Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,419
-
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.
AMD to Skip 20 nm, Jump Straight to 14 nm with "Arctic Islands" GPU Family
- Thread starter tommybhoy
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,210
- Location
- Billericay, UK
That graph is quite detailed, if you look through the past, AMD would occupy around 30% / 40% market share, but would always have periodic new release, this gen is the first time AMD have not followed up with anything new for such a long period, and as a result have lost a lot of market share, down to 25% Nvidia now don't need to do anything, and prices can remain high..
I do believe once AMD get some new products out they can re coup their lost market share. Sooner rather than later though, as it will be an uphill struggle..
Sorry if this comes across as a insecure fanboy comment but that graph seems a bit odd. Since the launch of the Bitcoin and the 28nm process there have several occasions where there have been major shortages of AMD cards due to people buying them up for mining. With that in mind I would have expected the market share to have been a lot closer during the Q1 2013 and 2014 periods.
Hope this doesn't mean even more 28nm cards in the interim
A die shrink is so long overdue..
I don't think it mattered to people really,
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Glad this is on the way. As much as i love the new tech and big improvements, i cant imagine it will make too much of a difference for us PC gamers (as opposed to CAD users and such). Sure 4k will be achievable for cheaper if we had the sort of improvements as we did a few years back but apart from going up in resolution i cant see too many game developers are going to make use of the extra grunt when the money is in consoles (some devs are happy pumping out poor ports which dont even let you change the settings!). I spoke to a dev once a while ago about how much i would like to see big leaps in GPU power and he said that developers as well as GPU manufacturers don't want to alienate people who buy cheaper GPUs or have long upgrade cycles.
I lol'd
I lol'd
LOL Blaming lack of competition for stagnation? It has very little if anything to do with it. If any business wants to stay successful in the technology world they have to be innovating all the time.
I can't believe for one second that any company involved in computing/graphics/techology aren't trying desperately to come up with new ways to do things. New technology that can do things faster, better etc. Even if you have no competition, you still have to come up with new products etc.
Do you really think Nvidia and Intel are holding back technology because AMD can't keep up? I think that's Nonsense!! There is no law stopping Nvidia/Intel or any other company developing better technologies and selling them. Nvidia can push as hard they like against AMD.
Just one thing, Nvida cannot price their products too cheap or else they would be accused of trying to put AMD out of business.
The problem at the moment isn't lack of competition it's the increasing complexity of die shrinks that no longer offer substantial performance gains over the previous ones. Die Shrinks now mainly offer power savings. And for the enthusiasts on sites like this, power saving is pretty boring. Look at Intel, there is very little reason for anybody to upgrade from Sandybridge to Haswell.
DX12? is that new? Low level APIs have been around for ages. It's not bringing any new tech to the table. You could make a case that it's going to slow down advancement. It will allow GPUs to do more work and get more performance from slower CPUs. So another reason not to upgrade?
Sure, competition is a good thing and, maybe can drive innovation. But, in my mind, any company that isn't striving to get new products out there is a dying company no matter if there is competition or not. Especially in the tech sector, if you snooze you lose. Just because you have no competition today doesn't mean you won't have competition tomorrow.
Intel have clearly been walking for years. They are making progress, but they are holding back. Anti monopoly laws are a real thing.
The video explains quite clearly why nVidia can't just completely monopolize the market.
Otherwise we'd probably have Pascal by now.
nVidia are innovating all the time, it's just they have little to no need to release it in a rush.
Otherwise we'd probably have Pascal by now.
nVidia are innovating all the time, it's just they have little to no need to release it in a rush.
Last edited:
What's this, a story from 6 months ago?
Why does nobody ever point out that 14nm has the same problems as TSMC's 20nm, you can't make big chips on it. Not to mention the fact it IS 20nm underneath. Samsung have no incentive to do the R&D for a GPU process and I doubt GF will be up to it.
SO where is it going to come from? Maybe that's why 10nm is being fast-tracked and talked up like the next sea-change for everyone to move to in a few years.
Why does nobody ever point out that 14nm has the same problems as TSMC's 20nm, you can't make big chips on it. Not to mention the fact it IS 20nm underneath. Samsung have no incentive to do the R&D for a GPU process and I doubt GF will be up to it.
SO where is it going to come from? Maybe that's why 10nm is being fast-tracked and talked up like the next sea-change for everyone to move to in a few years.
