Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ:AMD) Regained GPU Market Share From Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) In Q3 2015

~>Dg<~ · 16 Sep 2015 at 16:20

im holding out till dx12 becomes a massive influence like dx10

D.P. · 16 Sep 2015 at 16:24

I can't seem to find the actual sales figures anywhere? Where does this data come form, and how can they get Q3 results when Q3 is not over yet?

Dave2150 · 16 Sep 2015 at 17:20

mmj_uk said:
Dunno, sales were a bit stale for 290X towards the end as it's an old card and people want something modern. I think sticking a new name on it and conning people into thinking it's a new card has worked out marginally better for them.

Sigh - remember that it's not exactly the same card at all.

Yes the GPU is the same, though a better binned one with lower temperatures and lower power consumption.

There's an additional 4GB of VRAM, totalling 8GB - something that's appealing to those who keep their GPU's for 1-2 years. The only downside to this is that the increased amount of memory adds quite a bit of extra heat, though the coolers are fully capable of keeping this card running nice and cool.

The memory is also a much higher/faster specification than that was found on the 290 series.

Also there are no 390/390x reference designs, only third party coolers, which is a huge bonus since it means all these cards have adequate cooling/noise levels, when compared to the 290 series.

Call it a rebrand if you like - though remember it does have several improvements, most notably much faster memory and a 8GB frame buffer.

The Running Man · 16 Sep 2015 at 17:51

Olay it's a re brand with more memory. Happier now?

Stanners · 16 Sep 2015 at 18:34

D.P. said:
I can't seem to find the actual sales figures anywhere? Where does this data come form, and how can they get Q3 results when Q3 is not over yet?

You wont as the sales figures are not out yet, It is based on units shipped out not sold or something along those lines.

andybird123 · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:06

Stanners said:
You wont as the sales figures are not out yet, It is based on units shipped out not sold or something along those lines.

This one isn't based on shipped or sold, its purely on looking at prices and assuming discounts mean lost market share and prices above MSRP mean extra market share

Silent_Scone · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:23

Dave2150 said:
Sigh - remember that it's not exactly the same card at all.

Yes the GPU is the same, though a better binned one with lower temperatures and lower power consumption.

There's an additional 4GB of VRAM, totalling 8GB - something that's appealing to those who keep their GPU's for 1-2 years. The only downside to this is that the increased amount of memory adds quite a bit of extra heat, though the coolers are fully capable of keeping this card running nice and cool.

The memory is also a much higher/faster specification than that was found on the 290 series.

Also there are no 390/390x reference designs, only third party coolers, which is a huge bonus since it means all these cards have adequate cooling/noise levels, when compared to the 290 series.

Call it a rebrand if you like - though remember it does have several improvements, most notably much faster memory and a 8GB frame buffer.

It is a rebrand - the micro-architectural differences are minuscule enough to call it so, at best it is what the 290x should have been at the time of it's launch. There are not enough differences to warrant the use of the word several, unless one can name them specifically.

fs123 · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:33

Silent_Scone said:
It is a rebrand - the micro-architectural differences are minuscule enough to call it so, at best it is what the 290x should have been at the time of it's launch. There are not enough differences to warrant the use of the word several, unless one can name them specifically.

The 'rebrands' are faster than the nvidia equivalents though. Old AMD cards faster than the maxwell 1 cards. Why is that?

Dave2150 · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:34

Silent_Scone said:
It is a rebrand - the micro-architectural differences are minuscule enough to call it so, at best it is what the 290x should have been at the time of it's launch. There are not enough differences to warrant the use of the word several, unless one can name them specifically.

You're suggesting the 290X should have had 8GB of VRAM at launch, and no 4GB editions? Interesting.

nashathedog · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:38

Silent_Scone said:
It is a rebrand - the micro-architectural differences are minuscule enough to call it so, at best it is what the 290x should have been at the time of it's launch. There are not enough differences to warrant the use of the word several, unless one can name them specifically.

The cards have had several improvements done to them that allow them to run cooler and overclock better, Plus you have the faster ram and more of it on the 390 compared to the 290 and while they are rebrands the improvements are important ones.

Should this of been how the the 200 series cards were released? In a perfect world yes but isn't everything like this. Consumer feedback drives improvements.

Compare a mark five Cortina to a mark four or to keep it more relevant compare a GTX 770 to a GTX 680, It's the way things work. From what I can see and hear they did a good job.

