DSOG Reports that 3 out of every 4 PC gamers own an Nvidia GPU

[Boomstick777]

I believe the main issue is there is a stigma associated with AMD. The common folk believe NVIDIA to simply be the best, premium option. They believe AMD to be second rate, as such they believe the prices reflect the product.

In my opinion the real problem is a lack of competitive products from AMD, not only in GPU but CPU as well.

They can't compete without competitive products.

AMD is re focusing and streamlining it's product tiers. We will see some good AMD products over the next couple of years.

AMD will be fine imho, the fact that people are getting annoyed that they haven't released anything (Myself included) shows that there is still demand for AMD products. Once they can compete again, they will recoup some market share.

 

[ALXAndy]

Same here,

Titan X
GTX 960
GTX 860M

R9 270 (Spare GPU)

Three out of four..

Your AMD is poo though

 

[mmj_uk]

Seriously the performance difference is not nearly big enough to warrant the market share difference.

There's a lot more to a graphics card than just performance though, particularly in OEM systems where less heat means less cooling requirements, greater long term reliability, being able to install lower spec PSU's, less noise etc. That's without even getting into the software side of things which is where NVidia really shines.

The problem is the bad reputation that AMD has that can not be seen in forums like OCUK where people are more tech savvy.

In my opinion OCUK is one of the few enthusiast forums that is biased in favour of AMD, you tend to get more balance in other places.

I mentioned AMD gpu's once in a big pc gaming community and all I got back was how terrible and full of problems they are.

Have you considered that they were talking from personal experience?

 

[slick rick]

I really like AMD because they are ambitious and always innovating, but the problem is (in my personal opinion) this over-ambitious nature can act in a detrimental way. They have so many things they are working on and developing it seems like they lose focus on one thing while perusing another and this leads to fantastic technologies never being fully realised, supported or delayed.

If they really focused on only a couple of things and really polish the tech and push it, I think it would help them a lot.

 

[straxusii]

I'm worried for AMD, looking at recent tech news articles I think they are struggling in the PC arena, with no competition the PC graphics market will be grim. We need AMD to have a strong return with the 3x0 series and I'd also like to see Intel turn up so we have 3 strong competitors in the market.

 

[Tute]

they are things nvidia should do not what they do i replied to the OP
" What practices do both companies need to change about themselves to better succeed and drive the gaming industry in particular forward?"

Ah okay, my mistake. I apologise.

In which case I do agree. I thought it was odd as a couple of threads below you clearly raise some of these as a problem with NVidia.

 

[thesmokingman]

I really like AMD because they are ambitious and always innovating, but the problem is (in my personal opinion) this over-ambitious nature can act in a detrimental way. They have so many things they are working on and developing it seems like they lose focus on one thing while perusing another and this leads to fantastic technologies never being fully realised, supported or delayed.

If they really focused on only a couple of things and really polish the tech and push it, I think it would help them a lot.

It's too bad they don't have the liqiudity to back up their creative engineering.

 

[Nutella33]

I don't think they do if every 3 out of 4 gamers really do own one of their cards (I'm rather skeptical about that figure to be honest)

The market dictates the price, if people are willing to pay it, then they aren't going to cut their profits just to be nice. Both sides at the end of the day just want your money and will charge the maximum amount they can so long as they still sell. Unfortunately for AMD they have to charge a lot less it seems to compete.

The figures are throughout the last decade or so, not just current ownership.
it seems pretty understandable. Nvidia always have been the bigger company and that happens because they have a bigger income. even AMD at its peak only manages about 55% market share and that was ten years ago.


Even if the 390x is a massive success its not going to change the fact people for years have predominantly bought Nvidia. The article shoe horns its mention in to add some sort of relevancy to the post for clicks. What is actually interesting is seeing that this is the lowest point in over 11 years of gaming sales for them. But we knew that already.

 

[TheMorningStar]

If you guys ever check the Steam hardware poll it pretty much backs up these numbers.

 

[andybird123]

The figures are throughout the last decade or so, not just current ownership.
it seems pretty understandable. Nvidia always have been the bigger company and that happens because they have a bigger income.

That's not exactly true, until very recently AMD actually had more gross revenue than Nvidia

 

[Nutella33]

That's not exactly true, until very recently AMD actually had more gross revenue than Nvidia

That's because of nvidias investments into tegra/shield etc which hit revenues as they were heavy on R+D. It's still the larger company and as the graph shows, dominant in the market and has been since 04.

 

[andybird123]

Congratulations on not knowing what revenue is, or what the graph shows, lmao

 

[Pottsey]

The problem with that data is its based on research data from JPR’s who are renowned for copy and pasting paragraphs and randomly making up facts and numbers. I don't trust anything from them anymore. I have no proof the data is wrong in this case but with JPR's past history I find it hard to trust.

 

[Quartz]

AMD were caught napping with the bitcoin craze and were too slow to ramp up production, but have had two major wins with the consoles.

 

[bru]

The problem with that data is its based on research data from JPR’s who are renowned for copy and pasting paragraphs and randomly making up facts and numbers. I don't trust anything from them anymore. I have no proof the data is wrong in this case but with JPR's past history I find it hard to trust.

The thing is, the original 3 out of every 4 quote is about in line with NVidia's market share, so while I do agree with you, that you cannot always take these research numbers at face value, this one does seem about right.

 

[trisp]

What we really need is a third (or even fourth) gpu manf so that there is a lot of comp making all the companies fight over customers busieness with new tech/better performance.

Imagine what kind of performance we would have now if there was more then two? we could have proper 4k cards already

 

[diamount]

AMD were caught napping with the bitcoin craze and were too slow to ramp up production, but have had two major wins with the consoles.

'wins'

If you say so.

 

[EdgeDs]

As customers it is us that lose out if one brand becomes too dominant we need ATI too be snapping at Nvidia heels in order too push development and new releases look at what happened with the 290X release the price drops on the 780 quickly followed and then the 780ti was released makes you wonder how long that they had been sitting on that version for. However its not Nvidias fault that they are doing so well ATI releasing the 290X in the state they did was very sloppy with that terrible stock cooler which ran way too hot and stopping the release of custom cooling for such a long time.

 

[D.P.]

Rather ironic that people are saying nVidia need a better price to performance ratio.

I don't think they do if every 3 out of 4 gamers really do own one of their cards (I'm rather skeptical about that figure to be honest)

The market dictates the price, if people are willing to pay it, then they aren't going to cut their profits just to be nice. Both sides at the end of the day just want your money and will charge the maximum amount they can so long as they still sell. Unfortunately for AMD they have to charge a lot less it seems to compete.

He, nvidia price their cards exactly right, they still dominate the market and get much healthier margins allowing improved R&D.

People always ignore important things like features, out of Horne box experience, drivers, software support, game support, multi-GPU support, cooler design, noise, heat etc. Bang per buck doesn't only refer to raw speed, who care if a card is a few percent faster per dollar, it is meaningless compared to say not having crossfire profiles or being able to play games in Linux at respectable speeds.

 

[D.P.]

Seriously the performance difference is not nearly big enough to warrant the market share difference.

The problem is the bad reputation that AMD has that can not be seen in forums like OCUK where people are more tech savvy. I mentioned AMD gpu's once in a big pc gaming community and all I got back was how terrible and full of problems they are.

Who said performance has a thing to do with it, there is much more to market value