Odd, someone posts info that support a strong AMD can compete with a stronger NV. Even citing market share numbers almost being split! HD 5870 was probably the last real strong AMD card that wasn't marred by horrible trends. 6970 was praised to the moon and back because of VLIW4. Just go read some of the comments of yesteryear. It's almost embarrassing.
Just pick a card after 5870, anyone, and look at it's release and included fiasco. Some are attributed to AMD others are not but affected AMD adversely.
Get out of here with this tired meme. A strong AMD/ATI USE to compete with a stronger NV. But suddenly people forget get this because "poor AMD, why can't they catch a break." So tired of it.
Referring to Glo post and Adoredtv in general, it is simply lazy analysis and an over simplification to make AMD to make the free viral marketers for them to work harder. This is because it triggers an emotional response from people.
When AMD has a strong product like the 4870 and 5870 and price it well, AMD is able to get somewhere in the high 30's to mid 40 in terms of marketshare. Adored simplifies this to people not recognizing AMD product and how good they are for the price, but when you look at the 18% marketshare they carry today, people are recognizing it.
Big shifts in marketshare do not happen overnight. Whether it is the mobilephone industry, clothing industry shoe industry and every other industry. The market has favorites which allow them a greater marketshare at the same price/perfomance because brands do carry value. Companies have to consistently deliver over and over again to become the market leader and the superior brand. However this is not the only reason why Nvidia was able to maintain their marketshare.
Look at adores analysis of the Fermi generation and he completely omits of the GTX 460/560 ti because it weakens his argument tremendously. These cards were extremely well priced and was target at the mainstream segment which carries higher volume than the enthusiast segment adored was focused on.
https://www.anandtech.co2m/show/3809/nvidias-geforce-gtx-460-the-200-king
Combine high volume card at superior price to performance than the competition on top of being the favored brand in the marketplace and it should be no surprise Nvidia was able to counter AMD and maintain their marketshare lead. The gtx 460/560 marketshare volume was greater than the GTX the GTX 480/580/5870/5850/5770 combined.
Another thing helping Nvidia was their relations with system builders/manufactures due to their driver support(before AMD cleaned up their drivers) and stronger brand.
Similarly, when the 4870 launched, Nvidia dropped their prices the next day and quickly launched the GTX 270 216 core, added game bundles(which AMD didn't really have since Roy Taylor was not with the company yet). Nonetheless the 48xx series took a tonne of marketshare back.
If we want to see a gigantic disparity between price/performance not translating into sales, look at the CPU market. Ryzen has dramatically better price to performance than Intel's processors. Much more than their GPUs and look at their marketshare.
Even with the strength of Ryzen 2 years later, AMD is still under 20 percent marketshare(under 10 percent in the server market). Intel has been mostly rehashing the skylake architecture, had security blunders and increasing the price of their products and they are still able to keep most of the marketshare. Intel has been poorly executing unlike Nvidia.
Intels launches have been generally mediocre since the skylake launch(including skylake) and their processors still sell incredibly well.
So should AMD give up because they are not getting 50% marketshare even though their processors command vastly better price to performance. Now they should not because those 5% marketshare gains in the market are because of the superior price to performance which still translate into 40-50% more processors year on year.
So at a lower pricing and higher price to performance, AMD was succeeding when they offered better price to performance than Nvidia. The idiotic notions that complete marketshare shifts happen when a company develops a superior product overnight is ridiculous and naive to how real business work. AMD succeeded when they gained near 50% marketshare in the discrete market. Although they did not outsell Nvidia, they doubled their marketshare compared to now. If we measure the success of a product purely based on being able to get more marketshare than the competition, Ryzen and threadripper are out right failures because they did not remotely get 50% marketshare. So why don't we get the same CPU mindshare argument/narrative from AMD vs Intel. It's because Nvidia is a easier company to hate and hate allows irrational arguments to get traction.
Intel's questionable(and illegal business behavior) occured over 10 years ago.This makes the hate against intel generally forgotten and the illogical arguments would simply be picked apart without the emotions distorting the validity of the argument. The same thing cannot be said for Nvidia. Nvidia have not done anything so outright bad as Intel but their small acts do add up and are somewhat numerous.(founders edition, poor driver support when arch comes out, bad performance with some game works games, the abrasiveness and cockiness of CEO).
Facebook
Twitter