AMD announces open source ray tracing at GDC *Interview update*

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

When was the last time nV sold at a loss or no profit for their products then?

 

I just edited the previous post to reflect that.  They were forced to do it last time.  They didn't even do it with the FX series ya know that?  You know why, that is business, they knew they were going to loose out with the FX series so they said screw it, its not worth going into a price war because they were going to get even less they can get anyways.

 

nV will never give us something for nothing.  Even Intel wouldn't do this, they aren't going to go down that road even when they get hammered tech wise.  Of course Intel did it behind closed doors, that is different though and illegal lol.

Again, pretty much everything you said here is an assumption.

 

As for the NVIDIA FX series? Well the big reason is that they had competition that could force a price war. That is very different context from right now.

 

NVIDIA would stand to lose more money if they sold FX at a loss, and then AMD/ATI just undercut the pricing, forcing NVIDIA to drop the price, losing even more money, etc.

 

AMD doesn't have anything even remotely close to the V100 right now, so the chance of a price war is actually zero percent.

 

NVIDIA will do what's best for NVIDIA's bottom line. If they produced a series of dies that they cannot sell using the Tesla or Quadro branding (for whatever reason), selling those dies at a loss to recoup some of the money they already spent would be a good business decision. Especially if they are confident that after some time (say months), they can increase yields enough for the V100 to become profitable. Waiting wouldn't make sense, because in this scenario, the dies are just sitting on a shelf - they already paid for them.

 

Do you understand this?

[hobobobo]

Just now, Razor01 said:

 

 

Is a 2 year old product hurting them when they are making so much money on them,  Still breaking record quarters.  This product is not for mass gamers either, so its not going to be replacing anything.

 

Again they could have released a Quadro p100 replacement and gotten more money and have the same affect you have stated.  That would appease the shareholder even more right?

 

Oh right now AMD doesn't hold a candle to GP102, so that affect is diminished anyways.

You are too focused on the money aspect. Image is, arguably, more important since it drives those record profits. Quadro p100 would do jack shit, people who are aware of quadros are mostly aware of gv100 anyway. Broader market does not even know those quadros exist.

 

nV is the pioneer of the market, and while the specialists know that they got those tensor cores and all of the cool shit, broader market only sees 1080ti. To be in the forefront in consumer space you have to constantly have new cool shit and Titan V accomplishes that with the bang, considering the price point is outlandish enough not to sell heaps and performance is great enough to grab attention of every1 and their granma

[Razor01]

Just now, dalekphalm said:

Again, pretty much everything you said here is an assumption.

 

As for the NVIDIA FX series? Well the big reason is that they had competition that could force a price war. That is very different context from right now.

 

NVIDIA would stand to lose more money if they sold FX at a loss, and then AMD/ATI just undercut the pricing, forcing NVIDIA to drop the price, losing even more money, etc.

 

AMD doesn't have anything even remotely close to the V100 right now, so the chance of a price war is actually zero percent.

 

NVIDIA will do what's best for NVIDIA's bottom line. If they produced a series of dies that they cannot sell using the Tesla or Quadro branding (for whatever reason), selling those dies at a loss to recoup some of the money they already spent would be a good business decision. Especially if they are confident that after some time (say months), they can increase yields enough for the V100 to become profitable. Waiting wouldn't make sense, because in this scenario, the dies are just sitting on a shelf - they already paid for them.

 

Do you understand this?

 

 

They have nothing anywhere near the GP 102! let alone the V100.  That is moot to even talk about.

 

And yes that is exactly why they didn't go into a price war with ATi with the FX series.  With the gt200 series totally different scenario though.  They were competitive and they could recoup as much as they could that is why they went into a price war there, but not so much that it forced AMD to cut prices.  They just equalized the prices.

 

Why can't the V100 replace Quadro P100, it pretty much has more of everything outside of one memory bank.  So sell it as a Quadro V100 -300 or something like that.  Still get more money out of it than selling @ 3k.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

They have nothing anywhere near the GP 102! let alone the V100.  That is moot to even talk about.

