-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
GT200's Vs 4800's Market-share Nvidia 35% ATi 65%
- Thread starter rhys216
- Start date
whatever 
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
If it was the other way around, I am sure Rroff would approve of its validity.
The point is you have put an arbitrary group of cards in 1 list and an arbitrary list in another and compared the 2. The results are meaningless.
Considering the ATI fanboys cliam the G80 GPU was rebranded so many times one could easily include all the 8800 9500 etc cards.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
Well, Rroff was actually making a fair point though. If 4850 is in the ATI list for the comparison, then the 9800GTX+(GTS250), 9800 should be in the list too for comparison. And also bare in mind that lots of people are still using the 8800GTX.
Those numbers are the best we'll ever see, and whilst grouped figures wont allow people to do an analysis of how many >£300 8800GTXs were sold in 2007/8 vs £95 8800GTs in 2009, they do work well for game developers. Its not as if gtx performance is chalk and cheese vs the budget GT.
One or two other things to note about the data.
1. The average steam user isnt 100% representative of the market as a whole. Someone who buys a tower from the purple shirts just isn't as likely to download their games as oppose to buy retail. DSGI and other high street retailers simply do not sell many £300 cards (they aren't listing any high end cards at all right now).
2. Dead card / unused back up card factor. Lets face it, neither nvidia or ati gfx cards are the most reliable component sat in your pc. People also upgrade, and not everyone sells on their cards. My 4850 is unused at the moment, however I bet overall there is a slightly higher ratio of 8800s in this postion, simply as they are likely to have been bought before the 4800/9800 era.
From these figures we do know that Nvidia sold more 9600/9800/gtx200s than ATI sold 4800s in the last 25 months. People are talking as if ATI beat Nvidia in the last year from the 4800 series, but the only way that could be true, is if they were making a substantial ammount more profit per card, or if ati sold more to OEMs, whos users are less likely to use steam.
Edit: Meant 25, not 45
One or two other things to note about the data.
1. The average steam user isnt 100% representative of the market as a whole. Someone who buys a tower from the purple shirts just isn't as likely to download their games as oppose to buy retail. DSGI and other high street retailers simply do not sell many £300 cards (they aren't listing any high end cards at all right now).
2. Dead card / unused back up card factor. Lets face it, neither nvidia or ati gfx cards are the most reliable component sat in your pc. People also upgrade, and not everyone sells on their cards. My 4850 is unused at the moment, however I bet overall there is a slightly higher ratio of 8800s in this postion, simply as they are likely to have been bought before the 4800/9800 era.
From these figures we do know that Nvidia sold more 9600/9800/gtx200s than ATI sold 4800s in the last 25 months. People are talking as if ATI beat Nvidia in the last year from the 4800 series, but the only way that could be true, is if they were making a substantial ammount more profit per card, or if ati sold more to OEMs, whos users are less likely to use steam.
Edit: Meant 25, not 45
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Well the best comparison with the dataset would be to look at changes in the past year, not cumulative figures (download data for January 2009 and January 2010 then compare deltas), but even then all you can conclude is Card X was submitted more to Steam during that period or its share was more in that period, not if one was bought more than the other during that period (I could have bought a card 24 months ago and only submitted today)
I have said for a longtime that the steam survey is not the best way to compare anything and have been shouted down a few times on here from people that were saying how it showed nvidia had an edge. Now someone use's it to show they don't and all of a sudden it isn't the best thing to compare cards with i am confused.
Personally i couldn't care if i was the only person in the world with the card i have as long as it does what i want it doesn't matter. Seems to me some people are way too caught up in the corporate game and have forgotten the simple fact that if your happy with what you have why care about anything else just play and enjoy
.
Nvidia or ati fact is neither of them give a stuff about us they both want our money and both will do whatever to get it there is no loyalty on their end and there shouldn't be on our end either.
Personally i couldn't care if i was the only person in the world with the card i have as long as it does what i want it doesn't matter. Seems to me some people are way too caught up in the corporate game and have forgotten the simple fact that if your happy with what you have why care about anything else just play and enjoy
.Nvidia or ati fact is neither of them give a stuff about us they both want our money and both will do whatever to get it there is no loyalty on their end and there shouldn't be on our end either.
