trade-offs.

 

[Skurge]

Idk, if AMD took the two step process of releasing a 5890 which competed with the GTX 480 and slashed prices across the range they could do serious harm to Nvidia which would bring me immeasurable joy and another $50 when I buy a comp in a few weeks.

Not that I want Nvidia dead of course. Competition is ideal which isn't what we're getting at all. What however would be great is if Nvidia got hammered for their excessively poor choices concerning Fermi (I'm looking at you GPGPU). Its certainly not to any gamer's advantage if GPU companies start shifting over to GPGPU. As Fermi shows extremely well, dual priorities mean lots of trade-offs.

I would have to partiality agree with this. I would like to see AMD hammer nv and bring market closer to 50/50 so that we wont get any of the whole batman AA thing again.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Idk, if AMD took the two step process of releasing a 5890 which competed with the GTX 480 and slashed prices across the range they could do serious harm to Nvidia which would bring me immeasurable joy and another $50 when I buy a comp in a few weeks.

Not that I want Nvidia dead of course. Competition is ideal which isn't what we're getting at all. What however would be great is if Nvidia got hammered for their excessively poor choices concerning Fermi (I'm looking at you GPGPU). Its certainly not to any gamer's advantage if GPU companies start shifting over to GPGPU. As Fermi shows extremely well, dual priorities mean lots of trade-offs.

If AMD did drop prices they could sell 5850's and maybe 5870's like mad. I know if the 5870 suddenly was below GTX470 pricing I'd find a way to get a second one in my case.

But, who knows, maybe AMD is happy not stealing market share as much as making bigger profits per unit sold. Maybe yields still are bad. Maybe they're wonderful. I really don't know. But what I do think is that 5850's and 5870's are likely still selling great despite Fermi and despite the inflated MSRP.

I think if Fermi was better we'd see AMD slash prices, it didn't significantly out perform any of AMD's lineup and you have that power draw/heat to consider. The 5850 is within spitting distance of the GTX470 and is about $50 cheaper... no point reducing the price. The 5870 is definitely slower than the GTX480, but there is also a $100 price difference and the GTX480's power/heat/noise is a huge factor for some. The 5870 was never meant to compete in a $500 segment of the market, nor was it AMD's flagship part as far as performance goes. So the faster GTX480 at $100 more doesn't really effect it's ~$400 price point at all, no reason to lower that price when it already fits in nicely there.

Depending on how Nvidia prices the GTX460 and how it performs may bring prices down. If it gives very near 5850 performance and is $50 - $75 less than we may see some pricing competition.

 

[MrK6]

I would have to partiality agree with this. I would like to see AMD hammer nv and bring market closer to 50/50 so that we wont get any of the whole batman AA thing again.

Who says they aren't? The thing is, we lack a lot of inside information and much of what we conclude comes through retrospective analysis. AMD could very well be making headway in the markets they want to focus on now, and see no need to waste extra resources or push that much further to generate a little more revenue. They also could be sitting on their asses do nothing and will get smoked the next generation (I doubt it, but who knows).

 

[Lonyo]

If AMD did drop prices they could sell 5850's and maybe 5870's like mad. I know if the 5870 suddenly was below GTX470 pricing I'd find a way to get a second one in my case.

But, who knows, maybe AMD is happy not stealing market share as much as making bigger profits per unit sold. Maybe yields still are bad. Maybe they're wonderful. I really don't know. But what I do think is that 5850's and 5870's are likely still selling great despite Fermi and despite the inflated MSRP.

I think if Fermi was better we'd see AMD slash prices, it didn't significantly out perform any of AMD's lineup and you have that power draw/heat to consider. The 5850 is within spitting distance of the GTX470 and is about $50 cheaper... no point reducing the price. The 5870 is definitely slower than the GTX480, but there is also a $100 price difference and the GTX480's power/heat/noise is a huge factor for some. The 5870 was never meant to compete in a $500 segment of the market, nor was it AMD's flagship part as far as performance goes. So the faster GTX480 at $100 more doesn't really effect it's ~$400 price point at all, no reason to lower that price when it already fits in nicely there.

Depending on how Nvidia prices the GTX460 and how it performs may bring prices down. If it gives very near 5850 performance and is $50 - $75 less than we may see some pricing competition.

