That sounds plausible but even so it wouldn't typically lead to a discount in the professional market especially with the lack of competitioin. It's not like the price of the card is the highest or even a significant cost during an upgrade cycle. I actually can't think of any reason why a price drop on Quadros would significantly impact demand. That's a pretty inelastic market and demand is probably driven more by the general state of the economy and the corporate appetite for tech spending.
- Status
That sounds plausible but even so it wouldn't typically lead to a discount in the professional market especially with the lack of competitioin. It's not like the price of the card is the highest or even a significant cost during an upgrade cycle. I actually can't think of any reason why a price drop on Quadros would significantly impact demand. That's a pretty inelastic market and demand is probably driven more by the general state of the economy and the corporate appetite for tech spending.
with regards to ATI/AMD releasing a new product as the catalyst (no punt intended) I give that about a .00231% of reasoning.. remember ATI/AMD hardly ever releases FireGL/FireStream of new products hand in hand with consumer grade graphics parts.. I think it's only happened one time maybe, nearly every time ATI/AMD's pro parts come months (up to almost a year later). If I had to pick one I'd say it's too much on hand inventory, probably part in due to the economy and parts not moving as fast as originally intended (ie supply v demand).
iirc Consumer V Pro in reagrd to ATI products:
R520 (1800) came out in 2005 while the FireGL V7200/7300/7350 didn't come to market nearly a year later.
The R600 (2900) came out when.. May 2007 and was late while the 7600 GL didn't come out until November at best (about time that the 3800 series came out) while the RV670 's FireGL part shortened the "delay" it wasn't until the RV700 series where the RV730 parts launched almost simultaneously. However by the time the Cypress parts rolled around the FirePro parts were back to their several month delay/lapse (consumer graphics came in Sept 09, FirePro part's were not announced until April 10). AT BEST I would assume that Bart/Caymen generation parts wont see the light of day well into Q2 of 2011, so there is hardly any pressure from any upcoming ATI/AMD parts in that respect.
edit (lets see if this actually works
X1800 -------> V7200/7300/7350
Oct 2005 ----> Q2 2006
HD2900 -----> V7600/8600
May 2007 ---> Q3/Q4 2007
HD3800 -----> V7700
Nov 2007 --> Mar 2008
HD4800 ----> FirePro V3750/V8700
Sept 2008 --> Sept 2008
HD5800 -----> V7800/V8800
Sept 2009 --> Apr 2010
HD6800 --- > V7900/V8900 ???
Oct/Nov 2010 -> ???
iirc Consumer V Pro in reagrd to ATI products:
R520 (1800) came out in 2005 while the FireGL V7200/7300/7350 didn't come to market nearly a year later.
The R600 (2900) came out when.. May 2007 and was late while the 7600 GL didn't come out until November at best (about time that the 3800 series came out) while the RV670 's FireGL part shortened the "delay" it wasn't until the RV700 series where the RV730 parts launched almost simultaneously. However by the time the Cypress parts rolled around the FirePro parts were back to their several month delay/lapse (consumer graphics came in Sept 09, FirePro part's were not announced until April 10). AT BEST I would assume that Bart/Caymen generation parts wont see the light of day well into Q2 of 2011, so there is hardly any pressure from any upcoming ATI/AMD parts in that respect.
edit (lets see if this actually works
X1800 -------> V7200/7300/7350
Oct 2005 ----> Q2 2006
HD2900 -----> V7600/8600
May 2007 ---> Q3/Q4 2007
HD3800 -----> V7700
Nov 2007 --> Mar 2008
HD4800 ----> FirePro V3750/V8700
Sept 2008 --> Sept 2008
HD5800 -----> V7800/V8800
Sept 2009 --> Apr 2010
HD6800 --- > V7900/V8900 ???
Oct/Nov 2010 -> ???
Last edited by a moderator:
Out of curiosity, what features are holding ATI back in pro market? I think we can rule out the hw.
IF anything, I dare say it boils down the name recognition in large part due to the perceived less than "the other guy's" software development. Kind of like the old adage "You buy Intel v AMD Who ?" AMD's price point for the most is significantly better (or it was) however in select scenarios their performance isn't as polished. AMD has made huge in roads in how far they've come (from when they bought FireGL from DiamondMM) but they have a looong way to go to build up the prosumer capital that nV built over the years.. ironically as a cheap alternative to FireGL/3DLabs pro cards of the past.
Speaking of catalysts, remember this from the 10.8?