Silent_Scone · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:39

Dave2150 said:
You're suggesting the 290X should have had 8GB of VRAM at launch, and no 4GB editions? Interesting.

Additional frame buffer on a new product line is barrel scraping at best, I was referring to the complete power delivery overhaul that you mentioned in brief passing, which is the only certifiably obvious change to warrant it's change in brand name. Unless you are able to name any other notable changes to the architecture.

andybird123 · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:40

Dave2150 said:
You're suggesting the 290X should have had 8GB of VRAM at launch, and no 4GB editions? Interesting.

a card having 4 or 8 is just a case of what size modules they use, its not a difference in the chip and its irrelevant to a model number, they could have done 290X 8gb models from the off but its irrelevant to what he said

andybird123 · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:43

nashathedog said:
The cards have had several improvements done to them that allow them to run cooler and overclock better, Plus you have the faster ram and more of it on the 390 compared to the 290 and while they are rebrands the improvements are important ones.

Should this of been how the the 200 series cards were released? In a perfect world yes but isn't everything like this. Consumer feedback drives improvements.

Compare a mark five Cortina to a mark four or to keep it more relevant compare a GTX 770 to a GTX 680, It's the way things work. From what I can see and hear they did a good job.

I don't think that's down to architectural changes so much as just improved yields from process maturity, plus no longer having the rubbish AMD reference cooler

nashathedog · 16 Sep 2015 at 20:52

andybird123 said:
I don't think that's down to architectural changes so much as just improved yields from process maturity, plus no longer having the rubbish AMD reference cooler

That's another of the improvements, Just like the 770 got the better reference cooler the 390's lost AMD's cruddy one meaning where we we're unable to buy anything but reference for the first month or so with Hawaii this time we got nothing but good coolers (except Asus) on release because the feedback from Hawaii told them that the cards needed things like bigger thicker heatsinks.

What was done here is no different to what has been done in the past but overall they did a pretty good job. I still think the way they held the optimized drivers back to make them appear faster in comparison to Hawaii was out of order but nothing can be done about that, The cards themselves seem to be a lot better to live with so for a rebrand they did well.

D.P. · 16 Sep 2015 at 21:03

Stanners said:
You wont as the sales figures are not out yet, It is based on units shipped out not sold or something along those lines.

Where is the shipment data then? What is the actual change in market share, i can' seem to find the information in the linked article?

Jono8 · 16 Sep 2015 at 21:09

D.P. said:
Where is the shipment data then? What is the actual change in market share, i can' seem to find the information in the linked article?

It isn't. It is just speculation based on prices.

Though I would be shocked if AMD didn't increase their market share somewhat seen as they didn't have anything in the market much before Q3 this year!

D.P. · 16 Sep 2015 at 21:28

Jono8 said:
It isn't. It is just speculation based on prices.

Though I would be shocked if AMD didn't increase their market share somewhat seen as they didn't have anything in the market much before Q3 this year!

Seems like a pretty ridiculous baseless article designed for click bait and start troll wars on forums.

AMD's pricing has nothing to do with sales but stock amounts and the companies new policy to stop being seeing as a budget orientated cheep and cheerful brand but a premium brand with premium prices. The ridiculous price of theNano absolutely does not indicate AMD are gaining market share

AMD will hopefully gain market share when all Fiji cards are well stocked and prices fall to be competitive.

Dave2150 · 16 Sep 2015 at 21:53

D.P. said:
Seems like a pretty ridiculous baseless article designed for click bait and start troll wars on forums.

It really shouldn't start any troll wars. Obviously we don't have any concrete data here - though lets just assume that AMD gained 1-3% market share.

Why would that start troll wars? NVIDIA are still way, way ahead. NVIDIA fans should be very happy if this were the case, since it would mean more pressure for NVIDIA to cut prices on their mid/mid-high range cards such as the 970 and 980.

I suspect that if AMD have gained market share, it's probably 1% or less - though if that threatens some enough to start forum wars about it, then god help them.

Instead of arguing, we should be cheering

andybird123 · 16 Sep 2015 at 21:54

D.P. said:
Where is the shipment data then? What is the actual change in market share, i can' seem to find the information in the linked article?

Q3 data won't be out till November, we only just got Q2 data in August

varkanoid · 16 Sep 2015 at 22:44

A link that leads to a web page where its quoting an article that you can only read if you pay for it is dubious in the least.