Arachnotronic
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2006
- 11,715
- 2,012
- 126
Nothing wrong with debt; it's when your cash flow is abysmal and you can't service that debt that debt is bad.
IBM has a net debt position but nobody's worried about its financial health.
Nothing wrong with debt; it's when your cash flow is abysmal and you can't service that debt that debt is bad.
IBM has a net debt position but nobody's worried about its financial health.
Debt is always bad. It's just been polished up like a turd but you know what it still is right ....
There is nothing wrong with debt when it generates a positive business result. Borrow 1 billion, generate more income that can pay off that debt over time and grow the business. AMD's debt is the worst kind of debt. It has not generated a positive business result. In fact so far that debt has only generated a massive negative return as the market capitalization has shrunk roughly the size of the debt. AMD is servicing debt that is literally an anchor doing nothing for them.
Arachnotronic
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2006
- 11,715
- 2,012
- 126
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
You are right the world has changed. In the past most PC enthusiasts would not take a $200-300 loss in resale value on a 780 @ 1.3Ghz to save $15 of electricity per year for 15% more performance, only to take another $200 loss in resale value of 980 and get another flagship 250W GM200 card, which is bound to be >$600. In the past PC gamers would have seen right through the GM204 marketing gimmicks and skipped it entirely because they would have seen immediately that it is a GTX460/560Ti in disguise. In case you don't remember cards like 6600GT and GTX460 provided better performance than last gen flagships like 5950U and GTX280/285 and used way less power but PC gamers didn't fall for the trap and pay $500 for 6600GT/GTX460. Only this time there was no 6800GT/Ultra and GTX480; those cards got magically pushed back to support the bifurcating flagship cards strategy.
As far as GTX480 came out, that was only in March 2010, not 10 years ago.
I also didn't bash the card and actually bought 3 GTX470s myself over HD5850s. So there you go, I've remained consistent in my desire for overclocking and perf/watt over power usage. I even defended the 480 and pointed out that its temperatures and noise levels could be easily solved with a solid after-market cooler like the Zotac AMP! 480:
However, your insinuation of comparing GTX480 to a 290X is way out of line. GTX480 was barely 15-20% faster than an HD5870 at 1600P, but used nearly double the power. Under no circumstances does a 980 system use half the power of an R9 390X system, not even close as most after-market 980's use 200W of power and R9 290X uses about 270-280W. In contrast, the HD5870 used about 140-145W of power while GTX480 peaked at 272-275W. Therefore, your comparison is not even valid to begin with. Not to mention 480 had massive advantages like 1.5GB of VRAM, tessellation performance, huge overclocking headroom too and it cost $499 against $369 for 5870 but today R9 290X costs $260-300 vs. $550-600 for GTX980. In every way imaginable the GTX480 trounced the HD5870 in nearly every performance metric and the price difference was less. Today the 980 is barely faster than a 290x, the price difference is world's apart and the power usage difference is nothing like it was between a 480 and a 5870.
I won't support buying flagship cards every 12 months to save 100W of power from AMD or NV and I will definitely won't buy a GM200 if it uses 75W less power than an R9 390X but the latter costs $200 less.
I also won't support $500 mid-range chips with 10% more performance 10 months later and will skip such products from both AMD and NV even if they use 1W of power. If I wanted a power efficient gaming, I would sell my PC and get a Wii U, New Nintendo 3DS and Nvidia Tablet shield. 3 of those would give me gaming everywhere at 60W of power in total.
To me power is something I can easily quantify in terms of noise levels and electricity costs so I can easily equate what those 100W on a GPU mean to me in terms of dollars. Before I am crazy enough to spend $100s of dollars to save 100W of electricity on a GPU that I use at most 4 hours a day, I will rather spend $100 on efficient LEDs/CFLs/CCFLs around my house that will actually save me 100s of watts for years to come.
I guess given my financial background, I compare things mathematically which is why I don't fall for perf/watt marketing gimmicks.
You can argue all day that your 980 system saves 60-75W of power over an R9 290X system:
http://www.techspot.com/guides/912-best-graphics-cards-2014/page6.html
But the reality is I couldn't care less because R9 290X costs $260 and GTX980 costs $550. If 75W savings is worth $290 extra to you, by all means!