Code:
223,CAYMAN GL XT (6700),NI CAYMAN
224,CAYMAN GL XT (6701),NI CAYMAN
225,CAYMAN GL XT (6702),NI CAYMAN
226,CAYMAN GL XT (6703),NI CAYMAN
227,CAYMAN GL PRO (6704),NI CAYMAN
228,CAYMAN GL PRO (6705),NI CAYMAN
229,CAYMAN GL (6706),NI CAYMAN
230,CAYMAN GL LE (6707),NI CAYMAN
231,CAYMAN GL (6708),NI CAYMAN
232,CAYMAN GL (6709),NI CAYMAN
233,CAYMAN XT (6718),NI CAYMAN
234,CAYMAN PRO (6719),NI CAYMAN
235,ANTILLES PRO (671C),NI CAYMAN
236,ANTILLES XT (671D),NI CAYMAN
237,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO (6720),NI BLACKCOMB
238,BLACKCOMB LP (6721),NI BLACKCOMB
239,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO Gemini (6724),NI BLACKCOMB
240,BLACKCOMB LP Gemini (6725),NI BLACKCOMB
241,BARTS GL XT (6728),NI BARTS
242,BARTS GL PRO (6729),NI BARTS
243,BARTS XT (6738),NI BARTS
244,BARTS PRO (6739),NI BARTS
245,WHISTLER XT (6740),NI WHISTLER
246,WHISTLER PRO/LP (6741),NI WHISTLER
247,WHISTLER XT/PRO Gemini (6744),NI WHISTLER
248,WHISTLER LP Gemini (6745),NI WHISTLER
249,ONEGA (6750),NI TURKS
250,TURKS XT (6758),NI TURKS
251,TURKS PRO (6759),NI TURKS
252,SEYMOUR XT/PRO (6760),NI SEYMOUR
253,SEYMOUR LP (6761),NI SEYMOUR
254,SEYMOUR XT/PRO Gemini (6764),NI SEYMOUR
255,SEYMOUR LP Gemini (6765),NI SEYMOUR
256,CAICOS GL PRO (6768),NI CAICOS
257,CASPIAN PRO (6770),NI CAICOS
258,CAICOS PRO (6779),NI CAICOSThere's an awful lot of "GL" parts in there… Now that doesn't necessarily mean that they will launch soon, but it could be a hint, couldn't it? I certainly don't think that can account for the full 50% of this price plunge, though.
Crappy drivers. Or rather, inconsistent drivers. Take a look at this piece by Damien: http://www.behardware.com/articles/800-1/roundup-10-workstation-graphics-cards.html
In some benchmarks, FirePros do OK, e.g. 3DS Max, but in others they get really pummeled.
That's merely a facet of the issue. Pro customers also expect extensive support...think engineers on site/ready to fix whatever broke ASAP. They're also far more inclined to stick with what has been proven to solidly work time and again, and bad experiences linger for large stretches of time. ATI clubbered the strong FireGL brand post-aquisition, for whatever reason, and has had a number of mis-steps. For them to be competitive in pro they'd have to invest heavily in software and support, and that simply doesn't seem to be en vogue over there(or within AMD as a whole, if you will). Not to mention that given inertia, it'd take multiple cycles of investment and very good execution on all those fronts to get pro customers to switch.
Sure, but as long as drivers are crappy and performance is poor, pro customers aren't even going to consider AMD. The FirePro V9800 should be faster than the Quadro 6000, based on specs alone. If that were the case, and since it is a good bit cheaper, some customers might consider it, even if they weren't convinced about the quality of AMD's support.
By the way, I don't really get why FirePros are so expensive. Then have very little market share, and bring in very little profit. It seems to me that AMD would have everything to gain and very little to lose by slashing prices.
Maybe the reason why they don't slash prices is 'value maintanence'. Once people are used to paying a set price they will balk if AMD attempts to raise it once again. Anyway there could be significant improvements coming in that space in terms of drivers / support given the influx of cash AMD has recieved recently from Intel. It wouldn't surprise me if we see significant improvements there over the next 6-12 months Alexko.
This is a point that keeps coming up again and again, while everyone forgets that all that cash has already been spent on debt reduction.
So no change to the Status Quo.
Really? how are you so sure?
Financial reports said so.
As I see, a lot of posters already addressed that, i.e. if contract doesnt explicitly include future interfaces, Intel by no means is required to provide licenses to them. It already happened in old Pentium days, its nothing new. If Nvidia thought they have that right, its their lawyers issue they havent made that clear.
Also IMO crucial aspect of this issue which havent been mentioned yet - JHH massive ego. Intel and Nvidia arent even direct competitors (outside few slightly overlapping areas), so they could have easily continued partnership if Nvidia would have played nice. It doesnt even matter if Intel was going for integrating GPUs in CPUs, Nvidia could have been making chipsets as long as it was feasible to them. Yet JHH burned that bridge too. Compare to AMD - fierce competitors over many markets, went through many lawsuits, yet had no problem reaching cross-licensing deals. Business approach wins over ego driven policy. Steve Jobs is an exception, and JHH has nowhere near the influence and isnt as brilliant as Jobs in the first place.
The main reason IMO is Nvidia want cash, and want it now. Such fire-sale should generate very nice cash influx... at the expense of the future.
