nVidia GeForce Partner Program: Well Intention Marketing or Anti-Competitive

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Derangel said:

Its selling now, but it won't be forever. Right now is the best time for them to do it. When things stabilize they could be in a position to entirely sink AMD in the GPU market. The right time to do something like this isn't in the middle of new launches or when shelves are flush with products. Right now they can use this to bully AIBs and OEMs with threats of getting even less allocation.

 

I would argue if they have ever been in a position to sink AMD, it was over the last few years.  AMD were on the verge of bankruptcy with under performing GPUs for a very long time.  Nvidia had enough market share and revenue/profit to drop their prices to the point AMD would have started hemorrhaging.   I find it difficult to believe they would have passed up that opportunity before vega and zen were released only to decide now to risk a lawsuit and bad PR in a move that will not likely improve sales figures until 2019 at the earliest and maybe not even 2020 with ram not ramping up production until then.

[Derangel]

36 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

I would argue if they have ever been in a position to sink AMD, it was over the last few years.  AMD were on the verge of bankruptcy with under performing GPUs for a very long time.  Nvidia had enough market share and revenue/profit to drop their prices to the point AMD would have started hemorrhaging.   I find it difficult to believe they would have passed up that opportunity before vega and zen were released only to decide now to risk a lawsuit and bad PR in a move that will not likely improve sales figures until 2019 at the earliest and maybe not even 2020 with ram not ramping up production until then.

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

[cj09beira]

26 minutes ago, Derangel said:

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

i dont think they want amd dead at all, they want it which in an inch of its life because they dont want to become the only one and get in trouble

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

i dont think they want amd dead at all, they want it which in an inch of its life because they dont want to become the only one and get in trouble

There is that side of it too.  

[LAwLz]

So let me get this straight... This is my TL;DR version which may or may not be 100% accurate (please feel free to correct me if I am missing something).

 

 

1) Nvidia has launched a program they call GeForce Partner Program (GPP for short).

2) AMD went to HardOCP with this story. HardOCP says they ignored the info AMD gave them and decided to do their own research.

3) According to HardOCP there are essentially two major things to this story which together creates the issue.

a) If you are part of the GPP you get:

Quote

high-effort engineering engagements -- early tech engagement -- launch partner status -- game bundling -- sales rebate programs -- social media and PR support -- marketing reports -- Marketing Development Funds (MDF). MDF is likely the standout in that list of lost benefits if the company is not a GPP partner.

Basically, if you are in the partner program Nvidia will help you engineer computers, give you free games, maybe post about your computer on their Facebook page and so on. If you're not in the partner program you're on your own.

 

b) If you are in the partner program then your "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce".

Basically, you are not allowed to label a computer as "gaming" if it doesn't have a GeForce GPU in it.

 

My problem with this article is that for a) we get a citation from a document we can't see, so we have no idea about context or if it's even written like that at all. For b) we don't even get what appears to be a citation.

 

It would be one thing if we could see these documents and read them for ourselves, but I think it's one hell of a jump to assume that both a) and b) are legitimate and not taken out of context.

All we have to go by is small snippets from a secret document, which has been filtered through the author.

I'd like to see some better evidence before making my mind up.

 

I'm glad to see that only a handful of people have brought out their pitchforks so far. I was fully expecting the usual "Nvidia is run by the literal devil and is out to destroy everything! Please AMD save us!" crap we usually get on this forum.

[Razor01]

The GPP is not anti trust on its own.  Being a partner over right now, gives more benefits while it gives nV benefits too. 

 

Tier 1 OEM, and board partners get the same preferential treatment right now as do GPP partners do.  Free games, they don't get this right now, they must pay for it currently.  Free marketing, from nV, they don't have that right now either.

 

So what nV is trying to do it, essential is cut away from AMD's products, and make them the sole gamer brand if a partner signs up.  This is not anti competitive since the company has the choice and they are getting something more over what they had before.

 

Who this affects, OEM's, AIB's.  OEM's and AIB's, the larger guys won't care to much as they have the funds to create two separate lines.  The smaller guys though, they are going to be in trouble they can't create two separate lines, and market it, but we are talking about 3 companies in the North East? and 2 in Asia that do both IHV's cards?  All of them are major players.  The OEM's ya got 3 of them them that have more than 50% of the computer marketshare.  All big fish.  And the smaller guys are still pretty big too.

