[Barron's] Nvidia to Beat FYQ1, But Watch out for AMD, Says Pac Crest

E

EuphoricRage470

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2011
Messages
1,105
After shortages throughout Q2, supply chain conversations indicate that supply of AMD’s Polaris GPUs (RX 480/470/460) in the channel significantly improved last quarter. Despite the supply improvement, desktop graphics card manufacturers noted very little shift in market share to Polaris (100 to 300 basis points) and away from NVIDA in the channel, despite NVIDIA’s dominant market share position (70.1% unit share in the desktop discrete GPU market in 2Q16).
Click to expand...


http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...at-fyq1-but-watch-out-for-amd-says-pac-crest/
 
I like the thought process of that "analyst": NV is doing too well while dumping the OEM segment = AMD is winning because of the oh-so-profitable OEM market.
 
Yeah and lets ignore HPC/automobile/etc market as well :)
I think it is going to be shocking in a good way for Nvidia their Tesla/other market sales of Pascal cards, although that may still need another quarter to be a financial trend-report.

Still, interesting how Apple is still adamant about not using Nvidia cards, I think some of this comes down to not wanting to help Cuda against OpenCL.
Regarding OEM, I think that also needs to be seen as Nvidia has the best true 75W TDP GPU, although I appreciate OEM is more than just that.
However how far along is AMD with their OEM manufacturing with Polaris, taken awhile to release the 480/470/460 and did not gain much of a window if any (depending upon model) against Nvidia.
Amd's advantage is the 20-50W for now (and of course consoles and the latest partial upgrade ones further helping AMD), but comes down to if they have been able to ship any of that in any reasonable numbers.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
If you're at a point as a company where you can ignore entire swaths of market segments and still make money hand over fist then I guess you're doing pretty good...
 
Algrim said:
If you're at a point as a company where you can ignore entire swaths of market segments and still make money hand over fist then I guess you're doing pretty good...
Click to expand...

No, just means that your product line is lacking in places. Time to do better next time. (not basing this on the article as I haven't cracked it open yet.)
 
cageymaru said:
No, just means that your product line is lacking in places. Time to do better next time. (not basing this on the article as I haven't cracked it open yet.)
Click to expand...
I think Nvidia approach is to target what they see as the $Blns market sectors for growth, hence AI-Deep Learning/competitive in cloud-etc/automobiles/etc.
They still are incredibly competitive in dGPUs by just looking at the breadth of their Pascal line-up for retail consumers and HPC-pro (Tesla/Quadro), just that they have put more priority on their low power 'Tegra' (using quotes as the latest Pascal version is beyond traditional sense) rather than low power dGPUs comparable to the recent 20-50W releases from AMD.
To put it into perspective and priority, Nvidia released the P4 Tesla, which is a 75W (GP104) die with 5.5 TFLOPs FP32 in boost form and non-boost can be 50W, while not as groundbreaking the P40 is their highest single FP32 compute card with 12TFLOPs (and also with accelerated Int8 ops) with 24GB memory at 250W.

I know this is probably the right approach for them as it is a strategy followed by other (not necessarily all) very large successful tech companies.
One cannot target every sector with every product at the same time, and Nvidia has managed to hit a lot of high revenue segments already with Pascal.
If I was to be critical it is that I feel they have split the FP16 too much in its use to differentiate the P100 to some of the other Tesla products, not something I am keen on as not all large scale labs have dedicated nodes in this regard and so that causes a bit of a conflict with how usable or 'as ideal' the P40 can be.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
Well nV went above and beyond their estimated projections by a large amount. They crossed 2 billion.....
Click to expand...
Yep not too surprised myself, I cannot see how anyone thinks Nvidia has been lacking from a busines and tech manufacturing side since Pascal/Tegra 'x2' launched.
Says to me they nailed it perfectly on their priorities and what products and markets to target 1st with Pascal/Tegra, and critically that Pascal did ship on time and on a massive scale.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
CSI_PC said:
And to put it into perspective, the gaming side of Nvidia sales grew by 63% compared to last year.....

That is a big number.
Cheers
Click to expand...

It is not only a big number it is also a complete disaster for AMD and Polaris. Revenue share wise AMD is now what 20%? Probably even less.
 
CSI_PC said:
And to put it into perspective, the gaming side of Nvidia sales grew by 63% compared to last year.....

That is a big number.
Cheers
Click to expand...