They've said they expect to remain supply constrained until later this year, so there's no reason to drop prices if they are already selling everything they can make. Why reduce profits when you have no more units to shift?

Can't steal more marketshare if you are already selling everything you can make.

 

[Lonbjerg]

This should enable people to follow the trend:
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

NVIDIA's "fermi" is now on the charts:
GTX480 0.36%
GTX470 0.65%

Total marketshare is:
DX11 GPU's 5.58%
DX10 GPU's 74.47%
DX9 GPU's 15.33%

NVIDIA 61.88%
AMD 30.92%

Now to wait for the results from May.

 

[dug777]

This should enable people to follow the trend:
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

NVIDIA's "fermi" is now on the charts:
GTX480 0.36%
GTX470 0.65%

Total marketshare is:
DX11 GPU's 5.58%
DX10 GPU's 74.47%
DX9 GPU's 15.33%

NVIDIA 61.88%
AMD 30.92%

Now to wait for the results from May.

Steam surveys are awesome, I love the roll call of the budget gamers' cards through the years you can still see, particularly the ATI 9600 series, the nVidia 6600 series, and that old chestnut the FX 5200 It's a pity they no longer list the MX 400 series, I bet there are still plenty of those out there!

Quick question as to how you got market share, from all cards I get

ATI: 23.61%
nVidia: 50.69% (or 50.79 when I add them manually rather than giving them the remainder after doing the others)
intel: 2.5%
other:23.2%

?

 

[Lonbjerg]

Steam surveys are awesome, I love the roll call of the budget gamers' cards through the years you can still see, particularly the ATI 9600 series, the nVidia 6600 series, and that old chestnut the FX 5200 It's a pity they no longer list the MX 400 series, I bet there are still plenty of those out there!

Quick question as to how you got market share, from all cards I get

ATI: 23.61%
nVidia: 50.69% (or 50.79 when I add them manually rather than giving them the remainder after doing the others)
intel: 2.5%
other:23.2%

?

From the front page
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

 

[dug777]

From the front page
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

Aha!

I presume that front page figure then breaks down the cards in the other category into their respective red or green camps to give those overall figures

 

[Tempered81]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

NVIDIA's "fermi" is now on the charts:
GTX480 0.36%
GTX470 0.65%

HD57XX 43.46%
HD58XX 41.85%
HD5970 3.21%

Dang looks like for every Fermi card there are 100 HD5000 cards. Thats some ownage.

 

[Genx87]

HD57XX 43.46%
HD58XX 41.85%
HD5970 3.21%

Dang looks like for every Fermi card there are 100 HD5000 cards. Thats some ownage.

Yes, that happens when you have a 6 month lead. Should be interesting to see how overall market share changes in the next 12 months.

 

[A_Dying_Wren]

This should enable people to follow the trend:
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

NVIDIA's "fermi" is now on the charts:
GTX480 0.36%
GTX470 0.65%

Total marketshare is:
DX11 GPU's 5.58%
DX10 GPU's 74.47%
DX9 GPU's 15.33%

NVIDIA 61.88%
AMD 30.92%

Now to wait for the results from May.

Hmm... so about 15% of all amd cards (used on steam) were purchased in the last 6 months. I would've thought that number would be even higher given AMD hadn't been really competing for a while.

 

[Lonbjerg]

HD57XX 43.46%
HD58XX 41.85%
HD5970 3.21%

Dang looks like for every Fermi card there are 100 HD5000 cards. Thats some ownage.

No, it's a base to follow the trend and see how AMD's headstart will pan out...math/time isn't you strong side?

 

[Lonbjerg]

Hmm... so about 15% of all amd cards (used on steam) were purchased in the last 6 months. I would've thought that number would be even higher given AMD hadn't been really competing for a while.

Where do you get ~15% from?

 

[Lonbjerg]

Aha!

I presume that front page figure then breaks down the cards in the other category into their respective red or green camps to give those overall figures

I would figure that to be a very correct assumption, yes

 

[waffleironhead]

Hmm... so about 15% of all amd cards (used on steam) were purchased in the last 6 months. I would've thought that number would be even higher given AMD hadn't been really competing for a while.

They have been competing for quite some time. Just because they didnt hold the crown in performance doesnt mean they didnt offer good value in the mid and value market.
They have been competing on bang for the buck quite well.