Jon Peddie Q1 graphics market share report

[kemosabe]

http://www.jonpeddie.com/about/press/MarketWatch_Q105.shtml

Let the hostilities begin.

Edit: I was sure I was in the 3D companies and industry forum. Please move.

 

[RussSchultz]

I have no problem with intel being market leaders.


If only they sold product I wanted. *sigh* I will not buy a laptop with only "intel extreme integrated graphics".

 

[jvd]

Makes you wish intel would adopt some more power vr tech .

IT be nice to see a 2x1 dx 9 mbx instead of this extreme crap or even a 4x1 dx 9 mbx .

Come on video logic get your arse in gear and put out a dx 9 mbx and make intel use it in laptops and desktops !!!!

 

[Pete]

This only makes SC:CT's choice of SM1 and SM3 more curious, as Intel and ATI combined apparently sold about 70% of the GPUs for the past two quarters. That's a lot of SM2 parts out and about. Maybe it was just practice for Xbox 360?

 

[AlNom]

This only makes SC:CT's choice of SM1 and SM3 more curious, as Intel and ATI combined apparently sold about 70% of the GPUs for the past two quarters. That's a lot of SM2 parts out and about. Maybe it was just practice for Xbox 360?

Based on the market share, it seems that way. Well, even based on the number of Geforce 6's out there versus R3xx to R4xx AND NV3x from the past 2.5 years....

Otherwise, conspiracy theories would have nVidia paying Ubisoft an exorbitant amount of money in order to justify avoiding SM2.0. And that's just silly imo. IMHO, I think they were experimenting, and they felt they could release a working SM3.0 path with SC:CT, and that's the only reason people got that.

 

[JoshMST]

Matrox is going to rise from the depths and dominate your next PC!!!

 

[trinibwoy]

Otherwise, conspiracy theories would have nVidia paying Ubisoft an exorbitant amount of money in order to justify avoiding SM2.0. And that's just silly imo. IMHO, I think they were experimenting, and they felt they could release a working SM3.0 path with SC:CT, and that's the only reason people got that.

If they did it would be a poor investment. I wouldn't bet on SM3.0 support in SC:CT bringing in too many GF6 sales. And with R520 around the corner it would be a short-lived advantage.

 

[Pete]

No, no, it makes sense now (having read posts by Dave and others in another thread). Intel's IGP may be nominally SM2, but it'll be treated as SM1 for performance reasons. Still, tough luck for ATI and SM2 owners.