So what if AMD wins mid range? The two architectures are pretty close.
Nvidia has a quite competitive architecture, probably a shade better.
AMD: Sea Islands R1100 (8*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread
Blazkowicz
Legend
About Homeles's point on "microstutter", see AMD's annoucement that they fixed their driver. It was a deep and longstanding issue, with Dave Baumann apparently being credited.
nvidia is a teeny bit more power efficient (yet not enough to say something like "the writing is on the wall")
I feel AMD needs to be well perceived about their software support, for compute and non-Windows.
I wait&see, maybe Jaguar will "redeem" it. Their first GCN APU, usable in tablets, low end 15" and 17" laptops, maybe sparkling a netbook rennaissance.
nvidia is a teeny bit more power efficient (yet not enough to say something like "the writing is on the wall")
I feel AMD needs to be well perceived about their software support, for compute and non-Windows.
I wait&see, maybe Jaguar will "redeem" it. Their first GCN APU, usable in tablets, low end 15" and 17" laptops, maybe sparkling a netbook rennaissance.
And if you add the compute numbers on top, then factor in the 6 month delay until Nvidia had the cards available? Is that still a shade better?
It's quite ridiculous for anyone from Nvidia to be smug about anything tbh.
A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y
Veteran
Yeah I remember running the numbers on it. Nvidia has made a profit of about $10m a quarter on average for the past 5 years. Great stuff, really raking in the dough.
I see your "confirmation bias" now seems to extend to financial numbers.
And if you want to play that game please tell us how AMD did over those same 5 years?
Now back to reality Nvidia's financial numbers are available on Yahoo http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=NVDA+Income+Statement&annual and Nvidia's own website http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=116466&p=irol-IRHome
Nvidia's FY2012 that ended Jan 28,2012 Nvidia made $581,090,000 in net profit or $145,272,500 per quarter.
The latest quarter just ended Oct 31, 2012 Nvidia had a profit of $209,100,000.
So yes Nvidia is rolling in the dough.
7970 launched in Jan. 680 launched in ~March. For a 3 year design cycle, 2 months is nothing. And they came out a bit ahead.
NV won this round.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
Few points for you.
1. Telling people who have been hear far longer then you what beyond3d is about
2. NV makes very little Net profit from the consumer space, this is a very well discussed topic on beyond3d you would do well to review some of that discussion. Your justifications for financial positions are grossly inaccurate.
3. No one here has pained NV as the loser here, that's your own bias right there.
4. The quality of the quoted post is far from B3D "standard".
boxleitnerb
Regular
"NV makes very little Net profit from the consumer space"
Really? The GPU business made 193M operating income in this quarter which is hardly "very little". It amounts to 80% of their total operating income.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581012000060/nvda2013q310q.htm
Really? The GPU business made 193M operating income in this quarter which is hardly "very little". It amounts to 80% of their total operating income.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581012000060/nvda2013q310q.htm
Am I wrong? And you have a date as to how long I've lurked here? Didn't think so.Few points for you.
1. Telling people who have been hear far longer then you what beyond3d is about
This absurd claim has already been addressed in the post above me.
That was very obviously the implication of jimbo's post. Anyone else want to back me up here?
So is yours. Baseless, unevidenced claims such as yours? Blatantly false ones at that.
How about you keep your disapproval of me locked up at the AnandTech forums? You are a heck of a masochist.
Why does it have to be flat out better in terms of efficiency?
Nvidia is in the enviable position to be able to outgun its competitor in terms of sales and design wins when they're just competitive in terms of efficiency. With Fermi, that wasn't often not the case. With Kepler, they are obviously competitive enough so that their brand name, better driver reputation and other differentiating features pull them over the threshold to make customers and laptop partners prefer them.
That's all that matters doesn't it?
Don't you think it's a bit troublesome that with much more ALUs and bandwidth, AMD barely manage to outgun their competitor? And only 6 months later at that, when all opinions have long been formed and settled? I consider this generation of AMD a triumph of silicon execution and architecture, but a disaster in terms of product positioning, marketing, and driver readiness. They has the HW goods to take the crown across the board and they blew it.
What exactly matters to you?
First they got the performance crown with a much cheaper solution, only 2 months later, and they got the laptop design wins with a decent enough low end part (yay for Optimus overcoming AMD HW superiority, see?), locking in the most important high margin and volume segments resp. Then they locked in the super high margin HPC market, with a potential consumer device backup waiting in the wings as a nice bonus. That the mid-end was late didn't matter all that much, because 28nm availability probably couldn't cope anyway, and their high end solution was still cheap enough to cover part of that segment as well.
In my book, what ultimately matters is the bottom line. I fail to see why the Kepler generation can be considered godawful?
