Poll: AMD Keeps Screwing Up (HUB video) - do they?

[GoogalyMoogaly]

My point is there are limits to this.

Picture this, you're AMD with $27bn annual revenue and 40% margins, you want to undercut Nvidia to gain market share, you sell your GPU's for significantly less, job done right? As easy as that....

But hold on, now you're Nvidia with $60bn annual revenue and 70% margins.

It costs AMD $300 to make a $550 GPU
It costs Nvidia $300 to make a $600 GPU

That's just BOM costs, not including R&D or cost of sales.

So...
AMD lower their GPU to $400

Nvidia sit and watch with popcorn, AMD more than triples its market share from 12% to 40%, Nvidia are on their third bucket of popcorn when they launch a GPU with all kinds of shiny features and it absolutely murders AMD's latest offering because they had no money for R&D, AMD quickly becomes irrelevant, womp womp wooomp.

So why do AMD bother trying to compete if they know they can't win?
Just make GPUs that sit at around 4060 level and under where Nvidia won't care about you. Why make a 7900XTX if you can't compete with Nvidia.
If you are gonna compete with Nvidia then be prepared to be compared with them regardless of finances. At the end of the day the customers don't care about that, that's an AMD problem, customers care about what they get.

Skoda probably couldn't compete with Ferrari when it comes to cars at the price point, performance and feature level of Ferrari. So they don't. They don't make poor cars to compete with Ferrari, have poor launches and then rely on Skoda owners to tell everyone they don't have the budget of Ferrari.

 

[Murphy]

true but your missing the point, people are in here comparing amds and NVidia mistakes, NVidia make less.

Not really, people are in here discussing if AMD keep screwing up with their dGPU launches, as per the title of the thread.

 

[henson0115]

Not really, people are in here discussing if AMD keep screwing up with their dGPU launches, as per the title of the thread.

true but your missing the point, people are in here comparing amds and NVidia mistakes, NVidia make less. well that's because they have more resource available and likely bigger more refined departments due to having more money to run them. its not rocket science, i see the same issues in the small business i work in compared to being in a larger organization previously.

added the rest of the post here for you ion case you missed it.

 

[Joxeon]

My point is there are limits to this.

Picture this, you're AMD with $27bn annual revenue and 40% margins, you want to undercut Nvidia to gain market share, you sell your GPU's for significantly less, job done right? As easy as that....

But hold on, now you're Nvidia with $60bn annual revenue and 70% margins.

It costs AMD $300 to make a $550 GPU
It costs Nvidia $300 to make a $600 GPU

That's just BOM costs, not including R&D or cost of sales.

So...
AMD lower their GPU to $400

Nvidia sit and watch with popcorn, AMD more than triples its market share from 12% to 40%, Nvidia are on their third bucket of popcorn when they launch a GPU with all kinds of shiny features and it absolutely murders AMD's latest offering because they had no money for R&D, AMD quickly becomes irrelevant, womp womp wooomp.

Hang on, if amd make $100 per GPU but sell over 3x the amount then surely they are making more money than $250 per GPU but only selling 1/3, then you also have to factor in the $300 production cost since if you're buying 3x more components then you can use that buying power to negotiate a better prices which will cut production costs and further increase the amount made per GPU.

 

[Murphy]

true but your missing the point, people are in here comparing amds and NVidia mistakes, NVidia make less. well that's because they have more resource available and likely bigger more refined departments due to having more money to run them. its not rocket science, i see the same issues in the small business i work in compared to being in a larger organization previously.

added the rest of the post here for you ion case you missed it.

No, you compared AMD's and Nvidia mistakes. Until then few people where making a compression, i would guess because screwing up dGPU launches has absolutely nothing to do with what other companies are doing or how much money you spend.

It boils down to being truthful by not setting unreasonable expectations, it's not hard.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

and we can't blame it on Scott 'who ate all the pies' Herkelman this time either

 

[Calin Banc]

how many cases are out there? even if its 3000 cases then yes it does have a cost, in terms of money and man power i see your point but nothing in business is free and I'm not saying they shouldn't do it, I'm saying they don't have the resources like nvidia do and stop comparing them.

You don't test drive a car on all the roads on this planet, you test for certain types. Same here.

So why do AMD bother trying to compete if they know they can't win?
Just make GPUs that sit at around 4060 level and under where Nvidia won't care about you. Why make a 7900XTX if you can't compete with Nvidia.
If you are gonna compete with Nvidia then be prepared to be compared with them regardless of finances. At the end of the day the customers don't care about that, that's an AMD problem, customers care about what they get.

Skoda probably couldn't compete with Ferrari when it comes to cars at the price point, performance and feature level of Ferrari. So they don't. They don't make poor cars to compete with Ferrari, have poor launches and then rely on Skoda owners to tell everyone they don't have the budget of Ferrari.

*Froblins demo - massive AI crowds accelerated on the GPU with potentially huge gameplay implications.
*Bullet - Physics like PhyisX from nVIDIA.
*True Audio
*TressFX

Just to name a few they already developed and let them die without pushing into games harder. I left out Mantle as at least that went into Vulkan and inspired DX12.

The budget excuse, just like others causally dropped (people just want cheaper AMD cards so they can buy cheaper nVIDIA cards!), are just that, excuses. AMD can't keep a good, straight record of things getting properly done.
Even when they get involved with games can be disappointing. They've been with Far Cry franchise for a while and yet, even though their own tech (Eyefinity), gets mentioned in game for multi display gaming, the ACTUAL experience makes it not playable since the FoV is waaaaay to narrow! Starfield is the latest of this...

In short: have good, decent tech; promote it, make sure it runs well, be the good guy with facts, not just words, don't make fun of others, but rather compare what you do with yourself. Have those big + as stuff you innovated, you bring new to the market, not stuff that you're playing catching up or you'll look like the 2nd (hand) choice you don't really want, but go for since it's perhaps cheaper (in the short run at least).

 

[TNA]

true but your missing the point, people are in here comparing amds and NVidia mistakes, NVidia make less. well that's because they have more resource available and likely bigger more refined departments due to having more money to run them. its not rocket science, i see the same issues in the small business i work in compared to being in a larger organization previously.

Nah. Nvidia have always had better marketing, even when they were much smaller. AMD have loads of money these days, yet they keep making these mistakes.

Lisa should get rid of the whole department and start fresh.

My point is there are limits to this.

Picture this, you're AMD with $27bn annual revenue and 40% margins, you want to undercut Nvidia to gain market share, you sell your GPU's for significantly less, job done right? As easy as that....

But hold on, now you're Nvidia with $60bn annual revenue and 70% margins.

It costs AMD $300 to make a $550 GPU
It costs Nvidia $300 to make a $600 GPU

That's just BOM costs, not including R&D or cost of sales.

So...
AMD lower their GPU to $400

Nvidia sit and watch with popcorn, AMD more than triples its market share from 12% to 40%, Nvidia are on their third bucket of popcorn when they launch a GPU with all kinds of shiny features and it absolutely murders AMD's latest offering because they had no money for R&D, AMD quickly becomes irrelevant, womp womp wooomp.

Yeah. Instead AMD carries on their current path and ends up with 1% market share. Lovely that.

 

[Calin Banc]

Yeah. Instead AMD carries on their current path and ends up with 1% market share. Lovely that.

AMD wouldn't be here due to Ryzen if they wouldn't go after Intel with lower prices too, in thecpast. That argument doesn't make sense. Intel ate popcorn and are where they are.

Besides, R&D costs are spread between gaming and business/professional side. From time to time, Sony and Microsoft add to the money pool, as well.

 

[brostradamus]

So why do AMD bother trying to compete if they know they can't win?
Just make GPUs that sit at around 4060 level and under where Nvidia won't care about you. Why make a 7900XTX if you can't compete with Nvidia.
If you are gonna compete with Nvidia then be prepared to be compared with them regardless of finances. At the end of the day the customers don't care about that, that's an AMD problem, customers care about what they get.

Skoda probably couldn't compete with Ferrari when it comes to cars at the price point, performance and feature level of Ferrari. So they don't. They don't make poor cars to compete with Ferrari, have poor launches and then rely on Skoda owners to tell everyone they don't have the budget of Ferrari.

amd should leapfrog a generation, just shelve the next release (planned for 2026) and jump to the 2028 timetable

 

[heatonpkmassive]

true but your missing the point, people are in here comparing amds and NVidia mistakes, NVidia make less. well that's because they have more resource available and likely bigger more refined departments due to having more money to run them. its not rocket science, i see the same issues in the small business i work in compared to being in a larger organization previously.

added the rest of the post here for you ion case you missed it.

You can't have it both ways. You agree that money isn't the most important factor, clever development is.

Yet here you are using the money / resources argument again.

Your position is somewhat untenable.

 

[heatonpkmassive]

Nah. Nvidia have always had better marketing, even when they were much smaller. AMD have loads of money these days, yet they keep making these mistakes.

