Another nVidia/GF FX concern?

First of all, that happened well after they had already demonstrated quarter after quarter of exponential growth. I suppose from TNT to GF2 can be chalked up to the MS contract?

Secondly, Oh, you mean, winning a customer and getting them to pay $200 million dollars is luck?

Boy, you guys are scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Starts off with a shitty product and almost dies. Doubles down their bet and comes back from the grave to over $1 billion/yr in revenues in record breaking pace. Other companies in the same market during this time couldn't achieve this, they were in the same place at the same time, yet all of Nvidia's success is to be chalked up to luck?


Can't you just admit that Nvidia did a good job, was a well managed company that designed good products, and executed well?

 

No, they keep picking and picking and picking and picking and ...
It will never stop.... some are just lacking....

Ninelven

 

Coder lay off the Whisky...

My post was only one example why they grew so quickly, it isn't every day you get $200 Million Dollar Contracts..it had nothing to do about why they got it.
Yes they were making the most advanced hardware at the time.

 

I guess no matter how many times I say it, you still won't hear it, but I'll try one last time.

Nvidia did do a good job, as I've said several times. A lot of what happened was hard work on their part, but you can't seem to admit that even the tiniest bit of it was luck.

I give in. You are 100% right. Every good thing that has happened to Nvidia was entirely of their own making. It was they who badly managed 3dfx. It was they who wrecked an entire product cycle for ATI. It was they who made Microsoft enter the console market, and it was they who made ATI decide not to pursue it. It was also they who created the stock market bubble that allowed them to do a secondary offering at a price well above what a rational market would ascribe them.

 

Being able to take advantage of opportunities when they come your way is a skill. You call it luck, I call it, recognizing an opportunity when you see it, and taking advantage of it.

Everyday there are opportunities out there. When someone starts a company and gets rich off such an opportunity, you say "they got lucky and were at the right place at the right time". I say, they saw something other people overlooked, and worked hard to get it.

It's the hallmark of entrepreneurism.

 

I agree.

 

It's not just down to NVIDIA doing a "good job" (good products, executing well, etc) that has put them where they are (were?).

There simply weren't any others around.

But times are a'changing.

 

They were competing with ATI, 3dfx, Matrox, STMicro/IMGTec, and lots of others. The fact is, NVidia was simply better than them at what they did.

This is like saying "The winners of the Superbowl weren't just good at football, they simply didn't have any other (good) teams around" Well, if that's the way you want to spin it. I see the glass as half full, not half empty.

 

Jeesh coder...you are annoying.

Nvidia wasn't that big when they got the M$ deal, they were still reasonably small..they executed a few projects with some questionable PR and got selected for X-box...thats when they took off.

If 3DFX didn't screw up so badly (buying STB) and concentrated on working with OEMS (vs pissing them off) then Nvidia may have never had a oportunity..or if ATI didn't get caught with their pants down and was producing high end cards like today maybe they would have been chosen..

WHAT if 3DFX was chosen to do X-box..would Nvidia be as big as they were...I don't think so.
Poor decisions from other companies opened the door for them, that won't happen again.

 

I disagree totally. It had nothing to do with NVIDIA being *better* than all of them, it was just NVIDIA was smart enough to diversify.

3dfx had full swing focus on retail boxed sales. ATI focused on the OEM/pre-built market. NVIDIA had their feet in both of these, AND the high-end, workstation 3D market.

A few years later, they threw their feet into the console chip market, CPU chipset market and now it looks like they want to secure a position in the CG/professional animation market (i.e. taking the workstation piece a step further). Heck, they are even starting to enter the software arena with experiments in NView and NV-DVD.

The best way to ride out stormy weather is diversity. This is the only thing that has allowed NVIDIA to thrive during the peaks and bottoms of any given market. They don't have to be "better" or even the "best"- as long as they have profit from one or two of their given markets, they can thrive quite well.

I'd hope it's common sense by now that their position with the Geforce FX is trivial at best. They still have their timely NFORCE and XBOX sales to keep them afloat even if their entry into the high-end consumer retail 3D Graphics board falls flat on it's face. Not as if this is going to happen, but if it did, it would have almost zero impact on their company's profitability. And if it did theoretically happen, it would be a far cry from trying to explain revenue away as being "the best" provider of the bunch.. just the most intelligent in respect to being diverse and a player in multiple markets.

 

Agreed.

 

If GeForce FX doesn't pay for itself, then it will have a large impact on profitability. Not that I am predicting anything, but companies can't go around developing products and not sell them without expecting them to have an impact on the bottom line.

One comment about NFORCE: It can only address the AMD market, which appears to be shrinking, so it may be in a precarious situation.

 

Not when the Athlon64 comes out.

 

Truth is annoying. NVidia didn't get the X-Box contract payment until April 2000. By that time, Nvidia's revenues were already at $150million for that quarter, they had 492 employees, and .47 EPS. They had exponential growth before the MS contract.

Well, ATI didn't get chosen by MS, and they survived. The X-Box contract isn't end all and be all. It was just one more stream of revenue for NVidia.


Trying to use the X-Box contract to explain Nvidia's success won't work. try again.

 

Sharkfood, best means "best managed", not "best technology". Thank you for so eloquently explaining why NVidia had the best management.

The company truly is an amazing success story.

 

No

ATI survived because of OEM contracts and being diversified, and owned a good portion of the desktop market...ATI was hurting a year ago..

Yes I know, 200 Million dollar cash advance plus royalties would never help any company succeed...go back to business school.

Silly me.

 

Face it. Nvidia grew exponentially before the X-Box contract. From $0 to $150million a quarter by April 2000. (pre X-Box) Sure, the X-Box contract contributed to their bottom line (while also costing them at the same time), but so did the workstation market, and others.

You are trying to pinpoint NVidia's success to some Microsoftian deus-ex-machina, but the company was already a huge success before the X-Box contract.

You go back to business school. Maybe you'll make enough money to upgrade your graphics card finally.

 

When you grow up Coder and have children, you will realize you can't have everything all the time..

Yet I have a 9500 and a 9700 on the way, is that good enough for you Mr. Materialistic....I didn't get mine given to me..I Work for it.
The former ATI critic gets a free card for what...to come on Beyond3D and rave about his money he made on Nvidia stock.

What did ATI get for giving you a freebie...I haven't seen any tech demos from you...ever.

All those years in the early days you trashing 3DFX, there was more to it than I thought..you were protecting your investment..should have known.

 

'Nvidia wasn't that big when they got the M$ deal, they were still reasonably small..they executed a few projects with some questionable PR and got selected for X-box...thats when they took off. '
=Doomtrooper

Thats not true, they were already quite big on the stock market beforehand (bubble economy and what not). The Xbox contract got them a lot of volatility thereafter, with some impressive highs, and some disconcerting lows. I sold my stock, about 3 weeks after the contract precisely for that reason.

Those projects they executed were also *close* to industry firsts (32 bit color, transform and lighting, DDR memory interface, perpixel bumpmapping, etc etc) hardly negligable, PR aside. That legacy is what got them the contract, and the huge stock gain shortly after they went public (well, the highly successful PR department helped too).

It would be like if someone simply overlooked ATI atm for releasing the first DX9 compatible card on the market. Its not just execution, its being in the LEAD (at least for a few months). I count many months over the last few years, where Nvidia had the undisputed best card out on the market (geforce1 before V5 was released, Gf3 before 8500 came out, etc etc). Something 3dfx had before them, and ATI seems to have going for them right now.