I guess NV should focus on making the world's fastest 1W $2000 GPU and I'll be waiting for someone to sell me a $399 400W flagship card with similar performance. :thumbsup: If I have to pay $100s of dollars more upfront to save $25 in electricity a year, power usage means nothing to me if the power hungry card runs cool and quiet with great performance.
I guess most of NV's consumers also drive electric cars, diesels and hybrids? Later in life when I can afford it, I am going to get a V8 Corvette Z06 or a Porsche 911/Cayman GT4, MPG be damned. Oh, and Prius drivers, ya, they can continue to be hypocrites when the amount of energy/pollution that goes into making their brand new Prius is greater than the environmental savings they will achieve with that car over its lifetime.
P.S. What I really think is NV has finally figured out that it can get its customers to upgrade 2x in the same generation, something unheard of before Kepler. This strategy worked and they are rolling with it. Now PC gamers just use every excuses in the book why they upgraded to the next NV card such as perf/watt, etc. but the reality is had NV released GTX680 and 780Ti or GTX980 and GM200 alongside, most of these gamers could care less about the mid-range 680/980 cards. :awe:
Last edited:
exar333
Diamond Member
- Feb 7, 2004
- 8,518
- 8
- 91
Its easy on the PC too. Just start every game with medium graphics and you are good to go (and at least on-par with the PS4/XBone).
If you want better, then yeah, it takes a couple minutes to 'dial it in' to the right setting.
(This is from both a console and PC gamer).
On the topic, I also like the fact I can play any PC game released in the past 10 years on my machine. I can then pretty much play a decade older as well with a small amount of effort. Its called backwards compatibility. I have to drag-out an older console and connect it up to do the same on the console side. Each side has it's pros and cons.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
You are right, back on topic. What do you think NV will unveil March 3? They said it's something they've been working on for 5 years. A tablet or a next gen GPU or Titan X surely doesn't take 5 years to build so what can it be?
http://techreport.com/news/27803/big-nvidia-announcement-scheduled-for-march-3
- Sep 9, 2010
- 2,574
- 252
- 126
Something shield or tegra related since they invited Android press. Boring :thumbsdown:
cmdrdredd
Lifer
- Dec 12, 2001
- 27,052
- 357
- 126
Not always true, depends on:
1) what a "bit less money actually is"
2) the cost of producing the chips.
AMD is selling their largest chip ever, Hawaii, for 299, while nVIDIA sells a smaller chip for 499/549. Even if they sell 2 times the number of Hawaii chips, I doubt they are getting much money out of it. Certainly less than nVIDIA. That is not a good strategy on this market. AMD needs to increase their margins in order to pay for current and future R&D. Reality speaks for itself: AMD keeps slashing their expenses (including R&D) in order to stay afloat because its revenue keeps low.
Rory (? I'm bad with names) did the right thing... at the wrong time! He tried to push 7970 price to the top price. Unfortunately it proved to be a wrong move with nVIDIA releasing GTX680. Nevertheless, AMD desperately needs to increase their margins. For that, they need to gamble a bit and try to keep price parity with nVIDIA. If you are lowering your pants everytime someone launches something at you, you will never get your act together. Why make so many marketing videos if you do not at least try to take some advantage of them? If your only strategy is to lower prices, why even make the videos? The price cut should be enough (bad type of) incentive already.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
How will that revolutionize PC gaming? NV already released a Shield gaming controller and the NV Shield Tablet.
- Sep 9, 2010
- 2,574
- 252
- 126
You assume you are going to agree with Jensen's assessment of the product announcement importance?
Also, the announcement says "gaming" not "pc gaming"
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
I would have loved for NV to team up with Nintendo and bust out a Wii U successor that mops the floor with PS4, but that's not going to happen. :'(
Nintendo is so heavily tied up to AMD at the hip since Gamecube, they would never use Nvidia eventhough Nvidia could have superior hardware. Also Nintendo burned bridges with 3DS not using Tegra at the last minute, I doubt Nvidia wants to deal with them again just to be disappointed again.