 

Obviously AMD doesn't like this, because they are getting kicked out of the gaming market, doesn't really matter for them anyways, the only people buying AMD GPU's gaming right now are the ones that really don't know why the hell they are doing so bad to begin with compared to the competition or just like their products more.

 

Can nV use this program do to distasteful things, it sounds like it, but as other stated, need more info.....

[Razor01]

7 hours ago, Derangel said:

I wonder if the Intel-AMD deal is what tipped the scales. That new chip is very good and along with AMD's new APUs that could really cut Nvidia's laptop stuff. Perhaps AI stuff as well. Nvidia and AMD are both heavily investing in deep learning. It will be a couple years until that really bares fruit though. If Nvidia could cripple, or completely kill off, AMD's GPU division then it would be more than worth whatever fines they have to pay as it would give them exclusive access to those rapidly growing fields. This entire thing is definitely something to keep an eye on and see where it goes. It would be nice if it wasn't as bad as it seems, but it doesn't look good right now. Kyle's experience in the industry lends some weight to the concern as well.

That is possible but highly unlikely, because that ultra book will be going up against not pascal based notebooks, its going to be going up against next gen notebooks, and we all know if it can barely get up to a gtx 1030 in a notebook, how will it fair against next gen?

 

AMD's GPU division did it by themselves, they crippled themselves, by not funding it properly.  This has nothing to do with nV. 

 

Exclusive deals are nothing new in the industry, look at AMD with memory, they have done it many times over.  Of course nV being smart didn't play into the need to use the same memory AMD helped create.  Did AMD get benefits from this, hell ya, they got memory for less than what those companies normally sell to others for.

 

This is a bit different I agree, this exclusive selling of a product as a separate line. It doesn't stop these partners for selling other products, just not in the same line.  It also doesn't stop a company when a competitor has as good of product or better to stop being in the program.  They just don't get the benefits they once had with the program, which those benefits they don't have right now anyways.  Once AMD or Intel actually have competing products to nV, this program isn't even worth the paper its written on.  We see how fast graphics market swings can be, 10, 20% swings in notebook, 10% in dgpu's, easily if companies can compete.  This isn't like the CPU business, where OEM's and system builders are the main source of revenue, AIB's are the main source of revenue for nV and AMD.  Where a person keeps their OEM or built system for 6 or 7 years, and upgrades parts like the graphics card ever gen or two.

 

The concerns are there yeah, it sounds shady has hell when nV doesn't share the particulars about the program, but business transactions are never transparent, and never should be, because most people looking from the outside, don't know what the hell they are looking at.

 

Look if you want independent people looking into these things, yeah people like Kyle, like Linus, and others that have been in the industry before and know how these things actually work, are the best to look at.  And even Kyle stated, he needs more info, but since nV hadn't gotten back to him yet, he thinks it looks bad, and yeah it does look bad from what we have seen so far.

 

The current anti trust laws don't cover this at all and for good reason, because its not anti trust ;), the closest thing they have to it is customer allocation but these are non compete clauses based on regions or market segregation of products and customers, not marketing based as a whole.  nV is not telling their partners to not to sell AMD products, just not in the same line.  If nV, the best maker for GPU's currently is helping their partners to make more money, they don't want the same line to be associated with GPU's that aren't as good as it water downs the brand.

 

 

[Notional]

Sigh. NVidia being scummy again with anti competitive tactics. The worst part is that people will still support this behaviour. Hopefully, the larger brands won't fall for this nonsense. Then again Asus is kinda already doing that.

 

So why is NVidia doing this? Well, take a brand name like Asus' ROG, for instance. With this partner program, the ROG branding will be exclusive to NVidia, thus allowing NVidia to bandwagon onto an established gaming brand at no cost. Furthermore, it will exclude AMD from this same branding, thus preventing AMD (or Intel for that matter) to benefit from the vendors own branding. It will require Asus to make another branding, that ultimately will be weaker.

 

This entire ordeal only benefits NVidia. It will be at the cost of the vendors, AMD, Intel, and of course, YOU. Vote with your wallet, it's the only power you have.

[Jito463]

4 hours ago, Razor01 said:

the only people buying AMD GPU's gaming right now are the ones that really don't know why the hell they are doing so bad to begin with compared to the competition or just like their products more.

