• 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.

****Official OcUK Fury X Review Thread****

layte said:
Got anything to back that up?

Nvidia have made huge wins in recent times. They are the sole supplier for IBM supercomputer designs and the US government has recently announced they will be building the three fastest yet announced supercomputers in existence around NV hardware. That's some big money and mindshare right there.

So AMD got Apple, that's peanuts as we know Apple screw down their supplier margins, plus Mac Pro sales are hardly setting the world alight, it has not helped AMD's bottom line much has it?

Edit: You just need to look at the top 500 to see what people who's opinion counts really think about AMD's compute designs.

http://www.top500.org/lists/2014/11/
Click to expand...

I believe AMD went from around 12% to 21% of the entire market in the last few years - this includes workstations too and is where AMD has got most of the share.

However,the main concern for Nvidia will be Intel,who are putting more and more resources into Xeon Phi - not only ones which are add-in cards but potentially socketed ones.

Look at the top supercomputer on the list - it use Xeon Phi and so does the 7th ranked.

IBM,has had its own issues too - it basically divested itself of its fabs and started to license POWER uarch to others. The collaboration with Nvidia is more the fact they have nothing by themselves to take on Intel with compute cards,so again the common enemy is Intel not AMD.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I believe AMD went from around 12% to 21% of the entire market - this includes workstations too and is where AMD has got most of share.

However,their main concern will be Intel,who are putting more and more resources into Xeon Phi - not only ones which are add-in cards but potentiall socketed ones.

Look at the top supercomputer on the list - it use Xeon Phi.
Click to expand...

Aye, I completely agree that Intel and not AMD are the threat to Nvidia in the professional and HPC compute space. But as I said, NV have made some huge recent design win announcements. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8727/nvidia-ibm-supercomputers

Where are the AMD HPC wins coming from?
 
layte said:
Aye, I completely agree that Intel and not AMD are the threat to Nvidia in the professional and HPC compute space. But as I said, NV have made some huge recent design win announcements. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8727/nvidia-ibm-supercomputers

Where are the AMD HPC wins coming from?
Click to expand...

I would say in the professional space they are stealing sales - its why they have nearly doubled marketshare(it might be more TBH if you consider they are not massively in the HPC space).

However,the current most efficient supercomputer does have an AMD FirePro S9150:

http://www.green500.org/lists/green201411

The S9150 is Hawaii based. Hawaii is actually quite competitive in performance/watt for HPC tasks,but Nvidia simply has more experience in the area now and thats because prior to GCN,AMD and ATI cards were not that great for compute in the first place anyway.

It will be interesting to see when the new lists are out whether AMD has gained anymore traction in HPC,as until next year its still Kepler cards for Nvidia.
 
Last edited:
layte said:
Got anything to back that up?

Nvidia have made huge wins in recent times. They are the sole supplier for IBM supercomputer designs and the US government has recently announced they will be building the three fastest yet announced supercomputers in existence around NV hardware. That's some big money and mindshare right there.

So AMD got Apple, that's peanuts as we know Apple screw down their supplier margins, plus Mac Pro sales are hardly setting the world alight, it has not helped AMD's bottom line much has it?
Click to expand...

You just underlined my point for me. All those design wins are Pascal. It's where pretty much the entirety of NVIDIA's bottom line is going to be coming from. Hence why you won't hear about Titan SKUs until a long time after they've satisfied these contracts.

They are indeed the partner for the exclusive new platform they're building (hence NVLink).

Most of the recently built top rating supercomputing clusters are AMD based. Simply because they're faster and cheaper. CUDA is still a big thing in a lot of supercomputing scenarios, unlike workstation market which is transitioning very quickly to OpenCL and to some extent DirectCompute, so if they can get competitive hardware out, they can get back into it easily - and are doing on the promise of Pascal. Pascal is the big fight back for supercomputing and rendering farms, and the IBM partnership is a big part of it.

They're likely to continue to lose marketshare in the workstation market, but Pascal should stem the tide somewhat.

The margins AMD make on the the cards they sell for Apple workstations (and probably even the high end iMacs) is going to be many multiples of what they or NVIDIA make on consumer gaming cards. Plus, the market share gains through this alone are huge. NVIDIA had over 80% of the pro market 18 months ago ... it's now well below 70% and continuing to fall rapidly. The Apple contracts are a huge part of that. 50% a year or 18 months from now is quite plausible. Especially if Apple push new solutions using Fiji (the HBM compactness is right up their alley).
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I would say in the professional space they are stealing sales - its why they have nearly doubled marketshare(it might be more TBH if you consider they are not massively in the HPC space).

However,the current most efficient supercomputer does have an AMD FirePro S9150:

http://www.green500.org/lists/green201411

The S9150 is Hawaii based. Hawaii is actually quite competitive in performance/watt for HPC tasks,but Nvidia simply has more experience in the area now and thats because prior to GCN,AMD and ATI cards were not that great for compute in the first place anyway.
Click to expand...

Yet, nobody still wants to use their offerings in any recent big builds.

Can you link those market share numbers, I'd be interested in having a read.
 
pmc25 said:
You just underlined my point for me. All those design wins are Pascal. It's where pretty much the entirety of NVIDIA's bottom line is going to be coming from. Hence why you won't hear about Titan SKUs until a long time after they've satisfied these contracts.

They are indeed the partner for the exclusive new platform they're building (hence NVLink).

Most of the recently built top rating supercomputing clusters are AMD based. Simply because they're faster and cheaper. CUDA is still a big thing in a lot of supercomputing scenarios, unlike workstation market which is transitioning very quickly to OpenCL and to some extent DirectCompute, so if they can get competitive hardware out, they can get back into it easily - and are doing on the promise of Pascal. Pascal is the big fight back for supercomputing and rendering farms, and the IBM partnership is a big part of it.