The reasons could be (everyone of them contributes IMO, just the question how much)
1. Nvidia knows what ATI is preparing (still should be few quarters away, Cayman/Antilles based FirePro should wipe the floor with Quadros. That is, if AMD invested more in pro drivers and the support, which is possible - AMD is in better situation financially than it was for many years before.
...Maybe another reason is new player in town? Intel already has perfect HW to offer - Xeons with int/Larrabee. They were working on Pro software side for many years now. Intel said from the start their initial focus will be the Pro market, and only then games, they scrapped games for now and focusing on servers and Pro. With its resources and generous support plans, as well as superior HW (and in the future - SW as well) I dont see any reason they couldnt overthrow Nvidia.
2. Considering points above, Nvidia might exit Pro market sometime in the future. GPUs R&D cant be solely maintained by the Pro market, NV needs consumer market, and they're losing badly, with no signs of relief anytime soon. Problem with it, I expected Nvidia to last in this market the longest, it should be 5+ years away from demise, not the year or two, which could explain fire-sale now. Such discount shows Nvidia uncertainty about the future in Pro market.
Last edited by a moderator:
Heh, JHH's ego seems a fashionable thing to complain about these days (Hi Charlie!), but its importance in a case where the other side has a well documented history of antritrust offenses and cutthroat business behaviour is probably less significant than you make it out to be.
Also, AMD's history as a second source supplier pretty much makes its situation incomparable to anyone else's, but to say they had 'no problem reaching cross-licensing deals' is just silly.
Are you implying JHH hasnt ego issues?
Its primary reason many insiders are mentioning in loads of burned bridges - Microsoft, Intel, VIA, Sony, AMD, just to name a few. Anti-trust lawsuits are for the monopolists, since Nvidia isnt one of them - nobody cares if Nvidia also has dishonest cut-throat business tactics. As silly as you think, AMD only had few fireworks what concerns licensing with Intel (last one I remember was over Foundry splitting), nothing both sides couldnt overcome. And as I said - they are direct competitors over many markets, nothing like Nvidia. So if AMD could co-exists with Intel, the primary reason Nvidia couldnt is JHH ego IMO, there are no other explanations.
Are you implying JHH hasnt ego issues?
As silly as you think, AMD only had few fireworks what concerns licensing with Intel (last one I remember was over Foundry splitting), nothing both sides couldnt overcome. And as I said - they are direct competitors over many markets, nothing like Nvidia. So if AMD could co-exists with Intel, the primary reason Nvidia couldnt is JHH ego IMO, there are no other explanations.
AMD has Intel by the balls in many ways. Remember when Microsoft was giving money to Apple? They had no real choice b/c of anti-trust issues. In the same way Intel cannot screw around with AMD nearly as easily and anyone else. Without AMD, Intel goes bye bye. Ma bell we got the ill communication and all that.
I think finding a CEO without a large ego will be a problem for you, but that isn't the point.
Are you implying JHH hasnt ego issues?
I wouldn't imply that at all, just that you overstate its importance and that ego issues seem to happen on both sides. Like in the case of Microsoft, not giving in to their attempts to renegotiate the chipset contract just because their Xbox sales happened to be disappointing is just business. Intel's hubris in not being satisfied with just CPUs but also wanting to dominate chipsets and graphics means there's not much to salvage there for the future either. If it's an ego thing to not roll over and play nice just to be allowed a niche in the established pecking order, then good for JHH.
Oh c'mon, 'nothing both sides couldn't overcome'? AMD has had to seek the assistance of regulators and courts over Intel's anticompetitive practices time and time again. They've brought numerous cases all over the world including in the US, Europe, Japan and Korea dating as far back as 1991, and usually they eventually either won, forced a settlement, or got paid off.
What I fiind a bit telling is that it's only Quadros. If it were Teslas also (ok, that's Nvidia not PNY, but anyway), then i could be inclined to think it has something to do with upcoming heavy competition from the outside.
anyway, what are theoretical reasons which can force a manufacturer to offer 50% discounts of (reportedly) well selling product?
1. competitor is going to launch better product (not likely according to AlexV)
2. old stock (it isn't - according to kitguru)
3. replacement product will be launched soon
4. demand is weaker than supplies (hardly could explain 50% discount)
5. need to get some capital as soon as possible
any better idea?
To give a few professionals who can afford $2000+ from their own pocket a taste of the most advanced professional workstation card, as a teaser for future volume/company buying decisions.
The discount is most likely a very limited time, retail only promotional offering. Don't be surprised if some website intentionally dismiss this facts for pure sensationalism. Quadro retail market should be much smaller compared to system/workstation builder (HP, Dell, others) deals. And companies usually need months in advance from planning to purchasing 2 grand+ GPUs in any significant volumes.
- Status
Similar threads