Is anyone else confused by this run-on sentence?

[Razor01]

1 hour ago, Notional said:

Sigh. NVidia being scummy again with anti competitive tactics. The worst part is that people will still support this behaviour. Hopefully, the larger brands won't fall for this nonsense. Then again Asus is kinda already doing that.

 

So why is NVidia doing this? Well, take a brand name like Asus' ROG, for instance. With this partner program, the ROG branding will be exclusive to NVidia, thus allowing NVidia to bandwagon onto an established gaming brand at no cost. Furthermore, it will exclude AMD from this same branding, thus preventing AMD (or Intel for that matter) to benefit from the vendors own branding. It will require Asus to make another branding, that ultimately will be weaker.

 

This entire ordeal only benefits NVidia. It will be at the cost of the vendors, AMD, Intel, and of course, YOU. Vote with your wallet, it's the only power you have.

 

 

That is tough luck for AMD, they shouldn't have handed over the GPU market to nV.  They did this by not spending money for R&D for their GPU line ups for years.  Keep this in mind, AMD would have gone to their attorneys to seek an injunction if there were any grounds to do so.  That didn't happen.  So they went to the press.

 

Its not nV's fault that AMD's GPU's don't compete in gaming.

 

Yes it only benefits nV, that is what companies, do , they want to be on top of the food chain, nothing wrong with that.

 

You also can't blame consumers for wanting nV products, well AMD sat around long enough on GCN and did nothing to advance their tech.  This is what happens.  They lose market share, then they lose their ability to persuade their partners to give them equal opportunity to market their products.  AMD is not entailed to consumer's money if they don't' have products that consumers want.  They don't run a charity either.  If you run a charity and want to help AMD, by all means do so.  Take a tithe out when it comes to tax time

 

Tell me something, if you owned a brick and mortar, and you had two separate motherboard manufacturers wanting to sell products with you, One has a lion's share of the market and you know you can sell those by the droves, and other, they are nice but just not competitive, will you take part in the larger companies marketing deal, where you know you will also get extra benefits for the same things you are already selling droves of?  Or let the benefits slide and selling limited quantities of the not as good brand?  You know one of them you don't need to worry about left over stock.  AKA A-10 anyone?  AKA Fury X anyone?

[mr moose]

47 minutes ago, Notional said:

So why is NVidia doing this?

 

Doing what exactly?  So far all we have is an aggressive article with no supporting evidence and no interested parties willing to put their name to it.  They won't even tell us which documents they claim to have read let alone print them.  

 

The only facts we have are insinuations from the journalist and a blog from nvidia that claims:

 

Quote

The program isn't exclusive. Partners continue to have the ability to sell and promote products from anyone.

 

There might be another article from someone else which has more compelling evidence, but so far they all point back to Bennett and claim only that AMD has reached out and that's the only source for all of this. 

[cj09beira]

@Razor01 things aren't that simple thought, there are reasons why amd didn't have enough money to invest into R&D, which is nvidea still outsold them by alot even when they had the better product, which happened more than once, that is the fault of consumers  

[Razor01]

6 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

@Razor01 things aren't that simple thought, there are reasons why amd didn't have enough money to invest into R&D, which is nvidea still outsold them by alot even when they had the better product, which happened more than once, that is the fault of consumers  

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

 

How do you blame this on a consumer when AMD brings out rebranded products and late products to the market and expect consumers to just buy AMD and nV products equally?

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

 lets forget all about the history that really matters which is the one BEFORE the products that we got when amd dint have enough R&D

[Notional]

3 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

That is tough luck for AMD, they shouldn't have handed over the GPU market to nV.  They did this by not spending money for R&D for their GPU line ups for years. 

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

7 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Tell me something, if you owned a brick and mortar, and you had two separate motherboard manufacturers wanted to sell products with you, One has a lion's share of the market and you know you can sell those by the droves, and other, they are nice but just not competitive, will you take part in the larger companies marketing deal, where you know you will also get extra benefits for the same things you are already selling droves of?  Or let the benefits slide and selling limited quantities of the not as good brand?

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Doing what exactly?  So far all we have is an aggressive article with no supporting evidence and no interested parties willing to put their name to it.  They won't even tell us which documents they claim to have read let alone print them.  