Is there a source for that? Can't find it in the official statement. I for one is very interested in seeing NV's revenue breakdowns...

Anyway, NV/Intel/Apple has proven beyond doubt relying on mainstream consumers aka penny pinchers instead of high-end where the purse strings are much looser is a shitty business strategy.
 
I think by next year they are going to hit 47 billion or so for their Cap. *with their current momentum of course.
 
Last edited:
We already know that Pascal cards outsell Polaris cards with ~85/15 ration. And this may end up at ~90/10 as more laptops comes out since this is pretty much Pascal only.

The only people not seeing this coming was those that didn't understand the Q2 share numbers.
 
Richthofen said:
It is not only a big number it is also a complete disaster for AMD and Polaris. Revenue share wise AMD is now what 20%? Probably even less.
Click to expand...

I think it funny there were quite some voices saying AMD does it right by catering to the 200$ segment

Making more sales then catering to the high end

Well looks like another winning strategy for AMD
Sigh

Nvidia has a complete line up of high end to low by now (or soon depending on 1050 arrival wherever you live in guess)

While AMD cards can't go beyond a 1060 performance wise, not even at better price
Got my 1060 for 230€
Doesn't matter to me an AMD cost 10 bucks less or so

Man AMD get you're stuff together :bored:


Originally I wanted the 1060 to hold me over until the 1080ti arrives

Problem is I can't hit the 1060 with anything to make it come to a crawl
Great card
Impressions like that stick
 
Palladium@SG said:
Is there a source for that? Can't find it in the official statement. I for one is very interested in seeing NV's revenue breakdowns...

Anyway, NV/Intel/Apple has proven beyond doubt relying on mainstream consumers aka penny pinchers instead of high-end where the purse strings are much looser is a shitty business strategy.
Click to expand...

Those companies actually do rely on mainstream consumers. What they actually realize is that mainstream consumers for frivolous luxury goods, which is essentially all these tech products such as graphics cards for gaming, are not "penny pinchers."

It's certain segments of the tech crowd that treat these items like they are necessities and then argue over single percentage differences in avg fps numbers (or some other low end user impact benchmark number) on a screen to the dollar ratio like that is some sort of extreme important life altering decision.

There is also still some lack of understanding that the demographics has changed. The "mainstream" market for graphics cards has moved up compared to 10 years ago. It isn't just Nvidia's products, how much interest was there in Tonga over Hawaii (380 vs 390)?
 
Richthofen said:
It is not only a big number it is also a complete disaster for AMD and Polaris. Revenue share wise AMD is now what 20%? Probably even less.
Click to expand...

Much less, try 10% or below. Looking on Steam and DX12 numbers (Because Vulkan mixes 470 and 480 together).

Now this is a very rough example.

Lets set some fixed values for cards for the ease of example.
GTX 1080 700$ 0.67% = 469$
GTX 1070 400$ 1.11% = 444$
GTX 1060 225$ 0.73% = 164$ (Used half of each 1060)
RX 480 250$ 0.24% = 60$
RX 470 200$ 0.07% = 14$
RX 460 100$ 0,04% = 4$

This obviously doesn't include the 1050 series yet. And not much laptops yet.

But you still end up roughly with a sales revenue of 1077$ for Nvidia and 78$ for AMD. Or Nvidia cards sell for 13.8$ each time AMD cards sell for 1$. Or a 7.25% revenue for AMD.
 
Last edited:
Nvidia stock up 24% currently with a new market cap of 42.6B$.
 
Shintai said:
Nvidia stock up 24% currently with a new market cap of 42.6B$.
Click to expand...


That is only with the current pick up with AI/data centers, we should see AI/data center needs take more and grow faster in the near future, so 42.6 might actually be a low number!
 
Last edited:
limitedaccess said:
Those companies actually do rely on mainstream consumers. What they actually realize is that mainstream consumers for frivolous luxury goods, which is essentially all these tech products such as graphics cards for gaming, are not "penny pinchers."

It's certain segments of the tech crowd that treat these items like they are necessities and then argue over single percentage differences in avg fps numbers (or some other low end user impact benchmark number) on a screen to the dollar ratio like that is some sort of extreme important life altering decision.

There is also still some lack of understanding that the demographics has changed. The "mainstream" market for graphics cards has moved up compared to 10 years ago. It isn't just Nvidia's products, how much interest was there in Tonga over Hawaii (380 vs 390)?
Click to expand...

