New Jon Peddie Market Share Numbers Q2

[Geo]

http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/10459

I guess we can see why ATI's laptop chest-pounding has been trending downwards a bit of late. A few months ago they were talking about 70%-ish and then 2/3rd-ish, and now they are below that as well.

Otoh, ATI picked up a bit in the desktop share.

 

[Jakob]

There's a nice table of overall share at the Inq. Interesting how VIA and SIS manage to keep hanging around.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33359

 

[poopypoo]

I can't believe Matrox is holding on. Is somebody still paying all that money for the Millenium thingy (was it "G550"? Newegg seems to not be carrying them anymore)? or is there some other product I'm unaware of? I'm pretty sure dualheadtogo isn't included in these numbers, right?

 

[karlotta]

I can't believe Matrox is holding on. Is somebody still paying all that money for the Millenium thingy (was it "G550"? Newegg seems to not be carrying them anymore)? or is there some other product I'm unaware of? I'm pretty sure dualheadtogo isn't included in these numbers, right?

they are a nich gfx maker. Bizness upgrade, from lame intellgpus.

 

[ZoinKs!]

0.1% market share isn't much of anything... that's less then 800 cards a day spread out over the entire world. Sis is the next step up and did ~28,000 cards per day.

I'm assuming the marketshare report goes by number of gpu's sold rather then money amounts.

 

[_xxx_]

they are a nich gfx maker. Bizness upgrade, from lame intellgpus.

They do offer the best 2D and multi-monizor tech. Crystal clear, vibrant images like no nV or ATI user has ever seen. But they don't do 3D. They had a feature rich and very nice chip with the redesigned G400, but they were late to the game by then.

Still, for everyday work, I'll take a two generations old Matrox over the current nV/ATI stuff anyday. And I'm not alone. That's why they're rich.

 

[_xxx_]

0.1% market share isn't much of anything... that's less then 800 cards a day spread out over the entire world. Sis is the next step up and did ~28,000 chipsets per day.

I'm assuming the marketshare report goes by number of gpu's sold rather then money amounts.

Corrected.

 

[Maintank]

Doesnt surprise me in the mobile market. Nvidia has been hot to trot about their mobile wins all year.

btw AMD may be wise to have the walking papers for the upper management at ATI ready when they finalize the agreement. The management of ATI imo has been nothing but sub-par for the course. Minus a major strike of luck by acquiring ArtX and the R300 and Nvidia royally screwing up the NV3.x GPU. ATI has been blowing wind for the better part of the last decade. The X800 series was plagued with low availability, the X1800 was late, the X1900 was massive and terrible on heat\consumption\die size vs performance. And their offerings before the R300 were borderline pathetic.

And the thing that irks me the most about them, they never seem to have a mid and low end ready for their next generation GPUs. ATI should have an entire lineup ready and going. Nvidia does this every time and it has worked great. Even that stupid 5200 had the bragging rights of its feature set. How many times did ATI recycle the R200 in the 9000,9100,9200?

 

[Freak'n Big Panda]

They do offer the best 2D and multi-monizor tech. Crystal clear, vibrant images like no nV or ATI user has ever seen. But they don't do 3D. They had a feature rich and very nice chip with the redesigned G400, but they were late to the game by then.

Still, for everyday work, I'll take a two generations old Matrox over the current nV/ATI stuff anyday. And I'm not alone. That's why they're rich.

I think our assement of the 2d out quality is more subjective than anything, I've never noticed a difference even when comparing my old kyro 1 to my current 7800GTX. Matrox released a pretty decent 3d card in 2002 or somewhere around there. The Parhelia... anybody remember it? a little slower than the GF3 and way more expensive.. it died pretty quickly. VS2.0 tho, which was a big deal @ the time. I remember when it was released there was a interview with some matrox guy saying that PS2.0 will never happen on the 150nm process... r300 came out a few months later on the .15 process (with PS2.0) with 50% more transitors and still clocked 80% higher

 

[3dcgi]

I think our assement of the 2d out quality is more subjective than anything, I've never noticed a difference even when comparing my old kyro 1 to my current 7800GTX. Matrox released a pretty decent 3d card in 2002 or somewhere around there. The Parhelia... anybody remember it? a little slower than the GF3 and way more expensive.. it died pretty quickly. VS2.0 tho, which was a big deal @ the time. I remember when it was released there was a interview with some matrox guy saying that PS2.0 will never happen on the 150nm process... r300 came out a few months later on the .15 process (with PS2.0) with 50% more transitors and still clocked 80% higher

3dlabs said the same thing when the P10 was announced. I guess they were both wrong as they didn't anticipate consumers would be accepting of rising prices to match the rising die sizes.