You guys do realize the actual cost of the GPU is just part of that 400 dollars right? I would honestly be surprised if Nvidia sells the GT200 for more than 100 dollars for the 285 series.
Red Irish
Guest
- Mar 6, 2009
- 1,605
- 0
- 0
You are probably right, but can you confirm that this is Nvidia's new theme music [?]:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHXKlNP4-Aw
I think a lot of the concern stems from the lack of innovation outside of the ultra high end. G92 was the last time we've had something like that from nVidia, and they've been refreshing that for nearly 2 years now. True, nVidia is in better position than when ATI had the 2900XT, but at least ATI responded quickly with a complete change of game plan starting with the HD3000s not long after, a strategy which has improved their entire lineup from top to bottom and has gotten better with each succeeding generation. I don't think anyone is legitimately worried that nVidia won't be able to produce the absolute fastest part, we're just worried that won't be enough to keep them in the game. We want to see more G92 type efforts.
is that $100 in materials and manufacturing alone? what about making up for R&D and advertising and salaries of all employees?
don't forget its 512bit memory interface costs the board manufactures more money as well...
nVidia, their partners, and the retailers that sell the products all need to be able to profit from selling the cards...
if cost wasn't a problem, they'd cut prices to match the new price/performance standard set by the 5800s
I agree 100%, can't wait to see the new stuff from Nvidia because I want to see some competiton for ATI because right now they don't have any.
Just checked the stock at overclockers.co.uk and saw lots of Nvidia products out of stock. They still have lots of GTX 260 though
I would honestly be surprised if the GPU doesn't cost more than the rest of the video card. Are you implying that these cards have ~50% profit margin?
You guys keep saying cost and nvidia etc etc but I could of swore I read just a month or two ago that nvidia had much higher profit margins than ati.
Fudzilla is pro NV as Charlie is pro AMD.
When Fudzilla says:
NV did already write-off GT200 inventory once before. I am not sure if they broke even with them. It just might be that GT200 never made any money to them when R&D is included.
When Fudzilla says:
then I am tempted to believe it.
NV did already write-off GT200 inventory once before. I am not sure if they broke even with them. It just might be that GT200 never made any money to them when R&D is included.
GaiaHunter
Diamond Member
- Jul 13, 2008
- 3,606
- 134
- 106
Depends if you are looking just at the product or at the entire company.
If you looking at the entire company, yeah AMD is atm in a lot worse shape than Nvidia.
If you look at the 4xxx/5xxx series vs the GT200, then considering they make their waffers at the same place, considering the size of the products, etc, it seems correct to assume that AMD/ATI has at least more margin to lower their prices then Nvidia. It might be incorrect as we don't have all the data (if someone has please share
).Cost is always a problem. But like I said. I honestly would be surprised if their top end GPU was sold to board manufacturers for more than 100 bucks\gpu. From there the board manufacturers input their costs for the PCB, memory, R&D, cooling, and Marketing\distrubtion. Which then gets sold to a distributor which sells to a newegg which sells to you for 399.99
Nvidia and their board partners will sell at a price that maximizes margins\demand.
I have no idea the margin on the end product. It honestly wouldnt surprise me if a 399.99 card has a manufacturing cost of 200. Most product has a very high market unless it is a higher priced item like a car or boat. Have you ever looked at retail clothing? 300-400% markup is not unheard of.
Also overall margins don't have much meaning when talking about the high end.Originally posted by: GaiaHunter
Depends if you are looking just at the product or at the entire company.
If you looking at the entire company, yeah AMD is atm in a lot worse shape than Nvidia.
If you look at the 4xxx/5xxx series vs the GT200, then considering they make their waffers at the same place, considering the size of the products, etc, it seems correct to assume that AMD/ATI has at least more margin to lower their prices then Nvidia. It might be incorrect as we don't have all the data (if someone has please share
If we assume (I would guess maybe rightly), that G80 and its brothers make up the majority of the mid/high of NV's lineup, and the lower end is smaller chips, the GT200 based cards won't contribute a whole lot to the business, so having good margins won't mean much if your lower end has brilliant margins and your high end has worse margins, but it gets covered up by the lower models.
That doesn't mean NV's margins are good/bad/etc, but looking at overall margins doesn't say much about the high end only.
Kuzi
Senior member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 572
- 0
- 0
ATI must be getting much better margins on their 5xxx series right now than their older cards. But if they want to capitalize on the current situation, they need to release as many of these cards as possible to the market. However that may depend on the yields they are getting at TSMC. I'm sure there will be a lot of demand for these new cards, and maybe AMD can "finally" make a profit this quarter.
As for nVidia, the longer Fermi gets delayed the worse it would get for them, and I'm going with what many here are also saying, a Fermi release in late 2009 or early 2010.
As for nVidia, the longer Fermi gets delayed the worse it would get for them, and I'm going with what many here are also saying, a Fermi release in late 2009 or early 2010.
exar333
Diamond Member
- Feb 7, 2004
- 8,518
- 8
- 91
From the thread titles in here recently, it almost seems that there is a "shadow" AMD focus group working to post threads.