I like how the AMD diehards at AT argue the flying shit about how the oh-so-overpriced 1070 over the 480 is when that extra $100 is like a day or two worth of my wages for a computer part that I can use for like 730 days. It's so dumb beyond belief, and I'm not even getting to the part where the 1070 is on the way where it has no competition for a year.
 
Peter2k said:
I think it funny there were quite some voices saying AMD does it right by catering to the 200$ segment
Click to expand...
That still remains to be seen as it's a different market focus. It's the APUs that AMD is banking on and it seems likely they are after more than just gaming. That DTV board they had and Raja in India demoing VR cinema suggests they are eyeing entertainment in addition to gaming. Cable boxes with VR playback capability and some lite gaming along the lines of the consoles. The big APUs also seem likely to have some interesting characteristics. Analysts seem to be expecting growth from both companies so there are likely different markets in play. If the news were that bad for AMD I'd expect the stock to be taking a hit as opposed to up 5%. Not to mention if they start dumping chips into an emerging market to power VR their share likely skyrockets. India and China have quite a few people that could go for VR and would likely be price sensitive.

Palladium@SG said:
I like how the AMD diehards at AT argue the flying shit about how the oh-so-overpriced 1070 over the 480 is when that extra $100 is like a day or two worth of my wages for a computer part that I can use for like 730 days. It's so dumb beyond belief, and I'm not even getting to the part where the 1070 is on the way where it has no competition for a year.
Click to expand...
There is an argument there if you consider Nvidia's ~80% marketshare a year ago doesn't track with a 60% increase which would put them at 128% of the market if the size remained the same. A lot of that revenue is coming from jacking up the prices from a year ago along with the total market likely increasing a bit from that quarter.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
There is an argument there if you consider Nvidia's ~80% marketshare a year ago doesn't track with a 60% increase which would put them at 128% of the market if the size remained the same. A lot of that revenue is coming from jacking up the prices from a year ago along with the total market likely increasing a bit from that quarter.
Click to expand...

No, it comes from people moving up in SKUs. What does Intel keep reporting? That's right, record K SKU sales quarter after quarter. The GTX 970 was another hint.

And whats the worst selling cards from AMD and Nvidia? Yep, 460 and 1050.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
That still remains to be seen as it's a different market focus. It's the APUs that AMD is banking on and it seems likely they are after more than just gaming. That DTV board they had and Raja in India demoing VR cinema suggests they are eyeing entertainment in addition to gaming. Cable boxes with VR playback capability and some lite gaming along the lines of the consoles. The big APUs also seem likely to have some interesting characteristics. Analysts seem to be expecting growth from both companies so there are likely different markets in play. If the news were that bad for AMD I'd expect the stock to be taking a hit as opposed to up 5%. Not to mention if they start dumping chips into an emerging market to power VR their share likely skyrockets. India and China have quite a few people that could go for VR and would likely be price sensitive.
Click to expand...

That isn't going to happen till mid next year, also we don't know how much VR is going to "push" APU sales yet. Too earlier to see that being a factor. People that are looking into VR even mid next near most likely will have to pay a good deal of money to get a system that will be capable of running VR.


There is an argument there if you consider Nvidia's ~80% marketshare a year ago doesn't track with a 60% increase which would put them at 128% of the market if the size remained the same. A lot of that revenue is coming from jacking up the prices from a year ago along with the total market likely increasing a bit from that quarter.
Click to expand...

Its not from marketshare, its from people who are willing to buy higher tier cards. We have already seen the increases of performance segment sales from a year ago, that trend is not going to change.

Total Market Volume has remained year to year around the same Yes this quarter and next quarter the numbers are higher for total sales due to seasonal changes but not over all buyers on a year to year basis. So nV has been able to increase margins, by getting consumers to upgrade to higher end products. We can figure out this easily by looking at nV's MSRP's over the past few years and see nV has only increased prices by a limited amount which covers the added expense of dropping down nodes. The ONLY card that is priced out of league of the regular market pressures is the Titan X.

This is why the entire TAM that AMD has been addressing, which I stated the moment they started talking about, was just BS. AMD must have know this was happening, if we knew about it a year ago, and they didn't? No doesn't happen that way.

So end results, for what ever reason AMD couldn't get into the higher tier segments, was their undoing for this generation of graphics cards. The same issue (to a lessor degree since they were kinda about to get midrange and low end out just before nV) they had with the release of last gen Maxwell 2.

These problems or in this case, the capabilities of nV (what ever they may be) shows AMD is not in a position to take the fight to nV, unless nV fumbles the ball (for now) and most likely reason is nV's deep pockets (comparatively).
 
Last edited:
But but... Charlie has been pronosticating Nvidia's demise for years. Its only a matter of time before nVidia collapses :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Shintai said:
And whats the worst selling cards from AMD and Nvidia? Yep, 460 and 1050.
Click to expand...
Which are in direct competition with APUs and why Intel is still a dominant share of the graphics market.

razor1 said:
That isn't going to happen till mid next year, also we don't know how much VR is going to "push" APU sales yet. Too earlier to see that being a factor. People that are looking into VR even mid next near most likely will have to pay a good deal of money to get a system that will be capable of running VR.
Click to expand...
There is already Samsung VR and all the other affordable experiences tailored to video playback as opposed to gaming. Most of those are running off mobile devices and an APU isn't far from that. If sitting in the living room hooked up to a TV an APU makes sense to converge a bunch of devices(PC, gaming, streaming, assistant, interactive TV). Not that different from the current console market, but likely won't require as much performance. They could very well be home assistants or PCs. I'd agree that is likely a little ways off as regulatory hurdles are still being addressed, but I could see it taking off next year.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4022484-amd-coming-technology-war-nvidia

Yeah it's an investor piece, but backs what I've been arguing.
 
its seekingalpha, I can show you 10 articles from both pro nV and AMD that are totally BS (maybe even a 100 lol that is how bad that site is). The people that write for seeking alpha (free articles) are no better then people like Charlie, Adorned, etc, they really don't know what they are talking about. Its not really about the price, its what you get for that price, and if today we spend 1k or 2k for VR systems, and these people aren't happy with what they are getting, how do we expect lower cost systems to deliver even the same type of experience just a half year from now? What did I say about AMD TAM VR? Too earlier? Does it seem that way now? And that was almost 2 Q's ago, It looks worse, looks to be more like a year out from now.......

I can take one line form that article, the marketsahre, they are reporting last Q's marketshare, and they didn't even explain how that happened. And they are trying to base an entire article as that point is one of the main points of concerns of the article.......

We have no CLUE what the VR pick up rate is because even us as enthusiasts, here on this very forum, who actually spend money on hardware, that have tried VR many of us think there are teething problems still even with hardware that is more then capable of doing VR.

What would you weight to your thoughts? Would you take the word of people that actually spend money and lots of it for their gaming and entertainments needs, vs a guy that writes an article based on old data?
 
Last edited:
I know those sites are mostly bogus, but there is some actual anecdotal evidence out there. I'm talking about movie VR, not necessarily gaming. Situations with a 360 degree FoV and rotate based on head tracking. Getting movies and sports going on VR is a significantly lower bar that we will likely start to see roll out in the near future. Gaming and current development I'd agree need some work yet. Although consoles seem to be making some good progress and are likely further along than anything on PC currently. Regardless if companies wish for a big VR push prior to next years holiday season, the middle of next year makes sense to start rolling out hardware.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
I know those sites are mostly bogus, but there is some actual anecdotal evidence out there. I'm talking about movie VR, not necessarily gaming. Situations with a 360 degree FoV and rotate based on head tracking. Getting movies and sports going on VR is a significantly lower bar that we will likely start to see roll out in the near future. Gaming and current development I'd agree need some work yet. Although consoles seem to be making some good progress and are likely further along than anything on PC currently. Regardless if companies wish for a big VR push prior to next years holiday season, the middle of next year makes sense to start rolling out hardware.
Click to expand...

OK lets talk about that, how do you see nV not being able to do the same push as AMD? What is going to be the factor/s that will give AMD an advantage? I don't see anything that AMD can do, that nV can't.... Much to the point, nV has a commanding lead in VR as it is right now......

This is kinda to the point where AMD stated nV wasn't focused on VR yet they came out and blitzed them.....

APU's aren't going to drive this at first, as they really never will, especially for people who are price sensitive, because they will need to buy an entire computer system, possibly a secondary computer system for this, not their main computer because they have other needs for that.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
I know those sites are mostly bogus, but there is some actual anecdotal evidence out there. I'm talking about movie VR, not necessarily gaming. Situations with a 360 degree FoV and rotate based on head tracking. Getting movies and sports going on VR is a significantly lower bar that we will likely start to see roll out in the near future. Gaming and current development I'd agree need some work yet. Although consoles seem to be making some good progress and are likely further along than anything on PC currently. Regardless if companies wish for a big VR push prior to next years holiday season, the middle of next year makes sense to start rolling out hardware.
Click to expand...