Maybe it is arbitrary, but it does indicate GT200 was disappointing for Nvidia to say the least! Especially compared to the huge success of the 8800's and all it's reincarnations, don't forget Nvidia might have to actually retire the 8800 at some point!
Sorry it wasn't showing the opposite for you...
Indeed, which makes the ATi themed mutual masturbation that goes on here utterly hilarious (yet ultimately pathetic)
^^^
Lol! I love when someone post's something showing Nv in anything but a positive light that they automatically love Ati!
Ironic I only came across this survey due to an Nvidiot telling me to checkout Nvidias MS. I come back point out the GT200 was a failure, and now the Nvidiots are up in arm's LMAO.
I guess fanboys will continue at this age old battle until we finally see Nv phoenix 3DFX style... maybe then they will get some decent management?
Lol! I love when someone post's something showing Nv in anything but a positive light that they automatically love Ati!
Ironic I only came across this survey due to an Nvidiot telling me to checkout Nvidias MS. I come back point out the GT200 was a failure, and now the Nvidiots are up in arm's LMAO.
I guess fanboys will continue at this age old battle until we finally see Nv phoenix 3DFX style... maybe then they will get some decent management?
And your inflammatory comment contributes what, exactly, to this topic? I agree that the numbers here are completely meaningless and designed simply to present ATi in a better light but there is no need for comments like yours.
Anyway, I'd be far more interested to see results regarding the past few months with the 5xxx series versus the 2xx series and then see how things play out when Fermi is released. I wouldn't be surprised if nVidia were still leading even now, though it's good to see ATi/AMD doing something to counter the nVidia TWIMTBP initiative. We need real competition and it's disappointing that it's taken ATi so long to appreciate the power of marketing.
What is wrong with Ati gaining some market share? The steam survey isn't the most accurate comparison but would it really be better if it went back to Nvidia dominating with the 8800 series? Theres finally some decent competition where someone can pick either side and still get a pretty decent card. Everyone here seems to want a situation where one manufacturer has a pure monopoly on the market :/
When Nvidia were on top from other forums it was all pro-Nvidia so I'm guessing it wasn't anything different on here. People are fickle.
When Nvidia were on top from other forums it was all pro-Nvidia so I'm guessing it wasn't anything different on here. People are fickle.
Last edited:
Nobody was arguing that. What was being discussed was the manipulation of figures to make it look like ATi was doing well, when they're still far behind nVidia. Personally I think that's a shame as ATi products easily stand up to nVidia's and I consider them to be better with the last generation (4xxx).
, the figures were not manipulated, I was trying to highlight a change in trend, which can only be done with recent data.Savour it...
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
I kinda have to agree. For last generation card, the overall 4000 series was hitting the reasonable pricing sweet spots better than Nvidia. It's really kind a shame it took them 2 generations (2000 and 3000 series performed poorer than 8800 series)to catch up with Nvidia with their 4000 series.
In my opinion, if ATI didn't fall so much behind back then, the development of GPU for both Nvidia and ATI would had probably advanced further than today.
For the HD 5000 series, while it has added dx 11 support and EyeInfinity, the overall performance wise it has not really moved forward much from the excellent HD 4000 series (if we exclude the HD5970 (£500) which most people won't be buying). I really think ATI has planned this...they most likely already got 5890's speed GPU ready when they launched 5870, but they launched 5870 as a high-end card that's only marginally faster than 5850 instead. IMHO, I really think the 5890 that are due to be launched should had been what the 5870 supposed to be in the first place.
Personally i couldn't care if i was the only person in the world with the card i have as long as it does what i want it doesn't matter. Seems to me some people are way too caught up in the corporate game and have forgotten the simple fact that if your happy with what you have why care about anything else just play and enjoy
Very true, but a lot of us like to know the story of how the hardware got to us.
By the same argument, football fans should turn up to the game, enjoy it, not bother listening to post match radio phone in grumbles, buy the program/magazines, read football biographies. And the Sun newspaper might as well shut up shop. What are you doing reading this forum, btw?