Lol, do people honestly believe that Nvidia are holding back due to AMDs lack of competitiveness? If they were then why release the GTX980 or TX at all? I mean after all, the GTX780Ti was already faster than the R9 290X. The only thing AMDs lack of truly competing cards has done is allow Nvidia to price what should be £500 cards at ~£900.
Nvidia has been stuck on 28nm the same as AMD and it has seriously hampered progress for both companies. Nvidia simply suffered from this stagnation less than AMD. Pascal would have zero chance of being released by now because there has been no die shrinks to allow any serious jump in performance.
I miss the days when a ~70%+ jump between die shrinks each year or so was normal. Now we have about 50-60% jumps in performance over a two year period and prices have doubled for the courtesy. Titan to TitanX = 2 years and ~50-60% performance increase.
Nvidia has been stuck on 28nm the same as AMD and it has seriously hampered progress for both companies. Nvidia simply suffered from this stagnation less than AMD. Pascal would have zero chance of being released by now because there has been no die shrinks to allow any serious jump in performance.
I miss the days when a ~70%+ jump between die shrinks each year or so was normal. Now we have about 50-60% jumps in performance over a two year period and prices have doubled for the courtesy. Titan to TitanX = 2 years and ~50-60% performance increase.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,409
- Location
- UK.
I said stagnation due to being on the same node http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27950318&postcount=14, i.e no real performance increase. The performance increase we do get (Titan X) we have to pay over the odds for because of lack of competition from AMD.
Try reading next time
Exactly this..
So Nvidia would have probably have had Pascal by now if it wasn't for AMDs incompetence? Just wow. 
I agree Nvidia have been allowed to release their true top end at supper inflated prices because AMD are tools. But how is it AMDs fault that TSMCs failed to introduce any die shrinks and subsequently left GPUs (form both vendors) stagnated on 28nm for years?
Nvidia and AMD would have had much faster cards available right now if TSMC had delivered their promised die shrinks.
I agree Nvidia have been allowed to release their true top end at supper inflated prices because AMD are tools. But how is it AMDs fault that TSMCs failed to introduce any die shrinks and subsequently left GPUs (form both vendors) stagnated on 28nm for years?
Nvidia and AMD would have had much faster cards available right now if TSMC had delivered their promised die shrinks.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,409
- Location
- UK.
Yup, being stuck on the same node has really slowed performance improvements.
Right now AMD have nothing to counter Nvidia's cards. Hence why Nvidia can charge what they like..
New products from AMD can't come quick enough, and a new node for both camps is really needed as well.
2016 will be the best year for upgrades
Nobody said AMD weren't innovating as well?
It's all well and good innovating things but it means nothing if you can't stay competitive.
In your eyes AMD must compete with the absolute top end product to be worthy, correct?
IE - without a competitor for the Titan X they aren't going to survive?
Here's a newsflash. The AMD FX series never competed with anything Intel made yet they sell. Here we are years later and they're still selling to people on a budget.
Your attitude is rather silly. It's kinda like "Well if the builder doesn't build 20 million pound mansions then he's not going to make it"
Most of the market is made up from sales of budget products. IE - around 56 people here on OCUK have bought a Titan X. IIRC at some point I remember Gibbo saying they had sold 2000 970s or there abouts.
But the reason AMD are not staying competitive has nothing to do with not being innovative. TitanX has no new tech/innovations compared to the Titan and it was released over 2 years ago.
AMD have simply appeared to adopt a 1.5-2 year GPU cycle and frankly it isn't good enough if Nvidia are still releasing cards every 6 months to a year. Even if the performance increase is only ~15% between each of Nvidia's new cards it is still improvement.
Innovation is not what Nvidia are doing by releasing faster GPUs every 6 months compared to 1.5 years at AMD.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,409
- Location
- UK.
And that's a great attitude if the company never wants to make real profit or penetrate large market share. It's obviously not working either as their market share is clearly shrinking !!
If they want to do better in the traditional PC space home user desktop / server they need flagship products, real competitive parts in performance / power consumption.
That's exactly why AMD have hired Jim Keller and some of the other best guys. To launch a competitive architecture. AMD admitted Bulldzoer was a mis step. They obviously want to do better than just selling to people on a budget.
Hopefully AMD deliver next year, I would much rather a competitive AMD than an AMD that only appeals to people on a budget.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
If the AMD stuff "Sells" then why are their market shares dwindling?