 

And yes that is exactly why they didn't go into a price war with ATi with the FX series.  With the gt200 series totally different scenario though.  They were competitive and they could recoup as much as they could that is why they went into a price war there, but not so much that it forced AMD to cut prices.  They just equalized the prices.

 

Why can't the V100 replace Quadro P100, it pretty much has more of everything outside of one memory bank.  So sell it as a Quadro V100 -300 or something like that.  Still get more money out of it than selling @ 3k.

The first half of your post just further reinforces my own argument. Yes, they don't have anything comparable. Yes, that's moot to even talk about. Why did you bring up price wars and the FX series then, since you yourself just said right here that it was moot to talk about?

 

As for why not replace P100 with a Quadro V100? I don't know. It's entirely possible that they couldn't meet demand for a Quadro V100, but could with a Titan V (which no doubt sells a lot less units compared to the Quadro series).

 

We would have to speculate, either way. Which is kind of my entire point. We're all speculating. You. Me. @hobobobo, etc.

 

Just as long as we treat speculation and assumptions as just that - we're good! Just don't treat it like fact, like you have been.

[Razor01]

Just now, hobobobo said:

You are too focused on the money aspect. Image is, arguably, more important since it drives those record profits. Quadro p100 would do jack shit, people who are aware of quadros are mostly aware of gv100 anyway. Broader market does not even know those quadros exist.

 

nV is the pioneer of the market, and while the specialists know that they got those tensor cores and all of the cool shit, broader market only sees 1080ti. To be in the forefront in consumer space you have to constantly have new cool shit and Titan V accomplishes that with the bang, considering the price point is outlandish enough not to sell heaps and performance is great enough to grab attention of every1 and their granma

 

 

The image is already there, that is why GPP has the leverage it does, that is why 70% or more gamers are buying nV products, everyone knows this.

 

You are contradicting yourself. If the broader market only sees 1080ti's, then they don't see Titans either.  This is not a consumer card, its a Titan.  Its not even a GTX, unlike previous gens.  It was never ment for people to game with.  That is why they didn't send it to reviewers.  Reviewers bought their cards to review.

[Razor01]

5 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

The first half of your post just further reinforces my own argument. Yes, they don't have anything comparable. Yes, that's moot to even talk about. Why did you bring up price wars and the FX series then, since you yourself just said right here that it was moot to talk about?

 

As for why not replace P100 with a Quadro V100? I don't know. It's entirely possible that they couldn't meet demand for a Quadro V100, but could with a Titan V (which no doubt sells a lot less units compared to the Quadro series).

 

We would have to speculate, either way. Which is kind of my entire point. We're all speculating. You. Me. @hobobobo, etc.

 

Just as long as we treat speculation and assumptions as just that - we're good! Just don't treat it like fact, like you have been.

 

GP102 and what ever AMD has right now is moot to talk about.

 

The fx line was an example where nV decided it wasn't wise to go into a price war because they would end up loosing even more then they would without going into a price war.

 

Quadro's sell even less than Titan's, too specific of a market, and we aren't talking about the entire quadro line here, just the top end replacement which is a tiny market.  JPR numbers show that the pro market is smaller (which is the entire line up of quadros and tesla's) vs the enthusiast market which are well gp102 cards, and Titan is part of that.  That part is not speculation lol, we know those things.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

 

GP102 and what ever AMD has right now is moot to talk about.

 

The fx line was an example where nV decided it wasn't wise to go into a price war because they would end up loosing even more then they would without going into a price war.

 

Quadro's sell even less than Titan's, too specific of a market, and we aren't talking about the entire quadro line here, just the top end replacement which is a tiny market.  JPR numbers show that the pro market is smaller (which is the entire line up of quadros and tesla's) vs the enthusiast market which are well gp102 cards, and Titan is part of that.  That part is not speculation lol, we know those things.

Can you link a source that confirms that Titan V's are outselling top end Quadros?

 

"We know those things" is not a source.

 

You also cannot compare previous sales of the Titan X, Titan XP, Titan Xp, etc, since The Titan V is double the MSRP of the previous gen Titan, thus it's going to get a lot less sales by comparison.

