More Confirmation Of NVIDIA GPP Impacting Consumer Choice

Rathor said:
Nvidia’s GPU business did $8.15billion last year. AMDs entire CPU and GPU business did $3 billion - so let’s pretend RTG did $1.5 billion. That means NVIDIA’s GPU business is more than 5x larger than RTG. That means Nvidia is 5x more of the OEMs business and spends 5x more money on co-marketing and engineering support for the OEMs gaming brands.

What gives AMD the right to free load on this advertising and R&D spend? They can spend their own money to co-market their own brands.

Most AMD fans seem to think they have a right to “free stuff”. AMD sells its GPUs at BREAKEVEN. Nvidia provides the same performance for the same price while making a profit like good companies should. AMD fans think a Nvidia should give AMD free access to Gameworks - even though Nvidia spent $300 million and counting to develop them. AMD fans insist that free sync is better than Gsync - because it’s free. Notice a trend?
Click to expand...

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Like, really, no idea. What R&D spend is involved with labeling a product "Republic of Gamers"? Freesync and Gsync in practical demonstrations have shown to be effectively identical, but one costs significantly less. Gameworks has been running terribly on most Nvidia cards as it is, let alone AMD. I mean could you be any more of a fanboy?
 
Rathor said:
If it’s Asus’ brand 100% then why are they worried about losing co-marketing dollars.

Also, busniess is dirty. Like anything competitive. The question is only are they doing something illegal. And the fact is we don’t have enough info and non of us are antitrust lawyers. If they are telling OEMs not to make AMD cards or telling retailers not to sell them - that’s illegal. But for them to say “we will only put co-marketing and engineering $$ behind Nvidia Exclusive brands - that’s SMART.
Click to expand...
I guess cheating is a-okay with you.

I just wonder what your wife would think, tho.
 
HockeyJon said:
But the majority of the market is not buying 1080Tis. Perhaps you are because you care about E-peen and all that, but most people and OEMs are playing in the mid-range market. If Navi is competitive with the 1080 right now, and has relatively good power efficiency, couple that with Freesync and I would now have no reason to buy Nvidia. If I wanted the best in 4K, I would buy Nvidia, but I don't typically want to budget that much for a card. I play in the mid market, like most, so I don't care.
Click to expand...

Nvidias Gaming GPU revenues are at least 5x larger than AMDs. Per Steam AMD has <10% share of the gaming market. So regardless of what you think - the vast majority are buying Nvidia - regardless of if it’s 1080tis or 1050tis.

Navi being competitive with 1080, a product that launched in mid-2016, in 2019 is PATHETIC. And this is the reason that Nvidia has 90% share. RTG has no one to blame for its problems but their own poor technology.

They haven’t been good since the 5000 series
 
HockeyJon said:
You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Like, really, no idea. What R&D spend is involved with labeling a product "Republic of Gamers"? Freesync and Gsync in practical demonstrations have shown to be effectively identical, but one costs significantly less. Gameworks has been running terribly on most Nvidia cards as it is, let alone AMD. I mean could you be any more of a fanboy?
Click to expand...

Baaaahahahahahahahaha - Nvidia provides a massive amount of co-marketing dollars to support the launch of new products. And Nvidia provides tons of engineering assistance to OEMs for building the cards in the 1st place plus continued driver support.
 
Thinking about it, GPP makes a lot more sense in this area because literally all the manufacturers have their gaming laptops under their gaming brand and they all already overwhelmingly use Geforce. Also Kaby Lake-G is just the starting point of Intel's and AMD's more aggressive push into this area. While this might not stop it, but it definitely will slow down adoption by a significant amount.
 
Rathor said:
Nvidia’s GPU business did $8.15billion last year. AMDs entire CPU and GPU business did $3 billion - so let’s pretend RTG did $1.5 billion. That means NVIDIA’s GPU business is more than 5x larger than RTG. That means Nvidia is 5x more of the OEMs business and spends 5x more money on co-marketing and engineering support for the OEMs gaming brands.

