Tom's Hardware Guide: Financial Analysts Say Intel Killed the Discrete Graphics Card

[iCyborg]

Why is nVidia in a worst situation than AMD?
AMD is giving away their GPU tech to the market. Nobody cares about iGPU. If you think that the market is looking for the fastest iGPU you should compare the price of AMD's APUs and Intel's SB/IB cpus.

Well, take a look at the total graphics market share now and 5 years ago - nVidia is at the bottom right now among the 3. Intel is killing low end discrete, AMD can sell it as part of APUs, and nVidia can't do anything here. They can shift to other areas: HPC, Tegra etc.

As explained above, I don't think margins on AMD's APUs are lower than the margins on sub $80 discrete GPUs. 3.0 GHz Llano is certainly not worth $120 when you can get higher clocked Phenom 2 for $100. And you can find Radeon 6450 for <$40.

As for nobody cares about IGP, Intel has like 60% of the market which is all IGP. Yes, I know, that includes a lot of IGPs that people aren't using because you can't buy a CPU without it, but people who care about GPUs like 6450 and 6570 should certainly care about IB and Llano/Trinity.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

It seems that every year PC gaming dies according to the "analysts".

If anything, PC gaming seems to be gaining more popularity.

 

[blastingcap]

It seems that every year PC gaming dies according to the "analysts".

If anything, PC gaming seems to be gaining more popularity.

The article was not about PC gaming.

That said, adding more powerful graphics for "free" inside Intel and AMD CPUs means more people have access to "good enough" graphics that they might buy more PC games that they otherwise would not have bought (due to insufficiently powerful IGPs). Additional sales could lead to higher revenue and profit and thus healthier game developers who have more resources with which to build games, which could lead to better games overall.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Today, as you say, not a large need for GPGPU. But, audio and video editing could certainly use the GPGPU. Imagine photoshop effects rendered on a NVidia 690. I think that would have some interest. I think if new areas of use do not happen, intergrated graphics maybe will become only choice. I think, a lot is up to Microsoft, and if they use GPUs more.

I heard that same story over and over again since the geforce 8000.

 

[sontin]

Well, take a look at the total graphics market share now and 5 years ago - nVidia is at the bottom right now among the 3. Intel is killing low end discrete, AMD can sell it as part of APUs, and nVidia can't do anything here. They can shift to other areas: HPC, Tegra etc.

nVidia's Revenue is $950-$1050 Millions, AMD's Computer Solution (CPU, APUs, Chipset) makes $1200. nVidia is not losing anything.

As explained above, I don't think margins on AMD's APUs are lower than the margins on sub $80 discrete GPUs. 3.0 GHz Llano is certainly not worth $120 when you can get higher clocked Phenom 2 for $100. And you can find Radeon 6450 for <$40.

Without revenue margins are nothing. AMD is loosing revenue because they are selling a cpu+gpu package for the same cpu price instead of a cpu and a gpu for $100 and $50. There is a reason they are promoting dual-crossfire.

As for nobody cares about IGP, Intel has like 60% of the market which is all IGP. Yes, I know, that includes a lot of IGPs that people aren't using because you can't buy a CPU without it, but people who care about GPUs like 6450 and 6570 should certainly care about IB and Llano/Trinity.

Since Intel introduce iGPU to their chipset they have more than 50% of the market. The reason why they are increasing their share in the last year is because every CPU has a Intel-GPU.

And you don't think these people will not go out and buy the 28nm replacement? IB is not even as fast as the GT430. GK107 is more than twice as fast and using the same power...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Llano has sold very well and everyone is waiting for Trinity. If Trinity has GCN cores for the IGP it will be a big win for AMD.

Trinity got a weaker CPU than Llano tho. (Trinity is a dualco^H^Hmodule.) How long will people go for it? GCN cores are currently not doing well at all in terms of efficiency. If you want Trinity to have more success you would hope its VLIW4 based.

 

[blackened23]

Every new generation of Intel video claims it's the end of discrete graphics. It hasn't happened yet. Somebody is still going to have to develop powerful hardware to run the multi-billion dollar video game industry.

I just bought my daughter a low end laptop and I specifically avoided Intel because Intel integrated video is shite. She ended an AMD instead. It's not a powerhouse, but it runs games far better than Intel HD garbage.

The main effect is that, like the article states, the average consumer who doesn't necessarily cater their PC for gaming will not buy a discrete card. 5 years ago when you bought a PC you had to get a discrete card no matter what. Therefore, the discrete market is a lot smaller than it used to be, i'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. You'd have to be naive to think that the average PC user will buy a discrete card "just because", people like that in the past generally bought 50-150$ discrete cards for basic use....that will not happen anymore.

 

[iCyborg]

nVidia's Revenue is $950-$1050 Millions, AMD's Computer Solution (CPU, APUs, Chipset) makes $1200. nVidia is not losing anything.