Besides, point is moot, we already know Nintendo will probably use a GCN SoC in the Wii U successor.
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...e-x86-amd-chip-just-like-the-xbox-one-and-ps4
Besides, point is moot, we already know Nintendo will probably use a GCN SoC in the Wii U successor.
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...e-x86-amd-chip-just-like-the-xbox-one-and-ps4
Last edited:
Concerning the announcement, I have absolutely no idea of what's coming that may justify using the expression "redefine gaming", much less something mobile related as it seems to be. The only thing I could conceive that "redefines gaming" and is mobile would probably be impratical(and silly): play FPS games in an augmented reality environment, as you walk around the street
That's a great point indeed. I think AMD will have learned from this and not allow for 1.5 years to pass between flagship cards. Even it means going back to the old days of releasing refreshes with 10-15% more performance, they will have to do that. However, the situation is a lot more complex than that because NV users keep paying nearly double for a 980 over 290X, $80-100 more for 970 over after-market 290, nearly double for 980 CF over 290X CF/295X2, and still purchase 750Ti over much faster R9 270/270X, or 960 over the superior 290/280X. Even if AMD showed up on time, they have a brand issue at hand and extremely loyal customers with the competitor.
You will see a similar situation on March 1st when Samsung unveils the new Samsung S6 on 14nm 7420 SoC. It will have:
1) Superior screen quality to the iPhone 6/6+
2) The overall world's fastest smartphone SOC
3) Superior front and rear cameras than iPhone 6/6+
4) Standard 32GB of storage on-board with microSD expansion
5) By far superior battery life in the real world usage, with 50% recharging in 30-40 min, and nearly a week of low-power usage state battery life
6) Cheaper price
But none of these factors will allow Samsung S6 to outsell iPhone 6/6+ worldwide. None of these factors will allow the Samsung S6 to have the same resale value of the iPhones in 2-3 years either. Often market perception trumps the actual quality of a product.
There are many examples of products in the world from Beats to Bose to BMW where brand sells the product despite superior products available. Beats and Bose are probably the best 2 examples in the audio world where generally average to mediocre products sell at exorbitant prices because of marketing and brand value. No knowledgeable and informed consumers on audio would purchase Beats and Bose over AKG/Sennheiser/Shure/Audeze/Beyerdynamic, etc. but yet Beats makes something like 65% of the world's headphone profits and probably has similar market share.
I am not saying NV only makes average to mediocre products ,but that even when NV does in fact release turds like FX5200/5500/GTS450/GTX550/GTX650/650Ti/960, they still sell, and sell very well. That is the power of brand name and marketing where the high quality of your high-end / premium line allows you to sell inferior products in lower market segments at much higher prices than you normally would have been able to get away with. AMD has no such benefits at all. It's also why the average gamer would easily take a GTX770/960 over an after-market R9 290 and why people actually paid $100-150 more for 780 over 290 and $150 more for 770 4GB over 280X.
I'll give you another 2 examples that blew my mind. Tide which is considered Procter & Gamble's premium laundry detergent in Canada and United states is a budget/mid-range P&G laundry detergent brand in Europe and Asia. Procter & Gamble's premium laundry detergent in those regions of the world is actually Ariel or other P&G branded products. Want another example?
Everyone in North America or UK knows that P&G's Oral-B Pro-Health / Pro-Expert toothpaste is a premium brand and it competes directly with Colgate's premium toothpastes. This is not the toothpaste that competes on price with AquaFresh or some other lower brands.
Oral-B Pro-Health - Premium toothpaste in North America
Go to many parts of Central Europe or Asia and Oral-B sells identical toothpaste called Blend-A-Med Pro-Expert but it's priced as as mid-range / budget toothpaste (about 50% of the cost of Colgate) because it cannot possibly compete with the established Colgate brand. That is the advantage Colgate has accumulated over decades of market presence and competitive advantage in those regions before P&G arrived. You can see some mind-blowing scenarios where in Israel or UAE or some poorer Central Asian countries where you can hardly find Pepsi products and mostly everyone loves Coca-Cola. You'd think Pepsi makes horrible products from such observations but it's simply the power of marketing in those regions.