What gives AMD the right to free load on this advertising and R&D spend? They can spend their own money to co-market their own brands.

Most AMD fans seem to think they have a right to “free stuff”. AMD sells its GPUs at BREAKEVEN. Nvidia provides the same performance for the same price while making a profit like good companies should. AMD fans think a Nvidia should give AMD free access to Gameworks - even though Nvidia spent $300 million and counting to develop them. AMD fans insist that free sync is better than Gsync - because it’s free. Notice a trend?
Click to expand...

Well first of all your math is completely wrong. Nvidia last year sold 2.7 billion worth of GPUs. Perhaps you haven't noticed Nvidia isn't just a GPU company anymore... they sold 830 million worth of gear to data centers and another 400 million to the auto industry. They also still moved a fair number of SOC, the switch sales didn't hurt there either. This year so far they have increased their sales no doubt... and GPU sales are up for them that is true, of course their data center sales have increased even more. No doubt they are huge no one claimed otherwise.

AMD in 2017 made 5.3 billion (not 3 and was also 25% higher then 2016) Their margin 34% was up a few points over 2016 as well. AMD claims to have sold just under 1 billion worth of GPUs. (so Radeon is 20% of their sales... and yes no one is arguing they sold around 33% of the cards on the market based on sales numbers)

So sure Nvidia is making more money right now not that the companies compete in anything but the GPU market Nvidia last I checked didn't sell x86 and AMD isn't going after the automotive cloud computing markets either.

Regardless it doesn't change the fact that Nvidia has zero claim to another companies brands. No matter how much advertising money they have ponied up. AMD just like Nvidia has over the years giving those AIBs co advertising funds. GPP is completely illegal. It wasn't legal when Intel did it years back... its not more legal now that its Nvidia doing it. Intel set the industry backwards by almost putting AMD out. Forget AMD I don't care if you hate them.... just consider where the industry will be in 2 or 3 years if NV is the only option around. Enjoy your 2080 till 2025 when you may get the 2085. lol (and yes I know Intel is coming... so is winter. I will believe it when I can game on it ;) )
 
Shop_vac said:
I can say without the shadow of a doubt I don't need to purchase an Intel cpu. You don't mean that though.

I think Intel is a great threat to consumers, because they're actively anti-consumer. Not anti-competitive, anti consumer. They don't even see the consumers, it's all dollar signs like the matrix.

But they make good hardware and it's sometimes affordable, so double standards exist.
Click to expand...
And yet they made a whole fuckton of processors that have serious flaws in them, and no near-term replacements that don't sacrifice performance.

I built a rig for my daughter-in-law with an 8-core AMD processor that hums along nicely with the R9-270x, running her embroidery machine. No worries about flaws, and it's more than fast enough to do anything she throws at it.
 
Rathor said:
Sure they can. In fact they just did. The Top guys at the OEMs realize AMD is barely 10% of their business and have gladly decided to give those brands to Nvidia for continued access to co-marketing $$ and engineering help . AMD can spend their own $$ building new brands. No more freeloading off Nvidia.

The people that have a problem with this are generally long term AMD fan boys and people that were already Nvidia haters to begin with. This includes the people at Asus etc... that Kyle is “talking to”. Talk to the CEO not some ananomyous source that’s probably just a low level manager that is an AMD fanboy.
Click to expand...
Well, it ain't gonna last long, nVidia Boi. Y'all are gonna get slapped down so hard, you'll wake up next year in an alley wondering what happened.
 
This type of business practice goes back to the Rockefeller Standard Oil days, when railroads had to pay a penalty for carrying competitors oil. It led to government regulations and the FTC.
The rules for Nvidia GPP would have to be very carefully crafted to somehow remain within the letter of the law. Whether that will be good enough for Trump's Justice Department remains TBD.

All that aside, I admire the guts of Nvidia's leadership. They understand bare knuckle competition, best summarized by Ray Kroc of Mc Donald's fame. His maxim: 'When your competitor is drowning, stick a hose in his mouth.'
 