Which was my point earlier in the thread that he failed to grasp.

He comes across like a fanboy defending the underdog, whereas people like me would like BOTH companies to make competing products. AMD have far more resources than in the days of the 9700Pro, yet they are further away from Nvidia than they were back then.

Conclude from that what you will.

 

[henson0115]

You can't have it both ways. You agree that money isn't the most important factor, clever development is.

Yet here you are using the money / resources argument again.

Your position is somewhat untenable.

im saying you cant compare them due to money and the only way to even things out is for amd to get more money in. where have i said otherwise?

 

[henson0115]

No, you compared AMD's and Nvidia mistakes. Until then few people where making a compression, i would guess because screwing up dGPU launches has absolutely nothing to do with what other companies are doing or how much money you spend.

It boils down to being truthful by not setting unreasonable expectations, it's not hard.

where did i compare them? i only said you can't really compare them and why? nothing about there mistakes. anyway is all irrelevant discussion anyway wont change anything

 

[Murphy]

where did i compare them? i only said you can't really compare them and why? nothing about there mistakes. anyway is all irrelevant discussion anyway wont change anything

In the post i gave you a link to.

And then again in this post, and this one.

It's not about how much you spend, it's about setting expectations, it's about over-promising and under delivering, it's about claiming your upcoming product is the best thing since slice bread only for people to get their hands on it and being disappointed because it's not as good as you told everyone it would be.

AMD have a history of over-promising and under delivering. While that may result in short-term gains it's harmful in the long-run as more and more people cotton on to the fact that they're not going to get what you say they get.

 

[henson0115]

In the post i gave you a link to.

And then again in this post, and this one.

It's not about how much you spend, it's about setting expectations, it's about over-promising and under delivering, it's about claiming your upcoming product is the best thing since slice bread only for people to get their hands on it and being disappointed because it's not as good as you told everyone it would be.

AMD have a history of over-promising and under delivering. While that may result in short-term gains it's harmful in the long-run as more and more people cotton on to the fact that they're not going to get what you say they get.

again i compared them from a monetary point of view..
there's a phrase in marketing, something like there's no such thing as bad marketing, all marketing is good marketing.

im afraid to tell you that all companies will market there products in the best light, nvidia are no shining beacon of truth nor intel. they all do it. amd just get picked up on it more.

 

[Murphy]

where did i compare them?

again i compared them from a monetary point of view..

So you did compare them.

there's a phrase in marketing, something like there's no such thing as bad marketing, all marketing is good marketing.

No there's not. The quote is ‘There is no such thing as bad publicity’. There is such a thing as bad marketing because marketing is meant to encourage people to buy something not just gain attention.

im afraid to tell you that all companies will market there products in the best light, nvidia are no shining beacon of truth nor intel. they all do it. amd just get picked up on it more.

The reason AMD are getting picked up on it more is because this thread is about whether "AMD Keeps Screwing Up" not about Nvidia or Intel, if you want to talk about how they keep screwing up make a new thread and stop taking this one OT.

 

[henson0115]

So you did compare them.

No there's not. The quote is ‘There is no such thing as bad publicity’. There is such a thing as bad marketing because marketing is meant to encourage people to buy something not just gain attention.

The reason AMD are getting picked up on it more is because this thread is about whether "AMD Keeps Screwing Up" not about Nvidia or Intel, if you want to talk about how they keep screwing up make a new thread and stop taking this one OT.

nope, im saying they shouldn't be compared on there mistakes as they really cant be compared as they are two different companies.... they have different monetary incomes and budgets and departments and so forth.

ive stated from the start, questioning why are people comparing them from a pov of being able to compete!!!!!, im stating they can't compete due to money. im not sure you are following along..

in regards to the phrasing, of no marketing is bad marketing, having worked with marketing departments side by side for many years with selling software. I'm repeating what im told by professionals so yea im going to listen to them and not you

as with the other point your are trying to make in reply to people pick them up more, if that's the case why again do people keep comparing amd to nvidia, again back to my original point!

this is a pointless conversation and so we will leave it there

 

[Murphy]

nope, im saying they shouldn't be compared on there mistakes as they really cant be compared as they are two different companies.... they have different monetary incomes and budgets and departments and so forth.

Then stop comparing them!

again i compared them from a monetary point of view..

 

[heatonpkmassive]

nope, im saying they shouldn't be compared on there mistakes as they really cant be compared as they are two different companies.... they have different monetary incomes and budgets and departments and so forth.

There you go again! Citing money!

You really don't know at all what point you're making.