• 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.

Jenson wants higher margins for his GPU's, here is how he's going to do it.

Its about as accurate as people saying all the hardware mining ETH are GPU's. :cry: Massive amount are specific ASICs. PoW mining wont disappear but for gamers its a great time to be after a new GPU (discounting scalpers on the new gen launch ofc).
 
Fixed :)



What were your thoughts on RDNA 2 and ampere pricing on launch? Using these cards as they are the most popular recently as per gibbos posts.

3080 - £650
6800xt - £600

3070 - £450
6800 - £530
6700xt - £420

Do you think RDNA 3 is going to be significantly cheaper than 40xx? Or do you think amd will price in the same bracket as they have done for the last few gens now? Maybe AMD should price at least £100-150 cheaper than nvidia to save the pc desktop gpu market?
These undercuts are absolutely nothing and all they did was boost Nvidia even further.

For reference I bought the Ryzen 1700 for £300 when the nearest Intel competitor was £1000. The equivalent in GPUs would be selling the 6800xt for £196. Even with those prices it took years for AMD to make a dent at Intel's marketshare and mindshare.

I know that kind of undercut is not feasible in the GPU market but still AMD needs some serious market disrupting prices for several generations if they want to take on Nvidia.
 
These undercuts are absolutely nothing and they boosted Nvidia even further.

For reference I bought the 1700 for £300 when the nearest Intel competitor was £1000. The equivalent in GPUs would be selling the 6800xt at £196.

I know that's not feasible but AMD needs some serious market disrupting prices, drivers, features and performance if they want to gain any marketshare.

FTFY
 
Will definitely agree on the 'premium brand' nonsense and the availability also is key. Going toe to toe with nvidia on price means there is little room for gaps in performance and features.
 
These undercuts are absolutely nothing and all they did was boost Nvidia even further.

For reference I bought the Ryzen 1700 for £300 when the nearest Intel competitor was £1000. The equivalent in GPUs would be selling the 6800xt for £196. Even with those prices it took years for AMD to make a dent at Intel's marketshare and mindshare.

I know that kind of undercut is not feasible in the GPU market but still AMD needs some serious market disrupting prices for several generations if they want to take on Nvidia.

I think that is a bit drastic to have 6800xt selling for £196 :cry: :p

But agree, that or they need to beat nvidia to the punch with new game changing features and not lag behind by months/years.
 
I think that is a bit drastic to have 6800xt selling for £196 :cry: :p

But agree, that or they need to beat nvidia to the punch with new game changing features and not lag behind by months/years.
ATi did it back with the 4870, it is possible.
The 4890 was the cherry on top of the pie, ATi did it with the HD 5870 too.
 
These undercuts are absolutely nothing and all they did was boost Nvidia even further.

For reference I bought the Ryzen 1700 for £300 when the nearest Intel competitor was £1000. The equivalent in GPUs would be selling the 6800xt for £196. Even with those prices it took years for AMD to make a dent at Intel's marketshare and mindshare.

I know that kind of undercut is not feasible in the GPU market but still AMD needs some serious market disrupting prices for several generations if they want to take on Nvidia.
There is a price point at which AMD can have an impact on Nvidia's market share, that is, i think about 25% below the lowest price Nvidia are willing to go.

I think that is deep in to the point where AMD would lose money on every GPU they sell, AMD simply cannot afford to do that, Nvidia would just sit back and make them do it until AMD are bankrupt.

The thing with AMD vs Intel is its just about performance, one scores a bigger bar chart than the other = better.

With GPU's its far more complex, its DLSS vs Free-Sync, Its RT, its software, its drivers and its performance, and this is where it gets complicated, if one had a higher RT bar than the other then it doesn't matter that it also crashes in Forza 5 if you turn the graphics up because it lacks VRam, bigger RT bar = win, end of/

So AMD also have to be careful where they spend their R&D and product production costs, and where that advantage lands could change in an instant as consumers decide now this is more important than that.

AMD know this, they will continue making GPU's, as good as they can for their R&D expenditure and production costs, charge a little bit less than Nvidia and in that way also benefit from the inflated margins set by Nvidia.
 
Yep, add a bit more RAM and keep selling even the old stuff at high prices: https://videocardz.com/newz/geforce...i-with-gddr6x-memory-to-launch-end-of-october
I have heard that the slower memory on the 3060ti has gone up in price so moving to the gddr6x standard might not be expensive for them but they could charge more as it will perform better. Cutting the memory bandwidth for a 8GB 3060 might hurt performance quite a bit, perhaps bring it much nearer to the 2060 12Gb in performance. Hopefully it might bring down prices of 3050 if a 3060 8GB card comes out
 
In the last investors call, Jenson (Nvidia CEO) laid out how he's going to maintain the higher margins on GPU's in the future, for us that means he intends to maintain the sort of prices we have seen over the last two years.

JayZ2Cents lays it out.

The reason the current out-going generation is staying around MSRP or even slightly higher is because Jenson wants us to become a custom to this pricing level, some my point out that the 3090Ti and one or two higher end GPU's are currently under MSRP, that's because those GPU's were released after Nvidia realised crypto miners would pay almost anything for those GPU's and the MSRP given to those GPU's reflected that.

He also wants to artificially constrain stock, this has two effects, one is the supply and demand problem that we all learned about the hard way, if inventory is low that artificially increases pricing, even if they are given a reasonable MSRP in reality they will cost more, so Nvidia can say they are not being greedy while at the same time rationing supply to push the margins up. that is the most important thing to realise here, simply put "fake MSRP's".

I'm sick of this now, Nvidia has been growing at an impressive rate over the last decade, becoming extremely wealthy and enjoying margins higher than anyone, higher even than Intel at their peak.
They want this gravy train to keep gathering speed, they want to keep increasing their wealth and margins, can't blame them for that, their job is to make investors ever more wealthy, they all want a bigger yacht.
However while this is understandable from that perspective, its not our job to like it, its not our job to pay for this.
Clearly Nvidia think they are in a position to make us pay for all this, well, they are not wrong, they are a monopoly and they know it, you will buy their products no matter what they cost, if not right away, eventually, because its your only option, right?

Intel are no different to Nvidia, they are not going to save us, we have to save ourselves, the power is with us collectivity, always has been, we have the power to put a stop to all this, its about time we used it.


From your own post here nVIDIA is reducing its Gross Margin: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...-revenue-losses.18958357/page-2#post-35826032

AMD Gross margin: 46%
nVIDIA Gross margin: 43.5%

I would say AMD are the greedy ones :) .

Maybe both can lower that gross margin.
 
Back
Top Bottom