Rathor said:
Nvidia’s GPU business did $8.15billion last year. AMDs entire CPU and GPU business did $3 billion - so let’s pretend RTG did $1.5 billion. That means NVIDIA’s GPU business is more than 5x larger than RTG. That means Nvidia is 5x more of the OEMs business and spends 5x more money on co-marketing and engineering support for the OEMs gaming brands.

What gives AMD the right to free load on this advertising and R&D spend? They can spend their own money to co-market their own brands.

Most AMD fans seem to think they have a right to “free stuff”. AMD sells its GPUs at BREAKEVEN. Nvidia provides the same performance for the same price while making a profit like good companies should. AMD fans think a Nvidia should give AMD free access to Gameworks - even though Nvidia spent $300 million and counting to develop them. AMD fans insist that free sync is better than Gsync - because it’s free. Notice a trend?
Click to expand...
That's the error in your thinking: AMD isn't "freeloading" on nVidia's business, they sell their chips to the OEMs and AIOs just like nvidia does, and they even give them funding for marketing just like nvidia does.

The game branding by the builders was there before either one of them had any idea today was gonna happen. That branding was created and marketed by the builders themselves, backed by product the gamers wanted to buy, and the provided money divided up in about the same percentages. But the majority of the money put into those campaigns was put in BY THE OEMs/AIOs THEMSELVES, as was all the hard work (especially in nVidia's case, since they don't actually manufacture any of their own video cards).

You can keep blathering on with the nVidia bullet points from your script, but the fact remains that no one "piggybacked" on anyone else's work. Well except what you're spewing in this thread, since it all feel scripted.
 
etudiant said:
All that aside, I admire the guts of Nvidia's leadership. They understand bare knuckle competition, best summarized by Ray Kroc of Mc Donald's fame. His maxim: 'When your competitor is drowning, stick a hose in his mouth.'
Click to expand...
Wow, sociopathic attempted murder.

The Christianity here is astounding.
 
Rathor said:
Baaaahahahahahahahaha - Nvidia provides a massive amount of co-marketing dollars to support the launch of new products. And Nvidia provides tons of engineering assistance to OEMs for building the cards in the 1st place plus continued driver support.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with calling a card a "gaming" card? You're seriously clueless.
 
Rathor said:
Nvidias Gaming GPU revenues are at least 5x larger than AMDs. Per Steam AMD has <10% share of the gaming market. So regardless of what you think - the vast majority are buying Nvidia - regardless of if it’s 1080tis or 1050tis.

Navi being competitive with 1080, a product that launched in mid-2016, in 2019 is PATHETIC. And this is the reason that Nvidia has 90% share. RTG has no one to blame for its problems but their own poor technology.

They haven’t been good since the 5000 series
Click to expand...

So you support anti-competitive business practices due to the current market share position? We're all glad you don't work for a federal regulator.
 
ChadD said:
Not to mention that in most countries outside the US. Coke has been in court more then once and lost. Coke in many countries used to do things like lock supply in on fountain dispensers, and discounted or supplied coolers in exchange for exclusive supply deals. They where sued over it and lost. (well accept in the US... the courts there seem to have a higher tolerance for BS)
Click to expand...

When Pepsi returned to our shores after the fall of Apartheid, the Coca Cola company went and bought every single independent bottling plant they could in order to keep them from penetrating the market. AFAIK it was never tested in our local courts and it's taken twenty years for PepsiCo to gain a foothold.
 
{NG}Fidel said:
A lot of noobie accounts coming out to disagree. Very telling.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the NV bounty program is offering for them to troll Kyle and the [H] forums?

Maybe Kyle could go back to his "old job" shilling for NV and offer to troll himself in order to have NV fund [H] outing their GPP!? /s :ROFLMAO:

Kyle, you've been out doing yourself in keeping us updated and the loons in check regarding NV's vile GPP! You deserve a full stadium's worth of applause and an ice cold beer in a tall frosty mug for your efforts!!!
 