I don't think that's due to their low end discrete doing great. And if AMD admits this from the quote below, I don't think nVidia is an exception.

Without revenue margins are nothing. AMD is loosing revenue because they are selling a cpu+gpu package for the same cpu price instead of a cpu and a gpu for $100 and $50. There is a reason they are promoting dual-crossfire.

Hm, I don't think I understand the logic and math of: CPU+GPU for X has better margins than CPU for X, and GPU for Y? Their revenue hasn't been falling either, and their margins are what hurt them the most in the last years.
And again, when it came out A8 3850 was selling for $140. A comparable CPU was Athlon 2 that was selling for $90-$100. This is not the same price to me.
Anyway: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphi...ill_Kill_Low_End_Discrete_Graphics_Cards.html
"In the long run, parts of [graphics cards] business will be cannibalized and the low-end discrete GPUs will be replaced with Fusion-type products. This is all goodness for us because it replaces low-cost margin revenue with high-gross margin revenue,” said Thomas Seifert, interim chief executive officer of AMD,"

Since Intel introduce iGPU to their chipset they have more than 50% of the market. The reason why they are increasing their share in the last year is because every CPU has a Intel-GPU.

And you don't think these people will not go out and buy the 28nm replacement? IB is not even as fast as the GT430. GK107 is more than twice as fast and using the same power...

The cheapest AMD 28nm is $110, don't know about nVidia, seems like this GK107 is OEM only.
The problem is that with IB you can't choose whether you want to pay X money for HD4000 or $60 GT430. The choice is HD4000 for $0 or get GT 430 for $60. And will only be useful for gaming pretty much.

 

[3DVagabond]

Its not exactly working out for them right now.

AMD has actually gained market share against Intel recently. I'm pretty certain it's not Bulldozer sales.

 

[ShintaiDK]

AMD has actually gained market share against Intel recently. I'm pretty certain it's not Bulldozer sales.

And if it drops 1-2% again next quarter? They tend to pingpong this way. Plus its easy to flood the channel one quarter and gain 1%.

http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/01/amd-regains-microprocessor-market-share-in-q2/

Not really something to count on. You can even say AMD had higher marketshare in Q2 2011 than Q1 2012. Not that it mean much.

 

[Blades]

It was the server segment... so yes, it was bulldozer sales there.. More so, these figures were before the SB-E(B) based Xeon came out...

It was also the laptop segment that AMD gain some market share in..

 

[3DVagabond]

I think it's interesting that according to the most vocal here it's only AMD that's loosing. When it's compared to nVidia it's GPU's that are being sold that nobody is using. They just happen to be included in that gaming rig you are building and going to buy a card for anyway. So, it's not costing sales of discreet GPU's. When it's compared to AMD they're being forced to give away product to compete and it's surely the reason for their margins. How obvious is this BS?

 

[KingFatty]

What?

I thought the analysts were just mistakenly interpreting the numbers, because they had no understanding of the difference between selling a discrete video card vs. the forced sale of a CPU-integrated GPU when someone buys an intel CPU?

 

[tynopik]

So lets get this straight, ~5% of pc users are hardcore gamers and these will always be the ones that get good discrete GPUs.

As long as that percentage doesn't suddenly fall, discrete GPUs will still be doing as good as they have been and are doing and will probably grow as the third world improve their living conditions and wealth.

false

what most people here are missing is how dependent NVIDIA is on low-end cards

yes, they make huge margins on top-end cards, but absolute volume, and thus revenue from top-end cards is not enough to sustain them

they absolutely rely on those low/mid-range cards to keep them in business

without the revenue from the mass of low-end cards, nvidia won't be able to afford development of the next generation

 

[nenforcer]

Trinity got a weaker CPU than Llano tho. (Trinity is a dualco^H^Hmodule.) How long will people go for it? GCN cores are currently not doing well at all in terms of efficiency. If you want Trinity to have more success you would hope its VLIW4 based.

I'm not sure where you are getting this information.

Trinity is getting PileDriver CPU cores which are an improvement over the Bulldozer (Zambezi) FX released last October and certainly better (26%) than the Stars 10.5K Llano CPU cores.

The Trinity GPU is also VLI4 based and will be an improvement over Llano.

They wouldn't come out with a product that is 'worse' than the previous generation. (And yes I know AMD FX was pretty much worse than Thuban Phenom 2 X6 but it still has new instructions and lower idle power.)