 

So we need to look at Apples to Apples numbers.

[Razor01]

14 minutes ago, hobobobo said:

You are too focused on the money aspect. Image is, arguably, more important since it drives those record profits. Quadro p100 would do jack shit, people who are aware of quadros are mostly aware of gv100 anyway. Broader market does not even know those quadros exist.

 

nV is the pioneer of the market, and while the specialists know that they got those tensor cores and all of the cool shit, broader market only sees 1080ti. To be in the forefront in consumer space you have to constantly have new cool shit and Titan V accomplishes that with the bang, considering the price point is outlandish enough not to sell heaps and performance is great enough to grab attention of every1 and their granma

 

 

And a company that isn't focused on the money aspect?  I don't think nV does anything without looking at their bottom line lol, doesn't matter how trivial or future marketable it is.

 

What is the average turn around time for something that comes out to make future profits in any industry?

 

Its usually 5 years right?

 

You think that is what nV's goal is to make a card that will give them profits in the future? I don't think so, doesn't make sense to do that when they already.

Just now, dalekphalm said:

Can you link a source that confirms that Titan V's are outselling top end Quadros?

 

"We know those things" is not a source.

 

You also cannot compare previous sales of the Titan X, Titan XP, Titan Xp, etc, since The Titan V is double the MSRP of the previous gen Titan, thus it's going to get a lot less sales by comparison.

 

So we need to look at Apples to Apples numbers.

 

 

Look up JPR figures, they are their on the web, come on. Already told ya the entire pro line up which includes both Tesla and Quadro sell less than the entire enthusiast line up.  If you want to compare and contrast, nV's pro line up is split with profits received that will give use a perfect way to see which cards are giving more margins, and how many sales they are getting.

[hobobobo]

12 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

The image is already there, that is why GPP has the leverage it does, that is why 70% or more gamers are buying nV products, everyone knows this.

 

You are contradicting yourself. If the broader market only sees 1080ti's, then they don't see Titans either.  This is not a consumer card, its a Titan.  Its not even a GTX, unlike previous gens.  It was never ment for people to game with.  That is why they didn't send it to reviewers.  Reviewers bought their cards to review.

nV themselves dont know what a Titan is, it a showpiece as i see it. I see no contradiction, consumers only see 1080ti in the sense that they dont see quadros or gv100, now you always have a jackass who points out that Titan V is the latest in greatest in gaming whenever someone mentions that 1080ti is still the best. What is the point of sending it to reviewers when you dont want to sell heaps of it, you only want joes to know that nV never stopps innovating, they already have great new series for them in the works (and who cares that they have it done for about a year now), and reviewers would be more then happy to spend their own cash to grab those sweet views and do nV marketing for them. The showpiece is doing its job bringing great coverage at minimal cost.

 

Everyone knows this point is plain stupid, nV can not and will not stop expanding their influence, you treat it like all of this is separate issues when its all a part of their broader plan to keep their lead and increase it. They are obligated to do everything in their power to project the image of the titan(lul) of the industry in the spotlight and behind the scenes, Titan V, raytracing demos and all the other shit acomplishes the first part while GPP does the second part. The losses on the titan v sales are so insignificant in the broader scheme of things that they are barelly worth a mention

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

Look up JPR figures, they are their on the web, come on.

My friend, you must be new to the Internet.

 

If you already know it to be true, then you've already done the research, correct? And if you've already done the research, linking those figures should be trivial.

 

He who makes the claim, backs up the claim with data.

 

It is not my responsibility to backup your own claims. Until you provide source, your figures are just numbers that you have said - with no authority or bearing.

 

I would actually like to read them though, so please do link them.

[Razor01]

7 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

My friend, you must be new to the Internet.

 

If you already know it to be true, then you've already done the research, correct? And if you've already done the research, linking those figures should be trivial.

 

He who makes the claim, backs up the claim with data.

 

It is not my responsibility to backup your own claims. Until you provide source, your figures are just numbers that you have said - with no authority or bearing.

 

I would actually like to read them though, so please do link them.