Chupachup said:
I wonder what the NV bounty program is offering for them to troll Kyle and the [H] forums?

Maybe Kyle could go back to his "old job" shilling for NV and offer to troll himself in order to have NV fund [H] outing their GPP!? /s :ROFLMAO:

Kyle, you've been out doing yourself in keeping us updated and the loons in check regarding NV's vile GPP! You deserve a full stadium's worth of applause and an ice cold beer in a tall frosty mug for your efforts!!!
Click to expand...
I will always take the beer. ;)
 
Chupachup said:
I wonder what the NV bounty program is offering for them to troll Kyle and the [H] forums?

Maybe Kyle could go back to his "old job" shilling for NV and offer to troll himself in order to have NV fund [H] outing their GPP!? /s :ROFLMAO:

Kyle, you've been out doing yourself in keeping us updated and the loons in check regarding NV's vile GPP! You deserve a full stadium's worth of applause and an ice cold beer in a tall frosty mug for your efforts!!!
Click to expand...


It's called bringing balance to the force. You guys seemed a little too comfortable with all your logic. Somebody was bound to notice.
 
Shop_vac said:
I don't want to assume anything and you shouldn't either. Not out of interest to parties involved, but just out of the neccesesity of due process. You're apt to be just as wrong as right.
Click to expand...

I assume nothing without justification, logical reasoning and plain common sense. :)
I choose to put my faith in Kyle, his years in the business, his track record and his goal of reporting tech news, compared against a company doing business in today's world, their track record and their goal of making money.

If the GPP isn't real and Kyle knows that, all this serves him nothing and he'll lose a lot of readership.
If the GPP isn't quite what Kyle is reporting, and it's 'not that bad' for consumers, this also gains him nothing but frustrated and lost readership.
If he's being lied to by MULTIPLE companies about the terms and wording of the GPP, well - that just doesn't make sense. Another company (MSI, Dell, HP, ASUS, etc.) is NOT going to lie about a potentially illegal agreement, or because Nvidia 'compensated' them in other ways to provide Kyle a red herring.

On the flip side, why wouldn't a company try something like this? Lawyers go into a situation trying to get you out of it, so if Nvidia asked for wording and phrasing that would cover their ass, and upper management felt the risk (paltry slap on the wrist after 5 years of legal maneuvering) was worth it, why wouldn't they?
That's the question I ask myself in today's world of big business - why wouldn't they? Nvidia has very little to lose, and very much to gain.
Kyle on the flip side, only has everything to lose and almost nothing to gain. (Not even props FROM AMD by breaking the story!?!O!@#)(&!(%*)

I'm not 100% convinced as of yet GPP is worded quite the way it's being portrayed, or ignorant of the fact that it [GPP] couldn't be amended. I would very much like to see the entire paragraph from which 'gaming brands aligned exclusively' came from, but that isn't going to happen for a while.
Nvidia could also be taking the temperature of the room and thinking of changing the terms of the GPP, holding off on having AIBs actually sign, to change phrasing and use terms that better align with current public outcry or updates from lawyers.

There's a lot we do not know, but there's a lot we do....and what is known easily paints a picture that shows Nvidia trying to pull shady shit.
Is it illegal? IMO as reported, yes. But I'm not a lawyer and I'm not painting myself into the corner and assuming one truth.
 
griff30 said:
I'd buy the new Intel NUC with AMD GPU if it wasn't astronomically priced for what it is.
Click to expand...
If you just list out the parts and say "look at how much more expensive it is" it's a terrible deal. But if you say "I need a very powerful computer in the smallest box possible" it might be hard to beat.
 
Shop_vac said:
I can say without the shadow of a doubt I don't need to purchase an Intel cpu. You don't mean that though.

I think Intel is a great threat to consumers, because they're actively anti-consumer. Not anti-competitive, anti consumer. They don't even see the consumers, it's all dollar signs like the matrix.

