Problem is some of the Ip's are crossed licensed. It would be very difficult for both AMD and Intel if either changed hands.
AMD are not dead and buried yet.
-
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 might have trouble sourcing HBM2 for its next-gen video cards
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
Problem is some of the Ip's are crossed licensed. It would be very difficult for both AMD and Intel if either changed hands.
AMD are not dead and buried yet.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
Not yet, and nobody has said that.
But 2016 is their last chance saloon. If they **** it all up next year, it's game over.
NVidia don't have 82% of the market. Anyway considering how small NVidia has fallen in the world graphics market and the sourcing problems that has created I can see how AMD being even smaller could create problems. With NVidia and AMD unit shipments being so small they don't have the pull they used to anymore. I can only see this getting worse going forward.
It isn't just financial competition we need, it is technical feature competition as well. Just having one company means we have to except their vision rather than being able to vote with purchases. If a single company decides to implement a feature they love but we think sucks, we won't have a choice. Like when nvidia came to the market originally and shook things up. The others were busy implementing features that no-one really wanted.
Obviously there is a plus side to a singular company as well, it isn't all negative.
We shouldn't be spreading rumors as fact, that is for certain. I don't like either company better than the other, I try to decide based on price, performance, features and support level.
I think the real problem in here is people are just trying to pee off other people to get a rise out of them rather than genuinely having an interest. That is what you get from an open forum.
I don't know about anyone else, but personally I would love to have the money to own a titan x, or fury x, I don't get the amount of willy waving going on, especially from the older guys.
Obviously there is a plus side to a singular company as well, it isn't all negative.
We shouldn't be spreading rumors as fact, that is for certain. I don't like either company better than the other, I try to decide based on price, performance, features and support level.
I think the real problem in here is people are just trying to pee off other people to get a rise out of them rather than genuinely having an interest. That is what you get from an open forum.
I don't know about anyone else, but personally I would love to have the money to own a titan x, or fury x, I don't get the amount of willy waving going on, especially from the older guys.
It depends what "market" you're talking about. From a software side, the "market" is the userbase (thus the hardware they have) - of this market nVidia most certainly do not have 82%. This is the market you nVidia folk keep confusing with the hardware sales market which nVidia had 82% in the last quarter. They're two separate entities.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
Bah, Bah, bah nice personal attack.
"I can't hear you!"
Nice, well-reasoned argument. Clearly AMD are fine. I take it all back.
You Nvidia folk
Please do not label me as anything other than impartial.
Given this is a graphics card forum, that is the figures that are being reported.... Desktop GPU market share.
2016 is their last chance purely because that is when they are releasing all their next CPUs and GPUs which is expected to take them through the next years. these have to be successful and without issues - if the CPU ends up like Bulldozer and the GPU like Fiji then any shareholders will be very upset!
If We get Bulldozer-Fiji double death then AMD wont die immediately, it just means that they will continue to make losses, their debt will increase and they will edge slowly closer to bankruptcy and will be unable to pay back their loans due 2019. The problem is they will no longer have time or cash reserves left to try again with a new CPU or GPU architecture. And at that point MS/Sony/Nintendo will be looking to lock down their next gene consoles. Even if AMD have a reason APU solution the financial situation may mean an Intel-Nvidia solution is preferable.
If either Bulldozer or R400 is successful but the other is a desperate then it also paints a difficult picture for AMD and I think the chances of a company split to lesion off the profit destroying sectors.
The userbase means nothing to AMD or Nvidia, which is why it is not amrket share. the only think the GPU vendors care about is market share and profit margins.
A develoepr might care about the userbase, but the userbase will always follow the market share trends but is largely an irrelevant number. There are computers out there still running a Voodoo 2 but that doesn't mean that 3DFX have "market share".
Yep, but what you nVidia folk keep doing is using the Quarterly Hardware Sales figures interchangeably with User Install Base to make nVidia look like they're doing better than they are. It's getting old. Of the install base, nVidia have maybe 60% at best (52% if you go by steam data).
I sort of agree, the user base means less to nVidia or AMD - but obviously not nothing. The install base dictates where software devs are more likely to focus resources, focusing more to one vendor can lead to more sales for that vendor -- has a knock on effect which is why the divide between nVidia and AMD is growing and will continue to do so until either AMD bring out a SIGNIFICANTLY improved card or go bust.
Last edited:
What "you AMD folk" keep doing is using user base data to pretend that AMD is doing better than they are. It is absolutely irrelevant who bought GPUs 5 years ago, that does give a penny more cash flow to AMD now.
Software developers in the here and now don't worry about cards sold years ago -they worry about what the userbase will be like when the game is released 1-2-3 years from now, the best indicator of that is what the current market share is, i.e. current sales.
Even that is somewhat irrelevant ot how well software will run one certain hardware, that comes down to the expertise of the developers, time and resource constraints, and how much AMD and NVidia support the developer.
We have seena lot of terrible optimized buggy games recently, purely down to lack of skil, time and resources form the developer. If the game happens to feature Gamesworks then Nvidia will be erroneously blamed for the developers incompetence and rush to market.
Last edited:
Well the facts are there and I don't think anyone wants to see AMD go under but they do need some help from a big investor. They have lots of promise but clearly lots of over expenditure and the recent talks with Silver Lake have stalled (maybe AMD wanting too much for the 25% stake?) but a big shakeup is needed if they do get some big investors.
I am wondering if these HBM rumours are down to HBM prices and AMD just can't afford to go with HBM 2.0? I know the cost is put onto the buyers but they might not feel it is worth the added cost, so sticking with HBM 1.
True, it doesn't help AMD's income directly. But as I mentioned above it has an effect. It's not "irrelevant" by any means. You nVidia folk keep touting 82% and saying how no one will be catering to AMD (be it HBM2 or games, I can find several quotes of this happening in the dx12 threads) because "82%!" It's simply not the case, there are a lot of AMD users - sure nVidia have double but it's still not an insignificant portion of the market and cannot be ignored.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
Top left graph shows GPU breakdown. Can click for more detailed breakdown of exactly which cards.
A 4GB maximum across the R400 series won't cut it next year.
nV will possibly have 16GB on their flagship consumer model, if reports are true.
AMD have to execute on all their promises, and execute near flawlessly, if they want to compete again. HBM1 won't cut it.
Sigh....
You do realise that what people are using now does not equate to what people are buying now. What people buy now is the bread and butter of both Nvidia's anf AMD's business. It is what pays the bills.....
I want nothing more than AMD to return to profit and succeed. I have stated that time and time again. Having been an AMD user for the past 10 years, both cards and CPU's for all but two of my builds.
I didn't think HBM 1 was limited to 4GB? Been awhile since I read up but iirc, it could still do 4 stacks of 1GB x4