According to the helpful SEC filing link above, in the last 9 months, they added $500M in cash and marketable securities, all else roughly constant. Not too shabby, right?! Wall Street doesn't give a damn about what happened 5 years ago.Yeah I remember running the numbers on it. Nvidia has made a profit of about $10m a quarter on average for the past 5 years. Great stuff, really raking in the dough.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
and i lurked here in the DX9 era, lurking doesn't mean much, your posting style, your attack of people, your belittling isn't the way people post here on B3D.
no it hasn't and no it isn't. for someone who lurked here for 5 years you seemed to miss a lot of analysis.
one quarter doesn't make a year. costs are constant sales can be seasonal, you cant really judge anything off a quarter. There have been no new products so no write downs or write offs, year financial statements are much better to look at.
so as per Nvidia own financial statements
GPU operating income
2009 122,000,000
2010 -13,487,000
2011 30,154,000
2012 528,242,000
GPU made on average 13.9 million a month
whats interesting there is that Revenue was stagnate, so they have cut costs big time
PSB
2009 322,514,000
2010 148,953,000
2011 321,944,000
2012 327,970,000
PSB made on average 23.2 million a month
YoY Revenue growth
so NV have had a good operating income in 2012 on the GPU side which has really dragged there numbers up but its not via revenue which has been flat for 3 years.
the post your replied to while biased wasn't that inaccurate,
no there not, 3 of the last 4 years NV made almost no money in the consumer space. Revenue in the consumer space has been flat as well so i really do wonder where they cut costs. Part of it would have to be the removal of low Revenue low margin from budget PC and Laptops which would indicate a level of increased market share.
how about you keep your posting style locked up at the AnachTech forums, you constantly throw words around without even making an attempt to understand reasoning or logic. it migth just be they have information you don't.
edit:
i will jsut add in 2010 NV have an all other cost of -140,000,000 which im guessing is "bump gate" which if factored in would bring the last 4 years to 11 million a month from GPU.
the CPB number are shocking -94,-153,-207 10/11/12 but Tegra is an investment and i think a very worth while bet and while they have the income from there other lines I dont see a better investment for new growth markets that align to what NV do.
Last edited by a moderator:
DuckThor Evil
Legend
If you average nVidias last five full financial years, they have averaged about 76.5 million per quarter net income. If you extent that period one year to either direction you'll get about 100M per quarter or more.
They are currently making a killing in the consumer space and have been doing fine or great ever since the GTX 460 came out in July 2010.
They are currently making a killing in the consumer space and have been doing fine or great ever since the GTX 460 came out in July 2010.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
itsmydamnation
Veteran
if you extend one year you run into the AMD R600 disaster period where NV could set there pricing however they liked and sold everything, not really indicative of a competitive environment. That and i only have the last two year 10K statements from NV and CBF finding them on the internet.
why did you say they have been going well since 460 came out, there own financials disagree with you. overall they have been doing very well year on year dispite the hardships, but PSB carried GPU for 3 of the last 4 years. If they make 500 million a yaer in GPU the next 2 years, i will happily re-evaluate.
edit: i would actually loved it if they did, i dont expect AMD to survive, we as enthusiasts need companies other then intel making good profits so they have the finances to create great products. It's why i shake my head at all the complaining about GPU prices, it might just be me but a 660ti or 7950 are awesome value.
Last edited by a moderator:
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Perhaps, but excluding a year in which their GPU segment earned over 700M kind of stinks a bit, after Jimbo specified a five year timeframe.
Mainly because GTX 460 was the card that really got them back on track, even if the launch quarter wasn't profitable, it was imo the moment the tide started to turn. nVidia's upcoming release should look pretty favourable.
yeah the value certainly has gotten a lot better from the launch of those 79xx and 680 cards.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
Im not here to fight jimbo's battles, thats said it is 2013
It was a big improvement, but they still lost their price premium and that shows in the numbers
Which is to be expected. But the other thing to consider is how much improvement we get each generation and yet we have had consistent pricing, it has far exceeded everything in relative pricing to performance wise in the PC space.
I have bought a 4850,6950 and 7950 and the 4850 was the most expensive yet has the greatest hobbling relative to its higher counterparts. Personally i think over the last 4 years we have had great pricing.
boxleitnerb
Regular
Well, on average the fastest card now (7970 GE) is only 50% faster than the GTX580. For 549 initially (the 7970 non GE without 12.11 drivers)...not saying Nvidia does any better. They did a bit in the beginning and now their price/perf is quite worse than AMDs.
But both of their solutions are quite bad compared to the last gen. When I get 70% more performance than a GTX580 for 400-450, only then I will say prices are okay-ish.
But both of their solutions are quite bad compared to the last gen. When I get 70% more performance than a GTX580 for 400-450, only then I will say prices are okay-ish.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
so im guessing your still on DD2 800 and a C2D?
boxleitnerb
Regular
No, why?
I upgraded an E6600 to a 2600K which almost doubled my performance in games single threaded games and rather tripled it in newer ones. It was a very good investment.
I will get two GTX780s which supposedly will be twice as fast as the GTX580s which I currently have. Question is just price. 549 is okay for that, 599 is ouch, anything above is a no-go.
I upgraded an E6600 to a 2600K which almost doubled my performance in games single threaded games and rather tripled it in newer ones. It was a very good investment.
I will get two GTX780s which supposedly will be twice as fast as the GTX580s which I currently have. Question is just price. 549 is okay for that, 599 is ouch, anything above is a no-go.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
thats along way between upgrades and your pref has largely come from increased clock ( i assume your running 4.2+. you wont be seeing your requirement meet in CPU's for a long time from that base.
just checked, in 4 generations of GPU (4870 to 7970) performance has increased 600%... in crysis anyway. If we go 5 like your CPU it jumps 1100%
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