But they make good hardware and it's sometimes affordable, so double standards exist.
Click to expand...

Don't misunderstand me, I have no sympathy toward Intel, however anything that potentially hurts amd is bad for us as consumers as they are the only direct competitor to both companies in their core products. So it seems pretty simple to me.
 
DF-1 said:
So maybe nvidia should say what those shady details are
Click to expand...

If you already made your mind up, you aren't really interested in seeing it through.

It's called bias confirmation, and half the picture is usually enough.
 
ChadD said:
So lets say your right....

What is it we are hoping for as gamers ? Really

The 1080 is over 2 years old now.... and if your right and Nvidia starts shipping something faster in volume in 4-6 months from now... it will be what only 2.5 years of Pascal.

How long do you think your going to have to use that 2080 before they release a 3080 if AMD decides screw this we can't even sell our chips in performance parts anyway. Lets focus on Radeon Pro, those SSG cards are making us money. And forget consumer cards.... we'll just sell our chips directly to mining companies.

I guess then what we are hoping Intel will come along and just produce gaming cards in house and ignore the AIBs cause they are locked down anyway?

There is no upside for gamers if Nvidia is allowed to pull this crap. Even if you are the biggest Nvidia fanboi in the world you have to see that. Without consumer gaming card competition... Nvidia is going to focus even more money on AI, and refresh their gaming parts every 3 or 4 years if your lucky.
Click to expand...


Some people like no competition. Nvidia will be the GPU you have for the next 7 years like sandybridge but instead Nvidia will throw your drivers in the legacy bin 4 years later and force you to buy a shiny new $1000 upper mid range GPU.
 
Rvenger said:
Some people like no competition. Nvidia will be the GPU you have for the next 7 years like sandybridge but instead Nvidia will throw your drivers in the legacy bin 4 years later and force you to buy a shiny new $1000 upper mid range GPU.
Click to expand...

Because CPUs == GPUs, amirite?
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I got no problem with Intel snapping up a flailing RTG and getting into a bashing contest with Nvidia in the consumer GPU market.
Click to expand...

If Intel got rid of AMD, it would basically lock x86 for itself, just like they wish they did back in the day. Nvidia would have to go make GPUs for ARM systems.

No competition = anything is possible
 
cdr_74_premium said:
If Intel got rid of AMD, it would basically lock x86 for itself, just like they wish they did back in the day. Nvidia would have to go make GPUs for ARM systems.

No competition = anything is possible
Click to expand...

One, that would make them a monopoly. I'm sure they don't want to go down that road again. Remember MS bailing Apple out of near extinction? Two, they can't use x86 w/o AMD64, unless we all wanna go back to 32bit?
 
Shop_vac said:
If you already made your mind up, you aren't really interested in seeing it through.

It's called bias confirmation, and half the picture is usually enough.
Click to expand...

Nope. You, sir, do not get to accuse people of confirmation bias when you abjectly refuse to pull your head of the sand and prefer to go "lalalalala" and ignore the blindingly obvious. You are WELL beyond reasonable skepticism. Rational, logical, thought process would conclude that what Kyle has been saying is very likely true. There is a preponderance of evidence supporting the claims right now. Including a person who has been doing this for over a bloody decade and knows what he is talking about. You are choosing to ignore evidence and pretend that everything is as you'd like to be because doing anything else would be an inconvenience to your agenda and might require you to admit that you could be wrong.

cdr_74_premium said:
If Intel got rid of AMD, it would basically lock x86 for itself, just like they wish they did back in the day. Nvidia would have to go make GPUs for ARM systems.

No competition = anything is possible
Click to expand...

Intel does not want to get rid of AMD, at least not anymore. Intel benefits from AMD existing. Beyond the patents, which the government would not allow them to buy if AMD goes under, it prevents Intel from dealing with monopoly lawsuits. Intel has proven that they have no problem working with AMD. Intel are shady assholes, but they're not idiots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top