Just like NIKE sells hundreds of millions of running shoes, despite them being inferior in function and performance to Saucony's Kinvara or Cortana lines or Asics' / Brooks runners. You can spend all day trying to tell someone with Nike Air Max that their shoes are crap for running but they don't care. What they care is what they believe, not what the real world results are, even if they are verified by professional runners, like Runner's magazine and so on.
^ THAT is the power of marketing.
If you look at where NV is gaining the most market share, per their financial reports and JHH commentary, it's Asia and South America. Asia and South America typically tend to be countries where people are crazy obsessed about brand names and brands value, and they especially love premium and/or American brands. It's countries where Coca-Cola, Apple, BMW, and many popular American brands sell (as well as premium Italian fashion/cars, etc.). That means in many countries like Brazil, Russia, Central Europe, Asia where stronger brand names and higher prices usually and historically have equated to better products (you need to live in those places for years to understand the historical significance of American brands and brand value and how people perceive more expensive = better), AMD has 0 chance against NV in those markets unless it changes its strategy completely.
AMD is basically like P&G trying to sell Oral-B Pro-Expert Toothpaste to countries where Colgate is the established brand for 10-15 years. Even a company like P&G with billions of marketing dollars backing it cannot beat Colgate in those markets.
You need the world's best marketing and supply chain execution strategy if you want to claw back market share against established brands in highly populated countries where for a lot of consumers brands and what their friends think is 90% of their purchase:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...owth-by-dominating-jakarta-stalls-retail.html
Good points, but youre missing a few things... A video card is not all about raw performance to many people. Power consumption, heat generation, drivers, supported features (PhysX, GeForce Experience) all matter, and help change consumer perception. Nvidia has such a loyal following because they realize performance is a small part of the puzzle, just as Apple realizes specs are as well. Both have created unique and exclusive ecosystems that lets them compete in other ways besides x performance / dollar.
Good post though, thanks.
IMAGINE THAT! Nintendo coming out of nowhere with a console with silicon 2 years ahead of the X1 and PS4...
el etro
Golden Member
- Jul 21, 2013
- 1,584
- 14
- 81
oobydoobydoo
Senior member
- Nov 14, 2014
- 261
- 0
- 0
You are discrediting yourself with this argument, and it's too bad because I actually agree with you that AMD is superior hardware, and that people are just misinformed. But comparing nvidia to Apple is not making your point.
First of all, the iphone 6 is a vastly superior product to any samsung phone. Check the specs, check the sales figures, check the reviews... they all say Apple is qualitatively and quantitatively superior. Nvidia actually runs gross margins 20% higher than Apple's. The reason Apple can run a gross margin of 40% and still make better products than HTC, who runs a gross margin of like -5% (Lol), is because Apple can use it's huge influence to put pressure on suppliers to get people the best product.
How does nvidia get 60% gross margins? They just charge more. They don't give you support like Apple, or better design like Apple, or their own special operating system like Apple. THEY ARE NOTHING LIKE APPLE. So just stop even putting Apple in your posts. You need to separate your irrational hatred of Apple from your own legitimate criticisms of nvidia.
When you compare nvidia to Apple and claim they are similar you are doing a huge service to nvidia marketing. They wish they were Apple! So stop making their wishes come true.
Last edited:
AnandThenMan
Diamond Member
- Nov 11, 2004
- 3,991
- 627
- 126
I think your post is unnecessarily harsh (to put it mildly) and I sure see parallels in respect to NVDA and Apple. I see the merits of Apple products but their success is disproportionate to the products and services they offer, IMO. Same with Nvidia, they don't make hardware good enough to command 80% of the market, no way at all.
What really stands out for me is how poorly Nvidia GPUs have aged, this is a glaring issue that review sites don't even mention. What good is the hardware if in 2-3 years it falls way behind relative to the competition at the time.
What really stands out for me is how poorly Nvidia GPUs have aged, this is a glaring issue that review sites don't even mention. What good is the hardware if in 2-3 years it falls way behind relative to the competition at the time.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter