Interestingly after nvidia got pushed out of the low end pc market (not allowed to build motherboards, cpu's got gpu build in) they are kind of reclaiming some of that money. A load of people who would have been tempted to buy another low end laptop just bought a tablet instead with an nvidia chip in.
I couldn't resist getting an Asus TF700.. quad core tablet/laptop with an excellent screen? Damn good. Welldone NV, their mobile dominance really hammers at AMD for lacking the foresight to expand when they had a great chance.
Bah... nonsense eh. Ppl have been saying CPU or GPUs are fast enough for years. It's simply not true, when you get into high fidelity high res, even two of the fastest current GPU is NOT enough for current games.
I guess in 2013 it will become even better. Tegra 4+LTE, more Quadro and Tesla and Kepler v2 will drive growth further. Nvidias GPU division reaps in almost as much revenue as AMDs whole computing division. That's just crazy.
Will Robinson
Golden Member
- Dec 19, 2009
- 1,408
- 0
- 0
Good points Spydie:thumbsup:Some posters can't help themselves.
But since AMD has been brought up, and seeing how well Nvidia has done and continues to do, I wonder how things might be different today if the AMD/ATI merger never happened, but instead the AMD/Nvidia merger with JHH at the helm would have occurred. As opposed to the AMD we have today that cannot compete in the CPU arena on the highend and has very little HPC/GPGPU presence, both being areas with much higher margins than AMD is currently used to, we might have a company that truly would have had Intel worried. Who knows if ATI would still be hanging on, maybe Intel would have bought. It'd be a very different tech world, a lean mean executing AMD, and could you imagine Tahiti on Intel's advanced manufacturing process?
I was opposed to the ATi sell off to AMD and would have much preferred an Intel/ATi V nVidia/AMD landscape.
ATi would have thrived with more money and better process technology while JHSen would have brought his flair and drive to AMD.
It seemed a perfect fit and I think the current situation proves that.
Intel/NVDA prosper while AMD/ATi don't.
Intel/ATi V Apple/NVDA would be awesome tho
Nvidia is a very aggressive company with good leadership and vision. AMD lacks vision and execution at the top level. the company is being slowly killed by incompetent management and wrong architectural decisions (Bulldozer).
Yeah I really think Tegra 4 is going to be the chip that finally puts Nvidia at the forefront of the mobile wars performance. Tegra 2 was middle of the road from the start, Tegra 3 was top of the line in CPU performance (and above average in GPU performance) for a few months, but I finally think they will bring some serious performance that will rival Apple's A6X and crush everyone in the Android space.
(I ripped this off from techreport's comments on Nvidia's financial results)
Everyone put on your funny googles: AMD's response to Intel and Nvidia quarterly results: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3rpn6m/
It's just a joke people!
Everyone put on your funny googles: AMD's response to Intel and Nvidia quarterly results: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3rpn6m/
It's just a joke people!
LOL, good one.
Another bit of bad news for AMD :
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=29147
For those that don't know AMD sold Qualcomm the technology that they use in their Snapdragon SoCs.
Olikan
Platinum Member
- Sep 23, 2011
- 2,023
- 275
- 126
I wouldn't really call it bad news for AMD, more like hindsight is 20/20. They did what they did, and can't take it back. Who knows if Snapdragon would have become what it is now under AMD, I give props to Qualcomm for launching a great product line.
Good to see Nvidia showing profits, seems like a rare thing for a company to show profits when all we hear on the news is companies going under.
It's not even hindsight.. its bloody obvious smartphones would take off like crazy back then. They had the opportunity to dominate that market and blew it completely.. for what? Spare change for the technology?
Which is an obvious sign of horrible management. Same thing happened with Kodak, which I use as an example because the headquarters is local to me and my mom works there. They led the imaging world, and then didn't evolve into digital cameras even though they developed one early on. Now they are trying to climb their way out of bankruptcy, meanwhile the CEO and his executives are getting a nice bonus to the tune of $4.5 million.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
The PC market is soft.
If you listen to the Conference Call. The year-over-year GPU growth is more or less flat. CFIO says all growth is mobile Tegra "almost all" she said. There is no indication from these results NV is doing so much better because of desktop PC. If anything, NV's growth in other market segments probably offset what is otherwise a very flat desktop discrete GPU segment.
NV is smart. They went after key growth markets:
- A lot of budget/mainstream GPU design wins in the notebook sector (Kepler had 300+ design wins, more than double of Fermi)
- Expanding into mobile smartphone/tablet space
- Focusing on high-growth high profit margin Professional solutions space with Tesla and Quadro (K10 / K20 are selling well it seems).
I bet the actual desktop discrete GPU division barely grew as the premium PC market is slumping. Since NV clumps their consumer GeForce revenue together, we'd need a more accurate break-down of where the growth in GeForce itself is coming from - I bet it's not from GTX660Ti/670/680/690.
Premium desktop PC market is a very niche segment now. For that reason, it's understandable that more than ever NV is focusing on mobile, professional markets and looking at other opportunities such as Project Denver.
Source
It's not out of the question that their Tegra division will surpass their desktop graphics in 3-5 years from now. If NV executes will with Project Denver, AMD will have nowhere to go as they will be dominated in all areas by Intel/NV/ARM competitors.
"We are big believers in ARM-based servers. We have been working on project Denver for two years now, so we are going to have custom ARM designs for this market,” said Mr. Huang. If Project Denver is more advanced than Cortex-A53 and A57 cores, AMD's ARM strategy could be dead in the water.
As far as NV taking over AMD, I don't think it makes much sense to them. There is nothing really that AMD offers to NV that's worth buying AMD for. NV won't be able to compete with Intel in the x86 space without its own fabs anyway. AMD doesn't make class leading ARM-based / proprietary tablet/mobile CPUs that are market leaders. NV would be better off waiting until AMD goes bankrupt on its own and NV inherits the GPU market without paying billions to acquire AMD.
NV is also continuing to get Licensing Fees from Intel, a total of 5 annual installments, which started on Jan 18, 2011. Nice!
Last edited:
I don't think they see it as a "niche" market. I think they just have a better business by diversifying and see a larger growth market with mobile. The CFO commentary on the GPU division revenue:
"Our consumer GPU business which includes desktop, notebook, memory, license revenue from our patent cross license agreement with Intel, and the ramp-down of chipset (MCP) products as we exited the chipset business had revenue of $739.6 million, up 10.7 percent sequentially and up 14.7 percent year-over-year. Demand for our desktop GTX (enthusiast and PC gaming) products remained strong in the third quarter as we continued the launch of our Kepler based GPUs. Inventory in the channel remained healthy. As anticipated, notebook GPU revenue was at a record level on the strength of our Ivy Bridge design wins."
GPU division revenue in their 3rd quarter last year was $644.8 million, while $47.3 million dollars was chipset. This year, GPU revenue was $739.6 million, chipset revenue was $3.3 million. Subtract the Intel licensing revenue and chipset business from both figures respectively and we end up with Nvidia bringing in $531.5 million last year at this time and $670.3 milion this year. That is a $139 million dollar difference. I'm going to go ahead and make a very bold assumption that notebook GPU sales did not account for all (or more) of that $139 million dollar difference. Based on all that, and on my ultra crazy assumption, I think their desktop division is quite healthy and made more money this quarter vs. last year. Huge growth? No. Steady? Yes.
Agreed except I think it will be more like 3 years at the max, and I think it's more because of the growth of smartphones and their ongoing ability to leverage their GPU knowledge to make competitive mobile SoC's.
Yeah I just don't see how AMD is going to exist in 1-2 years time as the company it has been in the past. I really believe AMD will end up dismantled and sold piece by piece, or they'll move specifically into specialized sectors and fade away from the markets those of us in this forum care most about.
If you look at mobile market share for discrete GPU, NV took a massive chunk away from AMD last year and continuing.. the growth was simply staggering. AMD failed hard.
I am betting Nvidia is mostly now at 65 - 70% mobile discrete GPU market share and close to 2x or more the AMD mobile share. Nvidia swept the PC notebook and Mac market this gen with Kepler design wins. AMD failed hard with design wins for mobile discrete GPUs this generation. Thats just poor marketing and bad execution. AMD's problem is not IP but making money from it. they sold off their mobile graphics tech to Qualcomm who just announced a record quarter with higher than expected profits. With AMD mistakes keep getting repeated, thats what is disheartening.
Nvidia have talked a lot about their mobile Kepler wins. Nvidia swept the Apple desktop and notebook platforms this generation. Even last quarter Nvidia mentioned that with ivy bridge ramp they expect to take share and thats what is happening. we will get the numbers soon fron Jon Peddie and Mercury Research. The worst thing is Nvidia is making more than twice the money on Geforce than AMD's entire GPU division . With Quadro included Nvidia GPUs are making as much as AMD's CPU division which had a torrid quarter and lost massive desktop CPU share to Intel.
blastingcap
Diamond Member
- Sep 16, 2010
- 6,654
- 5
- 76
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
The high-end desktop enthusiast PC market is definitely a niche market segment, despite many people on this forum believing AMD is failing because of overpricing 7950/7970 cards. Think about it, HD7870/7950/7970 have been offering good price/performance for most of Q3, even before game bundles and it hardly hurt NV. That means either NV has very sticky customers or this market segment of $300+ desktop GPUs is largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of making $ for NV - ironically the market segment most of us here discuss. Even when NV launched GTX660, their pie chart showed that only ten percent of gamers pay $300 or more for their desktop GPUs. The introduction of GTX650/650Ti/660 is helping them for sure, but as mentioned by others, AMD was a no-show in the notebook discrete GPU space this year.
Interesting that NV lowered guidance for Q4 2012, despite this being a holiday quarter. NVIDIA estimates that revenue will dip to between $1.025B and $1.175B USD on a slowing global economy, versus the traditional bump in the holiday season. NV's diversification in professional GPU and Tegra/mobile device markets will help them weather the storm if the economy turns sour. Despite beating expectations, their stock is down today. The market doesn't seem to be assigning proper value to NV's future growth of its Tegra line.
You would be too if you got away with selling a mid-sized Kepler (GK104) for flagship GPU prices and moved the entire product stack down (i.e., what should have been GTX650Ti became GTX660Ti, etc.). At least that's what we heard this entire generation, right? It's no wonder NV is making a killing this generation.
What happens when you go from selling 500-550mm^2 die chips as GTX465/470/480/560Ti 448/570/580 and start charging the same price for a 294mm^2 chip, with cost cutting on the PCB/reference parts? It means all the other GPUs below the flagship are also making you more $ than you normally could have earned. NV doesn't have to drop prices much or add game bundles to sell GPUs. More money in the bank! If AMD was six or more months late with its HD7770-7870 roll-out, offered worse price/performance than NV, and NV offered game bundles, AMD would have been toasta already. When AMD offers all of those things, consumers still buy NV anyway. I said this before, I don't think AMD can win through price/performance as was clear with HD4000-6000 series. HD7000 series shows that AMD can't win even if it offers price/performance and faster performance at the same time. AMD has a brand image problem ATI didn't have, people love PhysX a lot more than we think, AMD's driver stigma persists, etc.
That means GTX700 series will be a walk in the park for NV since it doesn't even need to be faster for NV to still win. I just hope NV doesn't start holding back performance of high-end GPUs knowing they can get away with a generation like GTX600. It was probably the worst generational increase from NV ever and they still walked out making $ hand over fist. Hopefully GTX780 is not just 20% faster than 680 and NV delivers another 8800GT/GTX460 style card, as no such legendary price/performance/overclocking card existed for them this round.
Last edited:
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: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter