Time for another manufacturer to jump into graphics cards?

Nukester

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
1,429
Would you purchase a card from a new manufacturer? Not ATI/AMD or NVidia for your gaming card? I think it’s time for a new “3dfx” to pop into the game. I’m fed up with the prices, and supply chain. We need more competition. It’s the only way to fix this f’in problem brought about from cryptoassholes.
 
I mean, there was a time that there were many options. I particularly liked my Rendition card. I remember how good everything looked with it over my ATI card. I think Tseng, S3 and others were in the game. The market for an affordable mid ranged card that is AVAILABLE would be huge. Make it miner unfriendly somehow???
 
Check this list out! Courtesy of Wikipedia, check out the page for more info (support Wikipedia)

Defunct graphics chip makers
These companies designed graphics chips and cards.

 
Would you purchase a card from a new manufacturer? Not ATI/AMD or NVidia for your gaming card? I think it’s time for a new “3dfx” to pop into the game. I’m fed up with the prices, and supply chain. We need more competition. It’s the only way to fix this f’in problem brought about from cryptoassholes.

Intel is joining it. But don´t expect anything to change as long as some retailers do as they do. In Europe and Asia you can get cards st close to MSRP, specially if you are willing to backorder for a few days.

But as long as mining is profitable and you live in a country where resellers are short sighted because their customer base allows it. Then it doesn't matter how many manufactors you got. And the fewer you got, the higher price you may end up paying in the end due to more scattered R&D and higher costs overall or simply lower quality and performing products. More isn't always better.

The entire business concept of the semiconductor industry is there can be only one due to forever rising costs, accelerated if volume isn't offsetting it. If Intel didn´t already do IGPs they can offset costs on and gain benefits from. I doubt they would join either. AMD is out of graphics for the same reason.
 
Last edited:
Nvidia has to open the door for AMD cards simple as that bring back XFX it's the only way.
 
no...takes a long time to build brand trust and loyalty...same thing with any high end product...would you buy an OLED from someone other then the usual suspects of LG, Sony, Samsung, Panasonic etc?
 
I don't think you are going to see competitive 3rd party any time soon for a number of reasons:

1. Patents
Between AMD and Nvidia, there are so many patents covering just about every idea for faster graphics currently in use or planned. It would be a huge undertaking to design around all their patents, or hugely expensive to licence all the needed patents.

2. cost to have a competitive product
Very view of these "gamers" who want a 3rd party to come in to hopefully lower the prices they pay want to either a. Buy a lower performing product b. Pay the current higher asking prices for anything.
Which means you have to figure out how to come out with a product as good or better than the well established 2 main players at a significantly lower price. That is just not going to happen.
AMD spends a large amount of money on each new video card line, but their cards still rarely fully match up to the equivalent Nvidia card, so they are forced into unprofitable price cuts. Really mining is what is saving their rear ends
Intel which has the world's best fabs and process technology decided it wasn't worth playing in the mid range and up graphics & so stick with low end of their own & AMD for the lower middle end & nothing on the high end, except dedicated compute cards.

3. The loudest voices demanding more supply really just want to spend the least money
When profits & potential profits rise, then existing suppliers & new ventures are more interested in taking risks & making more supply.
However if all people want to do is see the market flooded with supply to wipe out profits & prices so they can get a better deal, it's not going to help increase supply or innovation from new parties as the entire semiconductor industry already learned their lessons from the race to the bottom on prices that saw many go under. The memory industry for example learned the hard way that if you expand capacity to fast & too much all it does is bankrupt everyone, so now they are very conservative in making new capacity & would rather have a steady stream of orders at good prices with good margins at near 100% capacity, than make a wild gamble on more production.

In short, Nvidia will stay King for a long time. AMD needs the miners to help them stay in the game as the "gamers" are usually talking a great game, but then looking for a discount on an Nvidia card because they are faster.
If AMD can make a breakthrough in performance right about the same time Nvidia hits a point of diminishing returns, then you might get some interesting competition / prices / products.
 
Definitely would consider it. It's always better to have more competition. We kinda are where we are because lack of it. Intel has had the best CPUs for a long time and the prices haven't changed. Same with nvidia in the GPU space. That's why I want AMD to stick around. Without them things would be even worse.
 
I don't think you are going to see competitive 3rd party any time soon for a number of reasons:

1. Patents
Between AMD and Nvidia, there are so many patents covering just about every idea for faster graphics currently in use or planned. It would be a huge undertaking to design around all their patents, or hugely expensive to licence all the needed patents.

2. cost to have a competitive product
Very view of these "gamers" who want a 3rd party to come in to hopefully lower the prices they pay want to either a. Buy a lower performing product b. Pay the current higher asking prices for anything.
Which means you have to figure out how to come out with a product as good or better than the well established 2 main players at a significantly lower price. That is just not going to happen.
AMD spends a large amount of money on each new video card line, but their cards still rarely fully match up to the equivalent Nvidia card, so they are forced into unprofitable price cuts. Really mining is what is saving their rear ends
Intel which has the world's best fabs and process technology decided it wasn't worth playing in the mid range and up graphics & so stick with low end of their own & AMD for the lower middle end & nothing on the high end, except dedicated compute cards.

3. The loudest voices demanding more supply really just want to spend the least money
When profits & potential profits rise, then existing suppliers & new ventures are more interested in taking risks & making more supply.
However if all people want to do is see the market flooded with supply to wipe out profits & prices so they can get a better deal, it's not going to help increase supply or innovation from new parties as the entire semiconductor industry already learned their lessons from the race to the bottom on prices that saw many go under. The memory industry for example learned the hard way that if you expand capacity to fast & too much all it does is bankrupt everyone, so now they are very conservative in making new capacity & would rather have a steady stream of orders at good prices with good margins at near 100% capacity, than make a wild gamble on more production.

In short, Nvidia will stay King for a long time. AMD needs the miners to help them stay in the game as the "gamers" are usually talking a great game, but then looking for a discount on an Nvidia card because they are faster.
If AMD can make a breakthrough in performance right about the same time Nvidia hits a point of diminishing returns, then you might get some interesting competition / prices / products.

There are some very good points here about Patents. Between Intel, Microsoft, Apple, AMD and nVidia, I don't think there is much left to develop upon! That alone puts the idea 6 feet under. Thanks.
 
Definitely would consider it. It's always better to have more competition. We kinda are where we are because lack of it. Intel has had the best CPUs for a long time and the prices haven't changed. Same with nvidia in the GPU space. That's why I want AMD to stick around. Without them things would be even worse.

We never had cheaper CPUs than now for example. And I consider GPUs still to be cheap compared to what they offer.

I think you confuse the business with someone making static products at static demand and costs. All the countless CPU, GPU, memory and what not makers didn't go out of business because it was too profitable to sell and how cheap the R&D was.

Competition sounds nice on paper until reality is you would have several bad instead of a few good. If your field can only support food for 5 people, then it doesn't help if you try to fit in 10. They all simply die.

To compete against Nvidia in graphics you would need at least a billion in yearly R&D and several years. And the IC design alone after R&D of your chip would be 100M+ on a node. Then next you have to sell enough as well, since as they say, the first chip cost billions.
 
Last edited:
There are some very good points here about Patents. Between Intel, Microsoft, Apple, AMD and nVidia, I don't think there is much left to develop upon! That alone puts the idea 6 feet under. Thanks.

Patents is the least of the worries to compete in CPU or GPU. The massive black hole that drains the money is the biggest issue. That´s why we only have ~2 instruction sets left in CPUs and ~1.1 GPU makers left.

It´s simply too costly to even try compete against ARM, Intel and Nvidia.
 
Nvidia has to open the door for AMD cards simple as that bring back XFX it's the only way.

XFX doesn’t make GPUs or memory chips which is where you would need more supply to make a difference. bringing them back won’t do anything.
 
We never had cheaper CPUs than now for example. And I consider GPUs still to be cheap compared to what they offer.

I think you confuse the business with someone making static products at static demand and costs. All the countless CPU, GPU, memory and what not makers didn't go out of business because it was too profitable to sell and how cheap the R&D was.

Competition sounds nice on paper until reality is you would have several bad instead of a few good. If your field can only support food for 5 people, then it doesn't help if you try to fit in 10. They all simply die.

To compete against Nvidia in graphics you would need at least a billion in yearly R&D and several years. And the IC design alone after R&D of your chip would be 100M+ on a node. Then next you have to sell enough as well, since as they say, the first chip cost billions.

I'm sorry I don't agree. In the type of economy we have competition is better, period. If AMD goes out of business and nvidia jacks prices up another 20% we as consumers will have no recourse. That is a shitty situation.
 
I'm sorry I don't agree. In the type of economy we have competition is better, period. If AMD goes out of business and nvidia jacks prices up another 20% we as consumers will have no recourse. That is a shitty situation.

If prices go up, people don't buy. They are not selling life essentials. You can ask Apple why they had to cut iPhone X production in half.

Again, please show me the business plan of a valid competition in these segments with ever increasing costs for R&D and manufacturing. If you cant, then its all just wishful dreams of an ideology that you don't want to pay for.

If someone would sponsor 10B$ a year I am sure we could have 10 good GPU makers. Problem is just the market isn't that big so you need corporate welfare. If the same 10 was to work within the current market, then you don't have to worry about competition. Because you wouldn´t have to buy a new GPU the next decade.

Nvidia is spending around 2B$ a year now on R&D alone. That's the bar. How many 2B$ R&D companies can you field in the market?

And remember Intel is entering the segment for discrete graphics.
 
Last edited:
doesnt intel have something in the works already "unknown application" but... it wouldnt be hard to imagine them beeing competative if they did, but then again they are like nvidia in price. but hey amd are kinda shitty with their vega cards also, it was stupid to go with HBM ram that is too much expensive for amd to price better. Ppl shouldnt use facebook or google either yet they do, or honestly none of the popular social media apps.
 
, it was stupid to go with HBM ram that is too much expensive for amd to price better..

Actually the HBM memory on the Vega series is what actually saved AMD's rear end as it let cards that were mid range for gaming, be at the top of the pack for certain mining applications & enabled AMD & their partners to basically sell everything they could make at full price or more.
 
you bitch that supply is low and your tired of prices.

if a new card comes along its only a matter of time b4 crypto finds a way to mine on that card.

what you fail to understand IMO is as soon as miners find they can make more $$ by using XYZ hardware.... they will. the cycle repeats.
 
Actually the HBM memory on the Vega series is what actually saved AMD's rear end as it let cards that were mid range for gaming, be at the top of the pack for certain mining applications & enabled AMD & their partners to basically sell everything they could make at full price or more.
ok ty.
 
If prices go up, people don't buy. They are not selling life essentials. You can ask Apple why they had to cut iPhone X production in half.

Again, please show me the business plan of a valid competition in these segments with ever increasing costs for R&D and manufacturing. If you cant, then its all just wishful dreams of an ideology that you don't want to pay for.

If someone would sponsor 10B$ a year I am sure we could have 10 good GPU makers. Problem is just the market isn't that big so you need corporate welfare. If the same 10 was to work within the current market, then you don't have to worry about competition. Because you wouldn´t have to buy a new GPU the next decade.

Nvidia is spending around 2B$ a year now on R&D alone. That's the bar. How many 2B$ R&D companies can you field in the market?

And remember Intel is entering the segment for discrete graphics.


They don't buy? If I'm making a PC and I want to buy a GPU and nvidia is the only manufacturer, I don't have a choice. I don't need to show you a business plan or anything like it. Also who said we needed 10 different ones? I just said more competition is better, period. If you think monopolies are good for consumers, good on you but again like I said before I disagree completely with that.
 
I wouldn't count Intel out. They've fumbled graphics to date, but they have enough resources that they could come roaring out if they just get a few key people in some key positions with the right resources. All the ingredients are there.

Same thing with Imagination Technologies. They make a lot of graphics. Now, it's mostly with low power envelope applications, but with the recent loss of Apple as a customer, they may start to look to other avenues, and a high power mobile chip wouldn't be a bad low end integrated PC solution, and it probably wouldn't take much for them to scale up past that if they put some emphasis on developing the driver.

I'd say arguably that Apple is decently ahead of both of these choices already, but Apple only does for Apple.
 
Intel is in the position in which they have to enter the GPU market. Or at least the GPGPU market. The writing is on the wall.

nVidia is going to eat their lunch in deep learning, AI, and autonomous vehicles if they do nothing about it.

And that’s to say nothing about what is happening with ARM.
 
Last edited:
I was a big fan of Matrox back in the day. Also Palm webOS, Pebble watches, and Saab cars. ...definitely don't listen to me. :)
 
Rumor is that intel is going to enter the game, but i highly doubt it will be at the same high level as NV or AMD. Im thinking decent performing APUs like what AMD just released.

I would like to see so hardcore GPUs come from them to compete with NV to help drive their prices down.
 
Rumor is that intel is going to enter the game, but i highly doubt it will be at the same high level as NV or AMD. Im thinking decent performing APUs like what AMD just released.

I would like to see so hardcore GPUs come from them to compete with NV to help drive their prices down.

They are going discrete GPUs, so lightyears from APU level even if its just 1050-1060 performance.
 
Intel does have their Xeon Phi stuff, which obviously isn't GPU, but obviously they've built out the capability for very large chips and parallelism. Isn't their latest on-chip graphics stuff pretty competitive in terms of perf/watt and perf/die area?
 
Interestingly, Xeon Phi is the result of Knights Landing which is what Larrabee turned into. (y)
 
Let's face it, this isn't going to happen. Even if it did the card would probably be good at mining or someone would make a special coin for it. They would be out of stock and overpriced just like everything else.
 
I'd buy another Matrox card again. They were cool for like an hour once....

I liked Matrox cards as well (I had/have a G400 Max, a G450, and a Parhelia 256). They were great for 2D, but Matrox never had anything that could compete with their peers of the time in 3D gaming. Plus, their cards always carried a premium price. They were wise to get out of the market--I doubt we'll ever see them back in it again.
 
They are going discrete GPUs, so lightyears from APU level even if its just 1050-1060 performance.
Thats really good news then. But i hope they get into the enthusiast market. Someone needs to reel in Nvidia and their prices (and im team green all day) because AMD just doesnt have what it takes to compete with NV flagship cards.
 
I liked Matrox cards as well (I had/have a G400 Max, a G450, and a Parhelia 256). They were great for 2D, but Matrox never had anything that could compete with their peers of the time in 3D gaming. Plus, their cards always carried a premium price. They were wise to get out of the market--I doubt we'll ever see them back in it again.

Right, it's a pain to make your own graphics chip. You have to spend real money on optimizing, and also fixing various bugs application and game makers will inevitably leave in their code.

And keeping up withe the joneses is hard. Just ask AMD when it's like keeping anywhere near Nvidia?

Another graphics card maker will not fix the supply issues we're seeing. Each GPU uses the exact same components, and GDDR is something the industry is very short on now.

I would embrace Intel if thy made a solid effort, but I'm not chomping at the bit to assist them.
 
Check this list out! Courtesy of Wikipedia, check out the page for more info (support Wikipedia)

Defunct graphics chip makers
These companies designed graphics chips and cards.


That list is missing:

Trident. Blade 3D, anyone?

https://www.anandtech.com/show/253

Cirrus Logic Laguna.

The companies still exist, but they stopped making graphics cards. Because making a 3D card is fucking hard.
 
Personally I'd just love to see Intel give RTG a $5 billion R&D infusion and allow them to Fab their chips on their superior process.
It would be a win for us, and a win for Intel since I believe we are going to see more of their using AMD IP on their high end core laptop/SFF chips.
 
Thats really good news then. But i hope they get into the enthusiast market. Someone needs to reel in Nvidia and their prices (and im team green all day) because AMD just doesnt have what it takes to compete with NV flagship cards.

You wont get cheaper prices. Prices are not dependent on "competition" due to their dynamic nature. Same goes for memory and mining limitations to volume.
 
You wont get cheaper prices. Prices are not dependent on "competition" due to their dynamic nature. Same goes for memory and mining limitations to volume.
i though the massive increase in memory prices where tied directly to shortened supply due to samsung and apple gobbling up all the ram chips?
 
i though the massive increase in memory prices where tied directly to shortened supply due to samsung and apple gobbling up all the ram chips?

Not entirely. It is true that two of the most profitable memories to produce is LPDDR for phones/laptops and DDR for servers.

The problem is simply that memory capability expansion is behind the curve due to unforeseen logistics in the chains. Phones are moving from core wars to memory wars. SKL-SP increased memory demands drastically and lastly mining and renewed PC gaming put GDDR memory under unexpected pressure as well.

Even if you build a new memory fab today, it will take years to enter production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 50Cal
like this
Back
Top