 

Super high margin products Pro visualization which are quadros

Data center which are Tesla

 

Both of them together are only half that of the entire gaming segment.

 

quadros are 1/4, now we are talking about cards that are 6 times the cost for the same silicon versions. What does that tell us, Quadros, are selling less that 24 times the total volume of gaming segment.

 

Now JPR combine that with JPR figures, of Pro vs enthusiast. 

 

The only way people learn is when they do the work to figure things out.  So yeah if you want to discuss something and are told what to look up, you should look it up.

[hobobobo]

5 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

And a company that isn't focused on the money aspect?  I don't think nV does anything without looking at their bottom line lol, doesn't matter how trivial or future marketable it is.

 

What is the average turn around time for something that comes out to make future profits in any industry?

 

Its usually 5 years right?

 

You think that is what nV's goal is to make a card that will give them profits in the future? I don't think so, doesn't make sense to do that when they already.

 

Company is focused on the money on way broader scale then you lead to. Selling a product at loss is not even a dent in the bottom line, its future income when that product is a showpiece for the broader public.

 

Does not make sense when they already is a point best illustrated with intel, and even nV themselves. Youd be right if they sold volta geforce lineup which sells heaps of cards, Titan V does not need to sell, it needs to be visible as the latest and greatest, which it is. Is it so hard to see Titan V is a marketing tool?

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, hobobobo said:

Company is focused on the money on way broader scale then you lead to. Selling a product at loss is not even a dent in the bottom line, its future income when that product is a showpiece for the broader public.

 

Does not make sense when they already is a point best illustrated with intel, and even nV themselves. Youd be right if they sold volta geforce lineup which sells heaps of cards, Titan V does not need to sell, it needs to be visible as the latest and greatest, which it is. Is it so hard to see Titan V is a marketing tool?

 

 

Its still a marketing tool if they are making money on it, they don't need to sell it a no profit for that to work!  That is why they won't sell it at a loss or no profit because the effect of the price has nothing to do with the image. If anything higher the price is better, because people look at it and say oh shit there is no competition so they can price this thing so high.

[hobobobo]

9 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

Its still a marketing tool if they are making money on it, they don't need to sell it a no profit for that to work!

Well, to do that they would have to wait for manufacturing to be mature enough or sell it for 6-8-10k which would not work (2x msrp of previous gen is crazy enough) and time is of the essence. Im sure theyd release it last year if they could (gv100 not selling like hotcakes to datacenters and loss on a sale being acceptable). As is see it, the time they rolled it out gv100 demand was projected to either die down or even out, the manufacturing was still not there to sell quadros at a volume, forget geforce, so releasing a showpiece which will sell like 5k units in a year while generating a shitton of publicity is a sound strategy.

[dalekphalm]

19 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

Super high margin products Pro visualization which are quadros

Data center which are Tesla

 

Both of them together are only half that of the entire gaming segment.

 

quadros are 1/4, now we are talking about cards that are 6 times the cost for the same silicon versions. What does that tell us, Quadros, are selling less that 24 times the total volume of gaming segment.

 

Now JPR combine that with JPR figures, of Pro vs enthusiast. 

So what does this prove?

 

Well. Nothing. You have yet to provide numbers that show Titan V outselling high end quadros. We already know that Gaming in general outsells all the rest. But this doesn't break down per GPU segment, or per die.

 

Do you have another link that does compare Titan V sales to Quadro GP100 sales?

19 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

The only way people learn is when they do the work to figure things out.  So yeah if you want to discuss something and are told what to look up, you should look it up.

Wow, this is a very condescending remark.

 

No. Straight up. No. This is not how debates work. If you make a claim, you back the claim up. If you do not back the claim up, the claim is worthless. I'm sorry if this offends you sensibilities, but I won't sit here and do your work for you. If you want me to take your posts and your arguments seriously, you need to back up claims with sources. It's pretty simple. If you refuse to do that, then we can collectively disregard your statements.

 

I'd rather not though. So if you can, again, provide sales figures on Titan V vs Quadro GP100, I would most definitely like to read them.

 

 

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, Razor01 said:

 

Its stupid to sell at a loss if they don't need to.

Considering stocking costs, if something is produced it can make sense to sell it at a loss before it costs you more to just keep it in stock.

[Razor01]

27 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

So what does this prove?

 

Well. Nothing. You have yet to provide numbers that show Titan V outselling high end quadros. We already know that Gaming in general outsells all the rest. But this doesn't break down per GPU segment, or per die.

 

Do you have another link that does compare Titan V sales to Quadro GP100 sales?

Wow, this is a very condescending remark.

 

No. Straight up. No. This is not how debates work. If you make a claim, you back the claim up. If you do not back the claim up, the claim is worthless. I'm sorry if this offends you sensibilities, but I won't sit here and do your work for you. If you want me to take your posts and your arguments seriously, you need to back up claims with sources. It's pretty simple. If you refuse to do that, then we can collectively disregard your statements.

 

I'd rather not though. So if you can, again, provide sales figures on Titan V vs Quadro GP100, I would most definitely like to read them.

 

 

 

 

Go look up JPR figures and compare and contrast and analyze the data, I'll give you 30 minutes to do it, if you don't I will post it up and do the analysis for you.  Yeah that is how it goes, Otherwise we are all sitting here and talking shit.  Just like Leadeater had a problem when I stated x800 series was only 5% faster than the 6800 series, he went and did the figures to figure out they were the actually similar in performance with all games at the time considered.

 

When I say something strongly, there are reasons for what I say, I don't make things up out of the blue.

 

Like marketing reasons they can release a product and go for no profits.  That doesn't make sense this is case sorry, they already have the halo product under lock and key and Volta doesn't change that.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

 

 

Go look up JPR figures and compare and contrast and analyze the data, I'll give you 30 minutes to do it, if you don't I will post it up and do the analysis for you.  Yeah that is how it goes, Otherwise we are all sitting here and talking shit.  Just like Leadeater had a problem when I stated x800 series was only 5% faster than the 6800 series, he went and did the figures to figure out they were the actually similar in performance with all games at the time considered.

 

When I say something strongly, there are reasons for what I say, I don't make things up out of the blue.

 

Like marketing reasons they can release a product and go for no profits.  That doesn't make sense this is case sorry, they already have the halo product under lock and key and Volta doesn't change that.

I will await your links.

[Razor01]

1 minute ago, laminutederire said:

Considering stocking costs, if something is produced it can make sense to sell it at a loss before it costs you more to just keep it in stock.

 

 

So the potential loss of more than 100% more profits for this card is offset by stocking fees?

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

So the potential loss of more than 100% more profits for this card is offset by stocking fees?

It could be yes. Thats why stock deprecate in value from an accountant point of view.

It's the same reason why there are often big sales. Those are done because products being stored for too long cost too much to just stay there idling.

See stocking as a weekly fee you have to pay for it. At some point you might just give it up and sell or even give that thing up instead of paying that fee indefinitely.

[dalekphalm]

43 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

-snip-

Wow man, have you even read half my posts?

 

If you did, you would know that I haven't actually made any specific claims (hence why I haven't posted anything to back up my non-existent claims). I was simply deeply troubled by your posts where you posted speculation as fact.

 

Second, how easy it is for me to Google Search something is quite simply irrelevant. You made a claim. You have to back up said claim. How difficult is it for you to understand that? Even better, I said more than once that you might even be right! But that doesn't fit your narrative.

 

Now, let's look at these numbers. What is their definition for "Enthusiast"? Does that include GTX 1080? 1080 Ti? Titan? Just Titans?

 

Before we can analyze the information, we need to ensure that everyone is using the same definitions.

 

What that does show is that overall Quadro (workstation) sales are similar to Enthusiast card sales (which is... what?)

 

If Enthusiast is defined as Titan series only, then this shows that yes, Quadros outsell Titans.

 

Though of course, it does not break down per card, so we will have no idea (only guesses) about how each Quadro fits into that graph. We can assume (again, speculation), that the GP100 sells less than the cheaper cards - this is a good assumption, but it's still an assumption which must be acknowledged, or otherwise have evidence to prove it as a correct statement.

 

Lastly, don't call me lazy because I refuse to do your own work for you. if I make a claim, and I don't back it up with evidence? Feel free to eviscerate me. Until then, cut that shit out - it's a toxic attitude and doesn't belong in this community.

 

If you think I'm wrong, then educate me with facts and sources to back up those facts.

[Razor01]

12 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

It could be yes. Thats why stock deprecate in value from an accountant point of view.

It's the same reason why there are often big sales. Those are done because products being stored for too long cost too much to just stay there idling.

See stocking as a weekly fee you have to pay for it. At some point you might just give it up and sell or even give that thing up instead of paying that fee indefinitely.

 

 

We are talking about thousands of dollars per product for few products, not a few bucks here and there for numerous products.

 

Look at cars halo pieces, Bugatti is perfect example of marketing and getting no profit from it.  Yeah they don't make a profit on this car because its a halo product.  Do you know the VW group doesn't want to sell or even make this car, the only person that is forcing VW to do it is the current CEO, once he is gone we will most likely not see a Bugatti ever again.  As I stated it doesn't make financial sense, and when a company that looks at bottom lines look at things like this.  Its better not to make a product that doesn't make the money its supposed to make.

 

Even stocking fees, were are talking about chips here, we can have 1000 planters of these chips and they wouldn't take up a 10x10 room.  That is a 100k chips man.

[hobobobo]

8 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Like marketing reasons they can release a product and go for no profits.  That doesn't make sense this is case sorry, they already have the halo product under lock and key and Volta doesn't change that.

2yo halo product and a brand new one are miles apart marketing wise. Try and get more publicity from the pascal line-up, its a beaten horse. Market leader needs a constant stream of marketing and you cant do that without releasing a new product for the broader audience, esp when you broke the old release cycle. Jensens words that theres nothing better then pascal in gaming dont mean shit for broader audience, every reviewer and their mom wanking to those glorious V fps on the other hand does

[Razor01]

4 minutes ago, hobobobo said:

2yo halo product and a brand new one are miles apart marketing wise. Try and get more publicity from the pascal line-up, its a beaten horse. Market leader needs a constant stream of marketing and you cant do that without releasing a new product for the broader audience, esp when you broke the old release cycle. Jensens words that theres nothing better then pascal in gaming dont mean shit for broader audience, every reviewer and their mom wanking to those glorious V fps on the other hand does

If that was the case they would have sent Titan V's to reviewers, they didn't.  Not only that they even told reviewers when they asked questions about, its not for gaming period.  Reviewers were the ones that stated this card could be used for gaming and its damn good at it.

 

Everything nV has done marketing wise, shows nothing that matters to the mass appeal of their products.  They went out of there way to not even have anyone look at it from a mass appeal perspective.

 

Just gave you an example of what VW thinks of Bugatti.

[hobobobo]

10 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

If that was the case they would have sent Titan V's to reviewers, they didn't.  Not only that they even told reviewers when they asked questions about, its not for gaming period.  Reviewers were the ones that stated this card could be used for gaming and its damn good at it.

 

Just gave you an example of what VW thinks of Bugatti.

Why would you send it to reviewers if you know that they will buy it for themselves anyways, since clicks is their business? I repeat, nV themselves dont know what Titans are for, or so they say. If its not gaming and its not datacenter and its nor professional use, what is it? Its a showpiece and they just dont want to admit it, which is understandable.

 

Bugatti example is shit, its not like veyron is a base for any other car they make or shares alot of components. Imo, they should have not made it into a production model in the first place, keep it sesto elemento style. And no, VW wont kill Bugatti, theyll kill veyron and sell chiron which was made from the ground up to be a product, not an engeneering poc.

 

Your whole yields/sell at a loss arguments hangs on the premis that nV are idiots who either sell a profitable V instead of launching quadro line-up with higher margins, since yields are good enough, or they sell at a loss for god knows what reason instead of launching quadro lineup to sell at a profit/less of a loss. its ridiculous