exar333
Diamond Member
- Feb 7, 2004
- 8,518
- 8
- 91
Because NVIDIA, like most stocks in the US markets are overpriced.
Because NVIDIA, like most stocks in the US markets are overpriced.
Everything is a risk. However they were run out of the chipset business years ago. They have replaced that revenue stream with other products.
Intel owns 60+% of the GPU market for a reason. The majority of computers sold through OEMs or best buy already have an IGP. AMDs APU is nothing more than an IGP on the CPU die like Intels SB. This trend to use IGP isnt new. Been happening for years. And Llano is low low end. It loses to a 40 dollar GTS 240 from Nvidia.
The high end provides large profits. I believe those low volume Quadro cards account for about 19% of Nvidia's revenues and even more % for their actual profits.
Nvidia has strong competition in SOCs. It will be interesting to see if they can out launch their competition like they did in the graphics world a decade ago. Basically flood the channel with new and improved products to the point the competition gives up due to lower margins.
There is a huge upside to Nvidia if they can corner the SOC market for cells and Tablets. Kal El imo is the 2nd step in this process.
It's the stock market, it doesn't have to make sense. It's a crap shoot.
Everything is a risk. However they were run out of the chipset business years ago. They have replaced that revenue stream with other products.
Intel owns 60+% of the GPU market for a reason. The majority of computers sold through OEMs or best buy already have an IGP. AMDs APU is nothing more than an IGP on the CPU die like Intels SB. This trend to use IGP isnt new. Been happening for years. And Llano is low low end. It loses to a 40 dollar GTS 240 from Nvidia.
The high end provides large profits. I believe those low volume Quadro cards account for about 19% of Nvidia's revenues and even more % for their actual profits.
Nvidia has strong competition in SOCs. It will be interesting to see if they can out launch their competition like they did in the graphics world a decade ago. Basically flood the channel with new and improved products to the point the competition gives up due to lower margins.
There is a huge upside to Nvidia if they can corner the SOC market for cells and Tablets. Kal El imo is the 2nd step in this process.
The top dogs of the mobile world such as Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and Samsung are giants when compared to nVidia and nVidia is going to be able to strut in and just claim the market for themselves. Personally nVidia reminds of ATI and their FireGL/FirePro lineup; plenty of design wins, but they perpetually remain in a small share of the market with a handful of loyal customers.
Year-to-year growth Nvidia is up 35% and AMD is down 15%. Just saying.
Nvidia was nothing compared to 3dfx, Matrox, and ATI back in the late 1990s when it came to discrete graphics cards. The business model is different for Nvidia than these companies you mentioned. Nvidia's business model revolves around pushing out new products into the channel to fund R&D on 2 generations down the pipeline. And doing this quite quickly.
Nvidia in their second generation became the hardware platform for android. That is a big deal. A lot of the tablets coming out this year are Tegra 2. And I wont be surprised at all if that changes from Tegra 2 to Tegra 3 in 2012. Phones will also start seeing more Tegra based designs. And while Kal-El is what is going into the wild in the 3rd quater. Nvidia already has 1-2 more generations in research that will be release over the next 24-32ish months I am sure.
It will be interesting to see if they simply out innovate their competition to the point they give up due to lower margins and faster product cycles.
Nvidia was nothing compared to 3dfx, Matrox, and ATI back in the late 1990s when it came to discrete graphics cards. The business model is different for Nvidia than these companies you mentioned. Nvidia's business model revolves around pushing out new products into the channel to fund R&D on 2 generations down the pipeline. And doing this quite quickly.
Nvidia in their second generation became the hardware platform for android. That is a big deal. A lot of the tablets coming out this year are Tegra 2. And I wont be surprised at all if that changes from Tegra 2 to Tegra 3 in 2012. Phones will also start seeing more Tegra based designs. And while Kal-El is what is going into the wild in the 3rd quater. Nvidia already has 1-2 more generations in research that will be release over the next 24-32ish months I am sure..
It will be interesting to see if they simply out innovate their competition to the point they give up due to lower margins and faster product cycles.
As oppsed to Nvidia who is known for talking a big game then under delivering.
I was following you until I read this....totally unfounded, and it makes you look ignorant.
Did you some how forget everything that happened with Fermi? I don't even care about the mock ups that weren't real cards. Fermi was months late and over hyped. Not to mention at one of the demos the cards weren't actually fermi cards. Then there are the conctant rebrands, hot running cards, and of course the GTX 590.
It was probably and low blow on my part. But Nvidia can't do that in the mobile world where phones are out dated in 6 months time.
If you mean Nvidia's ARM competition giving up I have to say you're crazy for a few reasons. Tegra 2 was beaten in processing power within a week of it's launch, I believe by Texas Instraments. Qualcomm isn't going to release a more powerful chip, instead they cut power usage by 75%.
Both of these companies have stong reputations, deep pockets, and long standing relationships with hardware manufactures. As oppsed to Nvidia who is known for talking a big game then under delivering.
Tegra 2 was launched in Q1 2010. It took at least 2 quarters (over a year in some cases) for Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, Samsung & Apple to get ahead of Tegra 2. Tegra 2 was too early though, it only got real traction in the market nearly a year after it was launched. Had it been launched in Q3/4 of 2010 the extra 6/9 months of development would probably have led to a faster chip but that's something we'll never know. They need to work closer with Phone/Tablet manufacturers to sync Tegra releases with new device launches.