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

Silent_Scone · 20 Apr 2015 at 07:32

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

Oh there is a lot more...

Quartz · 20 Apr 2015 at 09:11

diamount said:
'wins'

If you say so.

Which manufacturer has their GPU is inside the PS4? AMD. Which manufacturer has their GPU inside the XBox 1? AMD.

ubersonic · 20 Apr 2015 at 09:22

Before I say this, I have a R290 in my spare machine and it's a cracking card, I don't hate AMD or anything lol.

But seriously, it's now over a year and a half since the 290 launched and the 290X was the month before, and they were the last new performance cards AMD launched (the 285 was a cheaper to produce replacement for an existing card in the lineup).

Compared to Nvidia's current lineup the 290/290X don't really offer that amazing a bang/buck advantage, the 290 is cheaper than 970 but slower, and the 290X is slightly cheaper and slightly faster but it's not really noticeably quicker and the bang/buck difference is paralleled by the additional heat and power consumption (if your building a new system the GPU saving will be eaten by extra PSU cost).

Add to that, the mining boom that saw AMD hit record sales figures in 2014 is long over and the surplus of used cards means you can save up to 50% off retail costs by going used, this is hurting AMD's sales (like we always knew it would). Ironically the only thing that has stopped AMD's used value dropping more is the fact Nvidia's hasn't.

All in all AMD need to launch their new cards, and yesterday.

ubersonic · 20 Apr 2015 at 09:25

Quartz said:
Which manufacturer has their GPU is inside the PS4? AMD. Which manufacturer has their GPU inside the XBox 1? AMD.

PowerVR had their GPU in the Dreamcast, look at how well their gaming cards are doing today...

AMD will be making very little money on the PS4/XB1 just like they did with the Gamecube, the margins are tiny because Sony/MS know they will be selling the consoles at a loss for the first couple of years (they do this to gain market share and thus increase their revenue from games, it isn't until later revisions/shrinks of the consoles that they start to turn a profit).

diamount · 20 Apr 2015 at 10:47

Quartz said:
Which manufacturer has their GPU is inside the PS4? AMD. Which manufacturer has their GPU inside the XBox 1? AMD.

You are very naive to think the console deal is anywhere near favourable for AMD, they would be shouting to the rooftops and show it as a reason to invest. Still it's cash flow, I guess.

Blackjack Davy · 20 Apr 2015 at 13:47

I think AMD have an image problem and are poor at marketing, everyone and his dog seems to know the GTX 970 and 980 exist but who knows or cares about R9 290's other than PC hardware enthusiast forum? Even then people seem to shy away from them due to garbled stories of overheating. And AMD seems to do nothing to counter this. Where is their marketing strategy?

A good example of where they're going wrong is in purchasing ATI they should have kept the name as it had a reputation, better than AMD at anyrate. AMD are tarnished by their image of poor performance processors, or poor in comparison to Intel at anyrate. They should be promoting ATI cards not AMD cards.

mmj_uk said:
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.

Maybe because here people actually know what they're talking about?

Have you considered that they were talking from personal experience?

Almost always when you press these people they will finally admit they have little or no experience with AMD cards. Hearsay?

MasterOC · 20 Apr 2015 at 14:08

The problem is , the average joe thinks very little of the amd brand . I have some seriosuly fond memories of amd hardware , lit up again thanks to the tbird thread . But people coming into PC gaming as a primary example within the last couple of years constantly rash out the " heat " and " poor drivers " as an example why they went with nvidia for their GPU purchase be that in a pre built box or an upgrade from a passed on system . Having absolutely zero experiance with AMDs hardware they claim this and that right off the bat , as someone who loves the company yet does purchase competitors hardware I often find myself having to explain there thoughts are not nessarly based on fact , which often goes through one ear and out the other. Amd need new hardware and then they need some amazing p.r , without then hardware alls pointless

Meladath · 20 Apr 2015 at 14:27

Blackjack Davy said:
A good example of where they're going wrong is in purchasing ATI they should have kept the name as it had a reputation, better than AMD at anyrate. AMD are tarnished by their image of poor performance processors, or poor in comparison to Intel at anyrate. They should be promoting ATI cards not AMD cards.

Around the time AMD acquired ATI AMD CPU's were better than intel in pretty much every way for a long time. It wasn't until the Q6600 vs K10 where intel won over due to 45nm vs 65nm until intel started beating AMD again. When they changed the name, whilst they were not as powerful they were still incredibly great CPU's for their price.

Pottsey · 20 Apr 2015 at 17:03

ubersonic said:
PowerVR had their GPU in the Dreamcast, look at how well their gaming cards are doing today...

I don't understand that. PowerVR are doing very well, yet you make it sound like, look at how bad they did after being in a console.

Ayahuasca · 20 Apr 2015 at 17:05

and here we go...

bru · 20 Apr 2015 at 17:44

To be fair to Pottsey, he is quite right. PowerVR are doing fine, just because they no longer make discrete GPU's for PC's doesn't mean they are not doing ok as a company.

The Mad One · 21 Apr 2015 at 13:35

Sorry but the title of that article and this thread is totally misleading, it should read "75% of gamers who purchased a graphics card in the last 6 months purchased nvidia", presuming of course the data for that graph is correct which is probably isn't.