They're likely to continue to lose marketshare in the workstation market, but Pascal should stem the tide somewhat.

The margins AMD make on the the cards they sell for Apple workstations (and probably even the high end iMacs) is going to be many multiples of what they or NVIDIA make on consumer gaming cards. Plus, the market share gains through this alone are huge. NVIDIA had over 80% of the pro market 18 months ago ... it's now well below 70% and continuing to fall rapidly. The Apple contracts are a huge part of that. 50% a year or 18 months from now is quite plausible. Especially if Apple push new solutions using Fiji (the HBM compactness is right up their alley).
Click to expand...

They wont be making much at all from Apple. Apple are notorious for milking every last drop of margin from their suppliers, once again AMD are playing the razor margin game, and not seeing the benefits.
 
Interesting to see how DX12 effects actual gaming. DX11 does seem to have massive API overhead.

WC5c97q.png


Nutella33 said:
Can you sum up boom? At work and videos will draw frowns
Click to expand...

Ha, he talks about quite a lot, 3XX series having changes to at a silicon level, not just rebrands. Nano form factor. How HBM will incorporate system memory as it's so fast in terms of bandwidth, it can swap information in and out from system without being a limitation. The 4GB becomes the cache for the GPU with info being swapped in and out from system memory. System Memory effectively gets added to your framebuffer. Then says workstation developers who previously used GPU's with massive amounts of GDDR5 can now have more system memory and that will be used via the HBM memory. I.e Fury X 4GB HBM not a limitation for gaming or workstation developers.

Watch it later, worth a look (:
 
Last edited:
layte said:
Yet, nobody still wants to use their offerings in any recent big builds.

Can you link those market share numbers, I'd be interested in having a read.
Click to expand...

I was going by marketshare last year,so OFC have no data from recently:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp...t-share-can-rise-to-30-after-the-macpro-deal/

http://marketrealist.com/2014/10/amds-professional-graphics-attain-a-milestone-with-apple-deal/

First one said 20% in May 2014 and it appears it says 25% in October 2014.
Another report said 21% at the beginning of 2015.

A few years before that they were closer to 10% AFAIK.
 
layte said:
They wont be making much at all from Apple. Apple are notorious for milking every last drop of margin from their suppliers, once again AMD are playing the razor margin game, and not seeing the benefits.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. This isn't iphones or ipads. These are workstations costing many thousands. Apple would have absolutely no reason to not pay top whack, as their gross margin is still gigantic. Plus, they likely have long term plans for their wider laptop and PC lineup with AMD, based around their next generation APUs, so they're not going to risk forcing them out because they want even bigger nominal margins. If they felt the cost was too high that AMD were quoting, they'd just raise the price of the units ... they're by far the largest graphics workstation supplier in the market, and that won't change soon.
 
Last edited:
pmc25 said:
Rubbish. This isn't iphones or ipads. These are workstations costing many thousands. Apple would have absolutely no reason to not pay top whack, as their gross margin is still gigantic. Plus, they likely have long term plans for their wider laptop and PC lineup with AMD, based around their next generation APUs, so they're not going to risk forcing them out because they want even bigger nominal margins. If they felt the cost was too high that AMD were quoting, they'd just raise the price of the units ... they're by far the largest graphics workstation supplier in the market, and that won't change soon.
Click to expand...

The reason their margin is 'top whack' is because they screw their suppliers down to their absolute lowest.
 
MichaelAwkward said:
Nonsense. Apple is more likely to go all-Intel before all-AMD.
Click to expand...

No they aren't. Intel will eventually be eliminated from the entire line-up save workstation.

Own-brand ARM and AMD x86 (or hybrid ARM/x86) APUs are their future. Intel don't figure in it at all. Hiring Keller wasn't just because he's a decent microprocessor designer.

iMac almost went Kaveri already ....

They're doing a lot of work on HSA, and it ain't because of Intel ...

layte said:
The reason their margin is 'top whack' is because they screw their suppliers down to their absolute lowest.
Click to expand...

As far as Mac Pros and Intel/AMD are concerned. Absolute and utter ********. In terms of % margins their Mac Pros are nothing like iPhones (nominal margins are huge however). They're actually reasonably good value vs the competition and use top notch componentry ... and they definitely do not scew either Intel or AMD with their Xeon / FirePro SKUs.
 
Last edited:
pmc25 said:
No they aren't. Intel will eventually be eliminated from the entire line-up save workstation.

Own-brand ARM and AMD x86 (or hybrid ARM/x86) APUs are their future. Intel don't figure in it at all. Hiring Keller wasn't just because he's a decent microprocessor designer.

iMac almost went Kaveri already ....



As far as Mac Pros and Intel/AMD are concerned. Absolute and utter ********. In terms of % margins their Mac Pros are nothing like iPhones (nominal margins are huge however). They're actually reasonably good value vs the competition and use top notch componentry ... and they definitely do not scew either Intel or AMD with their Xeon / FirePro cards.
Click to expand...

Yet for all your claims, it's not made a dent in AMD's losses.

Apple are renowned for huge margins on all their products, I doubt that would change at all for the Mac Pro. AMD seem happy to chase razor margin wins for some reason.

There is no need to be so upset about this (and I guess the damp Fury X launch), I'm sure AMD can come good again eventually.
 
So those of you with Fury X cards in your mitts, are they worth the money? Are the drivers decent for them?

I was looking at both 980 Ti and Furty X, but I have just been told I can get the MSI Gaming 390x for £287 through a supplier we use for work.

Tempted to sit on a 390x for now and wait it out for 16/20nm process and further HBM improvements.

Reckon this path is better? Would be replacing a 7870 Black Edition so even a 390x should be a decent bump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom