AMD's Vega architecture previewed at ve.ga

[Fetzie]

6 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

AMD should try to work a deal with console OEMs to get their logo to pop up on system boot for half a second.  That could do the trick.

Yeah, something like

Would raise awareness that AMD makes gaming hardware, and would be seen by millions of XBox and Playstation owners every time they turn on their device. nVidia would shit themselves :)

[Vode]

2 minutes ago, Fetzie said:

Yeah, something like

Would raise awareness that AMD makes gaming hardware, and would be seen by millions of XBox and Playstation owners every time they turn on their device. nVidia would shit themselves

You know....

 

ATI had it on the Gamecube once upon a time.

 

 

 

[MoonSpot]

1 hour ago, Fetzie said:

Yeah, something like

Would raise awareness that AMD makes gaming hardware, and would be seen by millions of XBox and Playstation owners every time they turn on their device. nVidia would shit themselves

Naw, was thinking fullscreen nothing but radeon with a little chime.  Keep it short and sweet, and let repetition do its thing.

[FishTea]

Hype!

[leadeater]

8 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

No, it's because they couldn't make one. In no way is it a financially sound decision to completely forfeit the high end market. Aside from losing out on all those sales, you also lose out on the hype that having a top tier card drives.

And Nvidia knows just how good having the fastest card in the market is, it's an extremely powerful marketing tool which drives sales of low tier products even if the competition has a better offering. A marketing tool that you don't even have to drive with a marketing team.

 

Never underestimate the mental effect buying from the perceived premium brand has no matter which product you are actually buying. 

[captain cactus]

Well, no 1080Ti today. AMD can go ham if they want with the Vega announcement. Only if they release before the 1080Ti though. 

[Morgan Everett]

7 hours ago, Vode said:

The reason they didn't is a 100% finacial decision, and the correct one. AMD doesn't have as strong a brand as Nvidia. The enthusiast market is tiny and not the first thing you cather to. 

It depends on what you mean by "the enthusiast market". But not releasing a GPU to compete with the 1070 and above is not some shrewd financial decision, but probably born of necessity. That's where the money is, after all.

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

It depends on what you mean by "the enthusiast market". But not releasing a GPU to compete with the 1070 and above is not some shrewd financial decision, but probably born of necessity. That's where the money is, after all.

There's actually way more money in mid tier GPUs and partnerships with system integrators. These sell in huge volumes more than 1070/1080 GPUs do and the way the finances work with these deals you don't have to wait for a system to be sold to get the money, volume sale agreement.

 

Putting an AMD GPU/APU in an HP EliteDesk 800 for example would get significantly more product sales and profit than the sales they get from people like us on this forum.

[Morgan Everett]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

There's actually way more money in mid tier GPUs and partnerships with system integrators. These sell in huge volumes more than 1070/1080 GPUs do and the way the finances work with these deals you don't have to wait for a system to be sold to get the money, volume sale agreement.

I beg to differ. The money is in the margins, which come with sales of these higher end units. Nvidia sells them in high volumes, too: see the GTX 970.

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

I beg to differ. The money is in the margins, which come with sales of these higher end units. Nvidia sells them in high volumes, too: see the GTX 970.

But you sell way more mid range cards, where AMD has an advantage. Wal Mart didn't get to be Wal Mart selling luxuries. Volume always wins. 

[Morgan Everett]

4 minutes ago, App4that said:

But you sell way more mid range cards, where AMD has an advantage. Wal Mart didn't get to be Wal Mart selling luxuries. Volume always wins. 

I'm not sure it has an advantage even there.

 

As for the GPU market, as I've already suggested, the serious money is to be made in the area where AMD is currently not competing, where both margins *and* volume strike a balance that leads to the sort of profitability Nvidia enjoys. The 970 is a prime example: it remains a staggeringly popular GPU, yet was released at about $150 more than the RX 480. This is precisely why AMD will be trying very hard to change that fact in the near future.

[Energycore]

10 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Only reason 980Ti was up and over the Titan XM was because nVidia didn't allow Titan XM to be on custom boards/coolers for higher overclocks.

The few people who put a Titan X on a waterblock got some amazing performance from that

[Energycore]

3 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

I'm not sure it has an advantage even there.

 

As for the GPU market, as I've already suggested, the serious money is to be made in the area where AMD is currently not competing, where both margins *and* volume strike a balance that leads to the sort of profitability Nvidia enjoys. The 970 is a prime example: it remains a staggeringly popular GPU, yet was released at about $150 more than the RX 480. This is precisely why AMD will be trying very hard to change that fact in the near future.

I'm pretty sure AMD doesn't have an advantage anywhere, in terms of market share. Hell, Steam reports more users with 1070s than 480s

[App4that]

13 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

I'm not sure it has an advantage even there.

 

As for the GPU market, as I've already suggested, the serious money is to be made in the area where AMD is currently not competing, where both margins *and* volume strike a balance that leads to the sort of profitability Nvidia enjoys. The 970 is a prime example: it remains a staggeringly popular GPU, yet was released at about $150 more than the RX 480. This is precisely why AMD will be trying very hard to change that fact in the near future.

You're looking at retail cost, not cost to produce. Way harder to get the high core yields. AMD could win the market with just the 480, but 4k.

[Morgan Everett]

21 minutes ago, App4that said:

You're looking at retail cost, not cost to produce. Way harder to get the high core yields. AMD could win the market with just the 480, but 4k.

No, I'm looking at both, which is why I referred to margins. I can't understand your last sentence.

[App4that]

22 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

No, I'm looking at both, which is why I referred to margins. I can't understand your last sentence.

The 480 is enough for AMD to win. It's all most people need. The problem is people want a 4k card while using a 1080p monitor.

 

AMD has tried to market but they sound like an angry teen on social media.  They need to calm down and push what works.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Morgan Everett said:

I beg to differ. The money is in the margins, which come with sales of these higher end units. Nvidia sells them in high volumes, too: see the GTX 970.

You never get to see the sale stats of business and enterprise computers that come with GPUs in them, these never run steam and as such don't come up on hardware surveys. Where I work in New Zealand we have 6000 computers, this is one place in one small country. The 2 million (best figure I could find) of GTX 970 is not much at all.

 

This isn't even counting server GPUs which sell in huge numbers. The Cray XK7 (Titan) has over 18,000 GPUs in it alone.

 

Also look at the Nvidia CES press event, notice how almost none of it was about consumer graphics cards. Most of Nvidia's revenue is selling to data centers and partnerships with likes of every company mentioned in that presentation.

 

Basically Nvidia doesn't have as much interest in selling GPUs to you and I quite to the degree you may be thinking.

 

[Morgan Everett]

23 minutes ago, App4that said:

The 480 is enough for AMD to win.

Hmm...

 

10 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You never get to see the sale stats of business and enterprise computers that come with GPUs in them, these never run steam and as such don't come up on hardware surveys. Where I work in New Zealand we have 6000 computers, this is one place in one small country. The 2 million (best figure I could find) of GTX 970 is not much at all.

 

This isn't even counting server GPUs which sell in huge numbers. The Cray XK7 (Titan) has over 18,000 GPUs in it alone.

 

Also look at the Nvidia CES press event, notice how almost none of it was about consumer graphics cards. Most of Nvidia's revenue is selling to data centers and partnerships with likes of every company mentioned in that presentation.

 

Basically Nvidia doesn't have as much interest in selling GPUs to you and I quite to the degree you may be thinking.

 

I'm sure selling to businesses makes them a great deal of cash, too. But while Nvidia's CES event may not have focused on consumer GPUs, it's fair to say many of their other press events have done so. I can't comment on where most of Nvidia's revenue comes from, but clearly consumer GPU's are an extremely significant part of their business, and one you're unduly diminishing.

 

They make so much money from this side of their business precisely because they sell so many GPU's at higher/high end price points. The 970 was one example; the 1070 and 1080 are others. This is where AMD is going to have to compete with Vega, and you can be sure they'll be trying to soon enough.

 

 

 

 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

but clearly consumer GPU's are an extremely significant part of their business, and one you're unduly diminishing.

I'm not really trying to diminish it, that's how Nvidia became successful. Also the consumer GPU side of the business in large part drives the majority of the innovation and is what Nvidia uses to market their products to the enterprise market. It's just not where they make the money from now days, not directly.

[Morgan Everett]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

 It's just not where they make the money from now days, not directly.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one!

[App4that]

6 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

Hmm...

 

I'm sure selling to businesses makes them a great deal of cash, too. But while Nvidia's CES event may not have focused on consumer GPUs, it's fair to say many of their other press events have done so. I can't comment on where most of Nvidia's revenue comes from, but clearly consumer GPU's are an extremely significant part of their business, and one you're unduly diminishing.

 

They make so much money from this side of their business precisely because they sell so many GPU's at higher/high end price points. The 970 was one example; the 1070 and 1080 are others. This is where AMD is going to have to compete with Vega, and you can be sure they'll be trying to soon enough.

 

 

 

 

If AMD was selling 480s at a rate faster than Nvidia could sell 1070s, they win. Nvidia left the door open with no SLI support and a cut down 3g version of the 1060. If the 490 beats the 1070, get ready to see that kick in.

[leadeater]

Just now, Morgan Everett said:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one!

True I don't think we will but I do get to talk to the likes of HP design engineers, Microsoft cloud architects and many other vendors so I have a pretty good sense of the sales that goes on in this area and the kinds of money that gets thrown around. 

[3DOSH]

 

Little help

[TheRandomness]

I might allow some hype for later today...  I hope they're re-making the R9 Nano...

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, 3DOSH said:

 

Little help

Wow RIP the OEM & IP after Q3 2015, well market really has shift back again. Thanks.