If you're talking all gamers, including those who purchased in last few years then the data should be something like the steam hardware survey, which still shows that nvidia has a bit over 50% market share.

andybird123 · 21 Apr 2015 at 13:46

The Mad One said:
Sorry but the title of that article and this thread is totally misleading, it should read "75% of gamers who purchased a graphics card in the last 6 months purchased nvidia", presuming of course the data for that graph is correct which is probably isn't.

If you're talking all gamers, including those who purchased in last few years then the data should be something like the steam hardware survey, which still shows that nvidia has a bit over 50% market share.

bearing in mind that: the steam survey includes Intel, which is irrelevant to "AMD vs. Nvidia discrete GPU sales" as a discussion. If it includes Intel APU's then it also includes AMD APU's, which again is irrelevant data to a discrete GPU conversation... just discounting the intel data makes Nvidia's discrete installed market share 63% and that is without trying to work out how much of AMD's share is actually APU's which would drive that figure higher again

Ayahuasca · 21 Apr 2015 at 14:08

bru said:
To be fair to Pottsey, he is quite right. PowerVR are doing fine, just because they no longer make discrete GPU's for PC's doesn't mean they are not doing ok as a company.

I wasn't saying he was wrong but the last thing we need is another multiple page PowerVR debate.

andybird123 · 21 Apr 2015 at 14:13

bru said:
To be fair to Pottsey, he is quite right. PowerVR are doing fine, just because they no longer make discrete GPU's for PC's doesn't mean they are not doing ok as a company.

if going from making £12m profit to making a £300k loss is "doing ok"
they also owe £88m and have £83m in "assets" and only £19m in cash, so they would have to borrow more to cover their other debts and loans

their earning per share went from 2.5p to 0.3p

they aren't in any immediate trouble but they need that R&D to pay off

Devrij · 21 Apr 2015 at 16:22

AMD: Market your bloody products. Market your brand! Keep us updated on what you're doing. It's great having reps on the ground, but if they can't share info then they are just tech support. More regular updates please! Leaving your customers hanging for 4 months waiting for driver support with no explanation at all was unacceptable, especially when what turned up was poor anyway.

Nvidia: Try collaborating for once. Not everything needs to be proprietary tech. Why not support standard adaptive sync as well as offering your own superior gsync solution? Trying to get away with the 3.5GB VRAM was also incredibly underhand. Stop being the Apple of the gpu world.

bru · 21 Apr 2015 at 18:17

andybird123 said:
if going from making £12m profit to making a £300k loss is "doing ok"
they also owe £88m and have £83m in "assets" and only £19m in cash, so they would have to borrow more to cover their other debts and loans

their earning per share went from 2.5p to 0.3p

they aren't in any immediate trouble but they need that R&D to pay off

They seem to be doing ok to me.

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?type=chart&display=chart&code=cotn%3AIMG.L&it=le&timeframe=1f3&index=&versus=&linetype=line&Go=Plot+&overlay=&overlay2=&overlay3=&overlay4=&indicator=&indicator2=&indicator3=&indicator4=&chartwidth=976&buylines=on&triggers=on

andybird123 · 22 Apr 2015 at 08:17

Where did I mention share price?
Although the fact the share price itself is at the lowest its been in 5 years is also an indicator of how poor their results were this year

elmuzzy66. · 22 Apr 2015 at 08:34

Meladath said:
Around the time AMD acquired ATI AMD CPU's were better than intel in pretty much every way for a long time. It wasn't until the Q6600 vs K10 where intel won over due to 45nm vs 65nm until intel started beating AMD again. When they changed the name, whilst they were not as powerful they were still incredibly great CPU's for their price.

Yea what a flop Conroe cpu's were :rolleyes:

Pottsey · 22 Apr 2015 at 18:58

andybird123 said:
if going from making £12m profit to making a £300k loss is "doing ok"
they also owe £88m and have £83m in "assets" and only £19m in cash, so they would have to borrow more to cover their other debts and loans

their earning per share went from 2.5p to 0.3p

they aren't in any immediate trouble but they need that R&D to pay off

Not sure I should be posting this in this thread. Will try not to make too many more posts don’t want to derail too much. But there is big difference between IMG and AMD. Unlike AMD, IMG have just come out of a massive expansion and are just entering over the next years a phase of all the new R&D lines turning (hopefully) into massive profits while costs are going down massively.

IMG just built a new HQ, spent $100+ million on MIPS and developing new CPU lines, near the end of developing Ensigma communications technology and near the end of developing ray tracing technology and a few others. Its puts them in a what looks to be a strong position in the next few years.

Buying the company behind MIPS and expanding the product line and building the HQ alone explain the low profits. That large expansion and expenses to go with those two projects have just ended. I agree they need to turn the R&D into pay off but unlike AMD IMG have a number of different and promising R&D lines just about ready to go. MIPS alone is taking off faster then expected.

There won’t be any big expenses for IMG over the next few years, not compared to the last few years. Anyway I just wanted to explain why they want from 12million profit to -£300k loss. It wasn't due to shrinking revenue, it was due to a massive expansion which is a very different situation to what's going on over at AMD. That same expansion is why I think IMG are in a good position going forward and I think its fair to say they are doing ok.

EDIT: Its also worth factoring in IoT and how the markets are changing.
EDIT: If nothing changes and the new R&D lines fail they should still be back into millions of profits due to the big expenses being over.