boxleitnerb
Regular
What do you call AMDs profits then? Pebblestones?
I wouldn't even say it was that good. What part of this is hard to understand? Both companies are spending an inordinate amount on GPU for barely any profit in the end.
How much did Nvidia's GPU business make last year, or the year before? Both companies can only make money when the other is having a disaster - and even then it's a pittance compared to what the likes of Qualcomm is making.
Do you really think they'll continue with this? Do you think Tegra 4 will hold up vs the 14nm Atom for a year? The money simply isn't good enough for Nvidia to be wasting wafers on GPU.
Edit - and how the hell could I forget.
In actual cash terms the discrete GPU market must be struggling to be worth $250 million a year to both companies. That is beyond awful, even worse than what I had thought it to be.
How much was that again? If ever a point was proven it was this one. Thank you for pointing out to me exactly how much (little) Nvidia's GPU's actually make.
In actual cash terms the discrete GPU market must be struggling to be worth $250 million a year to both companies. That is beyond awful, even worse than what I had thought it to be.
By my reckoning, Nvidia will have made ~$80 to $90 million in profit per quarter last year on actual GPU sales. A year with smaller dies than they've ever had, a year with AMD leaking market share hand over fist and that's all they can muster.
Last year it would have been a lot worse. They almost certainly lost money in GPU in 2011 and 2010. Their professional segment *is* shoring them up without a doubt.
Last year it would have been a lot worse. They almost certainly lost money in GPU in 2011 and 2010. Their professional segment *is* shoring them up without a doubt.
See NVIDIA's press release.NVIDIA said:
Assuming those installments are equal, that would be $300 million per year. I think NVIDIA spreads this equally over each quarter, so that would be $75 million per quarter.
In Q2'12, their GPU business made $162 million in profit, which would be $87 million without Intel's payment. 10-Q SEC filing for Q2.
In Q1'12, it made $79 million, or $4 million without Intel. 10-Q SEC filing for Q1.
Last edited by a moderator:
And if we assume AMD is losing money or just about breaking even on GPU this year (not including console revenue), my figure of $250 million profit that is "up for grabs" per year on GPU probably isn't that far from the truth.
It really does make you wonder, and scared for the future of this part of the industry. It seems highly likely that AMD's gpu division will be heavily influenced by consoles for the foreseeable future.
It really does make you wonder, and scared for the future of this part of the industry. It seems highly likely that AMD's gpu division will be heavily influenced by consoles for the foreseeable future.
The discrete gaming GPU business probably couldn't survive on its own, but it's supported by workstations (Quadro & FirePro), GPGPU (Tesla & FirePro), APUs, and mobile SoCs. It should be OK for a while.
NVIDIA and AMD may decide to make only 2~3 discrete graphics chips per generation instead of 3~4 in the past to reduce costs, and perhaps eventually only a couple, but it should hold for a few years at least.
An interesting point to note would be that if AMD dies, Nvidia would respond by cutting die sizes while keeping prices the same. Basically getting a tiny increase in performance with a much larger decrease in die size.
That is what they'd do. All of those wishing on AMD's demise would be wise to take heed of this.
That is what they'd do. All of those wishing on AMD's demise would be wise to take heed of this.
boxleitnerb
Regular
Who wishes that? No offense, but maybe you should stick to the topic at hand instead of constantly making stuff up.
Since forever. They've been listed in their quarterly financial statements since at least Q1 2008.
http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&id=1131790
There are plenty of people wishing it, however I do not include you as one of them.
I was unaware of that. However we're past that stage now, it's more than clear that GPU is a borderline business for both companies, almost irrespective of how well they are doing comparatively.
Their GPU division had an operating income of $105 million for 2012. It's not a borderline business; it's a steady, reliable source of income, even with the graphics market being on the decline.
This.
Take any business, across the full spectrum, and $100M profit out of $700M is very respectable by any standard.
Calling that borderline is a borderline opinion.
As I already mentioned on numerous occasions, one swallow does not make a summer. For every year Nvidia makes money, they have a year where the lose money. That's the only thing "steady" or "reliable" about it, and as others have been all too keen to point out in this thread - it's only AMD's market that is in decline, not Nvidia's.
All that market share gain has basically been for nothing because it's a borderline business. When you factor in how many resources each company is putting into making these small profits/losses each year it's clear that both of them could happily get out of it altogether and use those resources a lot more wisely.
This is precisely what I am predicting. Instead of a 2 year cadence we'll get a 3 year from now on. AMD appears to be gearing up for at least another 6 months of the 7-series.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Wow I take a short nap and you are once again all over the place...But I think I'm done with this. Shoot one silly argument down and you come with three new silly ones.
Yes you sure shot me down until you forgot all about the intel payment.
Nvidia is and always has been dependent on the professional segment to make money. That is basically the only difference between them and AMD. The facts quite clearly prove it.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Yes you sure shot me down until you forgot all about the intel payment.
Nvidia is and always has been dependent on the professional segment to make money. That is basically the only difference between them and AMD. The facts quite clearly prove it.
You are the one who forgot that payment, I just didn't care too much about it. You were saying they regularly have bad quarters, I just pointed out that they've been profitable for quite some time. BTW their previous Q3 was also pretty good, you just didn't bother to check it out once again. You rarely fact check anything, just throw garbage around.
It's stupid to separate their GPU and Business side, because they both leverage from each other. The % of profit from their revenue has been solid, they'r just not as large as some other companies you like to drool about.
boxleitnerb
Regular
Yes you sure shot me down until you forgot all about the intel payment.
Nvidia is and always has been dependent on the professional segment to make money. That is basically the only difference between them and AMD. The facts quite clearly prove it.
No they don't. Because you don't know how this Intel payment is calculated against their normal income per segment. Even without it, they make plenty of money.
If you're discounting the money Nvidia gets from Intel, are you doing the same for the money AMD gets from Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony? If the console deals are structured like in the past, they're both money for IP, not for actual goods.
The money AMD makes from consoles is irrelevant to the discussion. It's about discrete GPU and how much money it makes for both companies.
As we've seen, it's really not a lot. With every advantage possible Nvidia is still making a pittance. It's pointless continuing with your fairytale belief that this is a lucrative business for them. Not in a very, very long time has that been so.
As we've seen, it's really not a lot. With every advantage possible Nvidia is still making a pittance. It's pointless continuing with your fairytale belief that this is a lucrative business for them. Not in a very, very long time has that been so.