Here is your own NordicHardware with this information

http://www.nordichardware.com/news/69-cpu-chipset/45809-amd-trinity-and-piledriver-detailed.html

 

[Arzachel]

false

what most people here are missing is how dependent NVIDIA is on low-end cards

yes, they make huge margins on top-end cards, but absolute volume, and thus revenue from top-end cards is not enough to sustain them

they absolutely rely on those low/mid-range cards to keep them in business

without the revenue from the mass of low-end cards, nvidia won't be able to afford development of the next generation

Luckily Ivy's iGPU is still horrid enough that most Ivy laptops are getting packed with low-end dedicated Nvidia GPUs.

 

[palladium]

Has the HD4000 caught up with 8800GTX yet?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I'm not sure where you are getting this information.

Trinity is getting PileDriver CPU cores which are an improvement over the Bulldozer (Zambezi) FX released last October and certainly better (26%) than the Stars 10.5K Llano CPU cores.

The Trinity GPU is also VLI4 based and will be an improvement over Llano.

They wouldn't come out with a product that is 'worse' than the previous generation. (And yes I know AMD FX was pretty much worse than Thuban Phenom 2 X6 but it still has new instructions and lower idle power.)

Here is your own NordicHardware with this information

http://www.nordichardware.com/news/69-cpu-chipset/45809-amd-trinity-and-piledriver-detailed.html

We go from real quadcore with Llano to a dual module Pilediver CPU with Trinity. Or shall we call it as it is, dualcore with 4 threads.

I would say the CPU got weaker. Also the only thing AMD really dare to show is performance/watt, and they write up to 15% on their own slides. (To compare Ivy would get 25% or so over Sandy in the same chart.) People seem to have alot of blind faith in Pilediver cores vs Bulldozer. So lets not hype it any further. Its not just Bulldozer that failed. Some still remember Phenom, you know the CPU that was 40-50% faster than Core 2.

 

[3DVagabond]

We go from real quadcore with Llano to a dual module Pilediver CPU with Trinity. Or shall we call it as it is, dualcore with 4 threads.

I would say the CPU got weaker. Also the only thing AMD really dare to show is performance/watt, and they write up to 15% on their own slides. (To compare Ivy would get 25% or so over Sandy in the same chart.) People seem to have alot of blind faith in Pilediver cores vs Bulldozer. So lets not hype it any further. Its not just Bulldozer that failed. Some still remember Phenom, you know the CPU that was 40-50% faster than Core 2.

You have missed the point of he article. None of this matters. All that matters for the majority of the population is "good enough" according to the article.

Warning, car analogy
Salesman: Want new tires for your car? How about these nice Y rated tires. Good for over 186mph. They're $400ea. Too much? Well then how about these V rated tires. Good for up to 149mph and half the price?
Consumer: Yeah, they're good enough.

There's a lot of truth to that.

The part a lot of companies miss is making something that people actually want.

 

[Olikan]

It seems that every year PC gaming dies according to the "analysts".

If anything, PC gaming seems to be gaining more popularity.

yes, it's because consoles are getting weaker, and weaker compared to Pc gaming...

But, then in 2013, we will have powerfull Igps, will make sub $100 cards useless, get in R&D from amd/nvidia...

 

[Lonbjerg]

yes, it's because consoles are getting weaker, and weaker compared to Pc gaming...

But, then in 2013, we will have powerfull Igps, will make sub $100 cards useless, get in R&D from amd/nvidia...

Only if games stop progressing.
People talk like the "target" for IGP's is static...it's not.

 

[Gikaseixas]

We go from real quadcore with Llano to a dual module Pilediver CPU with Trinity.

i3 2100 is a dual core cpu with HT and it's an excellent gaming cpu. Your excuse to qualify negatively a unreleased chip is getting old. They could surprise us.

On the topic, i think that both Nvidia and AMD would suffer greatly if intel released a better still graphics solution. In other words HD 4000 while very good for today's standard is not good enough. Older tech (Llano) is still better.

 

[Jaydip]

By the time intel HDn000 will offer the same experience as the lower tier NV,AMD chips available today,NV and AMD's solutions will make intel look like crap yet again.Here i assume PC gaming won't be dead before that of course.

 

[Puppies04]

Its a declining market. I wouldnt be surprised if discrete cards are dead 10 years down the road.

So in 10 years an integrated GPU will be capable of playing the latest games at a minimum of 1080P minimum 60FPS on at least high?

LMAO i doubt they will be able to runBF3 on those settings at that performance level. Considering resolutions are only going to go up and pretty much everything will be 120hz+ by then I find it even less likely.

 

[Olikan]

Only if games stop progressing.
People talk like the "target" for IGP's is static...it's not.

but they are... metro 2033 is one of the most gpu-power hungry out there, yet a 2 years old game...

How much igps envolved in 2 years? how much powerfull igps will be next 2 years?
what are the next power-hungry game? diablo 3? dota 2?

So in 10 years an integrated GPU will be capable of playing the latest games at a minimum of 1080P minimum 60FPS on at least high?

why the need of 60 FPS? We are talking the whole market here....