Seriously, I doubt Nvidia would abaondon the mid and high-level market without replacing their SKUs with new ones (Fermi, etc). If this is the case, then there was not abandonment anyway, it's just a natural product cycle.
Should be have a thread titled "AMD abandons 50% of the high end market" when they axe the 4780X2 and "just" have the 5870 on the high end?
These threads are borderline rediculous.
Seriously, I doubt Nvidia would abaondon the mid and high-level market without replacing their SKUs with new ones (Fermi, etc). If this is the case, then there was not abandonment anyway, it's just a natural product cycle.
Should be have a thread titled "AMD abandons 50% of the high end market" when they axe the 4780X2 and "just" have the 5870 on the high end?
These threads are borderline rediculous.
GaiaHunter
Diamond Member
- Jul 13, 2008
- 3,606
- 134
- 106
Curiously though, if you read the posts of this thread no one or barely no one is predicting the end of nvidia or hyping the "article" as pure truth.
All the threads that seem to pop in this forum are just based in a simple fact: it is the first time since the Radeon 9700 vs the FX5800 that ATI arrived in the market before Nvidia.
That is why people are speculating - some of those speculations are just wilder than others.
The fact that this is something to be talked about just proves that Nvidia as an excellent reputation and people are surprised ATI arrived first.
Yeah ATI arrived first, but so? Also, his article says they are abandoning the mid to high end market and are EOLing some cards, yet the 295 is still going to be sold... Well the 295 is the fastest single card solution so they aren't abandoning the high end market.. I don't understand that lol. NV will be fine.
The 295 needs a price drop. It's basically equal to the 5870 in performance but costs so much more.
ilkhan
Golden Member
- Jul 21, 2006
- 1,117
- 1
- 0
2 points:
"semi"-accurate is probably being far too generous to his hit percentage
and
Its not his facts that are so horribly flawed, I don't doubt some of the actual numbers he spouts, its the analysis thats so horribly off. Drawing down inventory before a big release isn't uncommon, it's not even unhealthy. Its just that a new product is replacing it. Most nVid sales are G92 based, not GT200 based. The economics for the GT200 chips for nVid are horrible.
AMD has the price/performance crown by far at the moment. 5870 matches the GTX295 for $80 less. The GTX285 gets spanked by the far cheaper 5850, and the GTX275 can't even compete against a cheaper 4890 at the same performance level but again far cheaper. Every single one is a much more expensive chip matching the performance against a cheaper AMD chip. If nVid can't bring down prices to match, sales are going to be almost non-existent. The people who buy that level of performance do their homework or listen to salespeople who do.
Continuing production of GT200 isn't necessary, new chips are going to replace them and current inventory should hold the meager sales (and they weren't *huge* to begin with) until GF100/GT300/Fermi hits. That's not conceding the high end, its not giving up, and its not losing. Its just the numbers and reality.
"semi"-accurate is probably being far too generous to his hit percentage
and
Its not his facts that are so horribly flawed, I don't doubt some of the actual numbers he spouts, its the analysis thats so horribly off. Drawing down inventory before a big release isn't uncommon, it's not even unhealthy. Its just that a new product is replacing it. Most nVid sales are G92 based, not GT200 based. The economics for the GT200 chips for nVid are horrible.
AMD has the price/performance crown by far at the moment. 5870 matches the GTX295 for $80 less. The GTX285 gets spanked by the far cheaper 5850, and the GTX275 can't even compete against a cheaper 4890 at the same performance level but again far cheaper. Every single one is a much more expensive chip matching the performance against a cheaper AMD chip. If nVid can't bring down prices to match, sales are going to be almost non-existent. The people who buy that level of performance do their homework or listen to salespeople who do.
Continuing production of GT200 isn't necessary, new chips are going to replace them and current inventory should hold the meager sales (and they weren't *huge* to begin with) until GF100/GT300/Fermi hits. That's not conceding the high end, its not giving up, and its not losing. Its just the numbers and reality.
Oh, one thing to mention is that if you look at the Q3 2009 financial report from NV, their inventory as listed under assets is I think less than half what it was in Q3 2008. This isn't something sudden I don't think (reducing inventory), but it's a progression of what they were already doing last quarter, before the new ATI cards even hit.
That's true, but only because ATI is tied to AMD who's CPU business is losing hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter. Not many companies/divisions are able to look good in that kind of situation no matter how well they execute.
ATi hasnt hasnt made money over the last 4 quarters either. Neither has nV, but they dont have the debt.
Recently Charlie has been close on what he posts hasn't he? This would be bad for nvidia if true
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 20K
-
Solved! Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 12K
-
-
-
Question Geekbench 6 released and calibrated against Core i7-12700
- Started by igor_kavinski
- Replies: 275
Facebook
Twitter