And where do the APU come into this again? Besides wishful dreaming that is. You can pretty much get a 5$ SoC to do VR movies. And one that can actually run with barely using any power.
 
Algrim said:
If you're at a point as a company where you can ignore entire swaths of market segments and still make money hand over fist then I guess you're doing pretty good...
Click to expand...

Unlike AMD, who has doubled down on ignoring entire swaths of market segments and can't turn a profit
 
razor1 said:
OK lets talk about that, how do you see nV not being able to do the same push as AMD? What is going to be the factor/s that will give AMD an advantage? I don't see anything that AMD can do, that nV can't.... Much to the point, nV has a commanding lead in VR as it is right now......

This is kinda to the point where AMD stated nV wasn't focused on VR yet they came out and blitzed them.....
Click to expand...
At the moment I'd say the SoC designs are a definite advantage. It's the very reason AMD owns the console market. That's a huge advantage in cost and form factor for a mass market.

VR as you've pointed out still has some teething problems and until we start seeing DX12/Vulkan titles from AAA studios developed with VR in mind on PC there isn't much to go off of but marketing bullet points. Beyond that AMD is driving ~75% (Link) of the VR gaming headsets, probably a bit more with PC numbers. I'm sure they'll take an even larger chunk when Scorpio releases. That in my mind is a far more commanding lead than <25% and it's likely just a matter of time before those titles start moving towards PC. That was Microsoft's goal, so when that happens we can get a feel for how each performs.

Shintai said:
And where do the APU come into this again? Besides wishful dreaming that is. You can pretty much get a 5$ SoC to do VR movies. And one that can actually run with barely using any power.
Click to expand...
You'll just have to check stuff going before congress and the FCC to figure it out. Then apply some basic business knowledge and common sense. I have a good source at a Fortune 50 company I could check with on this, but he's guaranteed to be NDA'd on this issue. Regardless it makes a ton of business sense and parts of it are public.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
You'll just have to check stuff going before congress and the FCC to figure it out. Then apply some basic business knowledge and common sense. I have a good source at a Fortune 50 company I could check with on this, but he's guaranteed to be NDA'd on this issue. Regardless it makes a ton of business sense and parts of it are public.
Click to expand...

WTF does this even mean. Can we just stick with facts instead of "my dad told me that a guy he knows..." crap?
 
Anarchist4000 said:
You'll just have to check stuff going before congress and the FCC to figure it out. Then apply some basic business knowledge and common sense. I have a good source at a Fortune 50 company I could check with on this, but he's guaranteed to be NDA'd on this issue. Regardless it makes a ton of business sense and parts of it are public.
Click to expand...

So more fairy tales and unicorns. How long are you going to try and pretend the reality isn't what it is?
 
Shintai said:
So more fairy tales and unicorns. How long are you going to try and pretend the reality isn't what it is?
Click to expand...
You have some narrative that doesn't jive with or something? It's public record and there are plenty of news articles about it.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...be-replaced-set-top-box-reform-could-be-dead/

PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD ASSEMBLY(VIDEO GRAPHICCARD)MAGNUM FPGAPROTOTYPE BOARD FOR DTV WITH 1XKING P/N:102B25432-00 (FOC)
Click to expand...
https://www.zauba.com/import-printe...ode-84733030/fp-canada/ip-INHYD4-hs-code.html

I could go quote WSJ and probably every other mainstream media outlet if needed. I'm sure it's just a fluke tech and communication companies are dumping cash lobbying the congress/president at the same time at least AMD is making a product that would seemingly be related.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
You have some narrative that doesn't jive with or something? It's public record and there are plenty of news articles about it.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...be-replaced-set-top-box-reform-could-be-dead/


https://www.zauba.com/import-printe...ode-84733030/fp-canada/ip-INHYD4-hs-code.html

I could go quote WSJ and probably every other mainstream media outlet if needed. I'm sure it's just a fluke tech and communication companies are dumping cash lobbying the congress/president at the same time at least AMD is making a product that would seemingly be related.
Click to expand...

Again, how is this related to AMD and their APUs? What can they do everyone else cant? Besides just being another drop in the huge ocean.

You do know that pretty much all sold TVs can already do this? Just to mention one blatant example that everyone and their mother should know about.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top