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

 lets forget all about the history that really matters which is the one BEFORE the products that we got when amd dint have enough R&D

They had the R&D prior to that, that is why GCN came out, they had decent R&D then.  It wasn't till the new/current management started to shave graphics R&D for CPU R&D.

[-rascal-]

5 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Why did nV outsell AMD?  It started with Maxwell against the r3xx and Fury Lines.

 

r3xx was late by 6 months, Fury line a couple months after, they dropped down to 20% and less market share because of that.  Then Polaris against Pascal, status quo, they got clobbered again.  What is going to happen with next gen, yeah its going to be worse then what we saw before. 

 

You need to understand, nVidia has been outselling ATi/AMD waaaay before Maxwell and R-300 series times.

We could go back to all the way to ... 2004 .. if we wanted.

Look at the market share difference throughout the years.

[Razor01]

6 minutes ago, -rascal- said:

 

You need to understand, nVidia has been outselling ATi/AMD waaaay before Maxwell and R-300 series times.

We could go back to all the way to ... 2004 .. if we wanted.

Look at the market share difference throughout the years.

 

 

They were but not by what we saw then.

 

AMD was hovering around 40% marketshare with the HD lines, outside of r600 and hd3xxx.

 

That is enough commanding marketshare to stop things like this from happening.

 

Maxwell was a kick in AMD balls, it was the lowest marketshare they have ever had in their entire history.

 

[Razor01]

5 minutes ago, Notional said:

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.

Offering both when one isn't selling is not a good idea, because at the end you need to either write off the left over inventory which if you don't sell within 6 months after an updated product comes out or eat the cost by selling at no profit or a loss, either way its just bad.

 

Fury X, Dell was selling those after Pascal came out, a good 6 months after, at higher than gtx 1080 prices.  Crazy stuff I know, but that is what happens with left over stock,  who would buy such products at that time?

[mr moose]

11 minutes ago, Notional said:

Indeed. I wonder if AMD's deroute was the consequence of Intel's illegal anti consumer tactics, very similar to this? Yeah, that sounds quite plausible. Buying ATI at a way too high price didn't help, but that wasn't what sabotaged AMD.

I would offer both, so the consumer (my actual customer) has a choice and get to buy what they want. I would never, as a company, allow myself to be 100% dependable on another company I have no control over. Why do you think LTT made floatplane? They cannot afford to allow one company (Youtube) to dictate their existence. Allowing such a situation is just incompetent.

 

Well, of course, when it comes to journalism it is always a case of trust. You either trust them or not. You should however never blindly trust them. This is what Videocardz have to say about it:

 

Remember that these things need to get leaked in which case credibility is limited. There's a smoking gun here, but this case is far from over though.

 

The program is very much exclusive, but only when it comes to branding. No ones claimed that Asus is not allowed to make or sell AMD products anymore. Only that if Asus joined the program, it would have to dedicate its gaming brand exclusively to NVidia.This is all a marketing ploy. Now if it was just NVidia's own, then no problem. But when they are indirectly forcing third party companies to implement their marketing at the expense of not only the vendor itself, but also the consumer, then it's a problem.

 

If there is evidence that what they are saying is true then they don;t need to fear a defamation case.  Evidence is evidence. The fact they fear a defamation case only furthers the proposition they have no evidence and it's more hearsay.

 

So even though we have no evidence and Nvidia have outright claimed it's not exclusive, you are still willing to claim it is?

 

Pardon me but I am going to wait for evidence before I make a call one way or the other.

[Notional]

Just now, Razor01 said:

Offering both when one isn't selling is not a good idea, because at the end you need to either write off the left over inventory which if you don't sell within 6 months after an updated product comes out or eat the cost by selling at no profit or a loss, either way its just bad.

 

Fury X, Dell was selling those after Pascal came out, a good 6 months after, at higher than gtx 1080 prices.  Crazy stuff I know, but that is what happens with left over stock,  who would buy such products at that time?

Sure, but you are delving into a non issue here. AMD products are not only selling, they are completely sold out everywhere (GPU). I see no reason for Asus, MSI or similar to stop selling AMD cards. But again, that is not what NVidia is demanding either. They only seem to demand exclusive use of the vendors gaming brand (ie. ROG).

[Razor01]

Just now, Notional said:

Sure, but you are delving into a non issue here. AMD products are not only selling, they are completely sold out everywhere (GPU). I see no reason for Asus, MSI or similar to stop selling AMD cards. But again, that is not what NVidia is demanding either. They only seem to demand exclusive use of the vendors gaming brand (ie. ROG).

 

They aren't selling because of gaming......  Vendor's know this.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

 

They aren't selling because of gaming......  Vendor's know this.

And even if they were, everything is selling, they stand to gain absolutely nothing because even if they released a card called the vanilla plain Jane stock GPU and put it in a grey box, it would sell out too.  Branding means absolutely nothing when literally everything above a 1050/480 is selling out.

[-rascal-]

Anyways, after reading HardOCP's article, this is what I am interpreting.

 

Using ASUS ROG as an example, if you want to be part of GPP, your "gaming" product lines must be dedicated for nVidia only.

ASUS is not allowed to created ... Federation of Gamer (FOG) for AMD  and use ROG of nVidia -- it is still considered a "gaming" line.

There is a on-off discussion about this on HardOCP...personally, I am keeping an eye on this.

 

HardOCP contacted AIBs and OEMs, they even think this GPP is a "shady" tactic -- could be outright illegal.

A bunch of them don't even want to have a RECORD that they talked to HardOCP.

If GPP is so great, they could use this as a marketing.

THIS is scary for me.

 

I remember XFX used to produce nVidia cards...then they started making AMD GPUs too...then something happened.

Maybe nVidia threw them out to dry, and XFX abandoned ship, and now they just make AMD cards.

 

Quote

NVIDIA will tell you that it is 100% up to its partner company to be part of GPP, and from the documents I have read, if it chooses not to be part of GPP, it will lose the benefits of GPP which include: high-effort engineering engagements -- early tech engagement -- launch partner status -- game bundling -- sales rebate programs -- social media and PR support -- marketing reports -- Marketing Development Funds (MDF). MDF is likely the standout in that list of lost benefits if the company is not a GPP partner.

Will AIBs and OEMs get MORE support from what they are getting now after signing up for GPP?

Is non-GPP partners going to get reduced support, and GPP are maintaining the same level of support?

 

Before: Whether you are part of GPP or not, you get the same support

After (theory 1): non-GPP gets reduced support, GPP maintains same level of support as before?

After (theory 2): non-GPP maintains same level of support as before, GPP get extended level of support as before?

 

IF it is theory 1, again, then this is sketchy.

[Notional]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If there is evidence that what they are saying is true then they don;t need to fear a defamation case.  Evidence is evidence. The fact they fear a defamation case only furthers the proposition they have no evidence and it's more hearsay.

 

So even though we have no evidence and Nvidia have outright claimed it's not exclusive, you are still willing to claim it is?

 

Pardon me but I am going to wait for evidence before I make a call one way or the other.

2

Well, if you read the original article, Bennet clearly states he has talked to seven third party vendors about this. Other sites might not have, and thus won't have the same evidence as hardocp. This is what Hardocp wrote:

Quote

 

We have contacted seven companies about their part in NVIDIA GPP and not one of the seven would talk to us on the record if they spoke to us about it at all. The ones that did speak to us have done so anonymously, in fear of losing their jobs, or having retribution placed upon them or their companies by NVIDIA. All of the people that I did interview at AIBs and at OEMs did however have the same thoughts on GPP. 1.) They think that it has terms that are likely illegal. 2.) GPP is likely going to tremendously hurt consumers' choices. 3.) It will disrupt business with the companies that they are currently doing business with, namely AMD and Intel.

 

The crux of the issue with NVIDIA GPP comes down to a single requirement in order to be part of GPP. In order to have access to the GPP program, its partners must have its "Gaming Brand Aligned Exclusively With GeForce." I have read documents with this requirement spelled out on it.

 

5

Now, if is entirely your prerogative not to believe any of it, but we are taking about classified documents here. Exactly what do you require?

 

6 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

They aren't selling because of gaming......  Vendor's know this.

 

Nonsense. Sure we all know the result of cryptocrap going on atm., but the 500 series were doing just great before that. Vega is difficult to make any conclusion about, as it was limited from the get go, and launched right into the cryptocrap bubble.