[AMD] Vega coming in 1H 2017

[railven]

It will be interesting to see where Vega comes performance wise.

If the performance isn't there AMD might find themselves squeezed again. If NV refreshes using GP102 as the flagship, a GP104 (akin to GTX 770) would be a strong competitor if dropped to the $350-450 price range.

Hopefully once a little more info is revealed the usual hype men don't try to sell us absurd expectations. RX 480 is just another reminder that the AMD hype train often arrives at the wrong station.

 

[Leadbox]

You mean an idea similar to "the introduction of fury X" a little late to the game? And even worse this time the whole high-end market(or even the 300$+) would virtually belong to Nvidia(for 10months or more?).
ShintaiDK surely has a point here. Many of those who would have already bought gtx 1080/70/titan X(pascal) won't buy again next year unless Vega cards prove to be that big of an upgrade over those cards. Sure it could be a good situation for the buyers at the time when Vega cards launch with more options and possible price shake up from both the camps, but still won't change the thing that a lot of potential sales went away with them coming late to the party. It's not like there will be no sales, but if the sales would be like that those of fury line-up then it would not be something great either.
If they are going to be that late they better bring out something that great that swings it in their favour. It's looking somewhat good for AMD next year,more DX12 titles by next year means they would likely be higher up on average than they would have been at this point of time.

The significant majority of 10 series and TitanX pascal owners would still be that even if AMD had something new and performance competitive with those skus. These ppl would just have had those parts for less because of price pressure from AMD. Not everyone is on the same upgrade cycle, there're those who only upgrade when nVidia has something new and the same is true for AMD. Your statement grossly underestimates the partisanship at play here, were're not dealing with discerning consumers in the majority. The fact that AMD has picked up a little more market share with a only old and low end new parts tells us just how small the market for nVidia's largely high-end offerings is.

 

[96Firebird]

AMD has gained marketshare in Q3'16?

 

[Sweepr]

The fact that AMD has picked up a little more market share with a only old and low end new parts tells us just how small the market for nVidia's largely high-end offerings is.

You mean the entire Top 8 of Amazon US best selling graphics cards?

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-Graphics-Cards/zgbs/pc/284822

 

[Leadbox]

You mean the entire Top 8 of Amazon US best selling graphics cards?

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-Graphics-Cards/zgbs/pc/284822

All that tells me is they move a lot of EVGA cards, not surprising, it easily the favourite brand for geforce.

 

[poohbear]

I'm surprised people won't admit this is a failure launch.
I had high hopes for amd, but leaving the high end open for that long is a joke.

AMD doesn't look like they'll be able to truly compete with Nvidia for a long time.

Especially considering the 480 isn't significantly faster or cheaper than the 1060 I just dont see what amd has done this generation that gets people excited.

These waits for amd gpus are just not worth it. At all.

What's so surprising? AMD has a market cap of barely $6 billion, Nvidia is nearly $34 billion, & Intel is $168 billion. The fact it's competing with companies so much larger than itself is impressive to begin with. If people want a monoply for Nvidia in the GPU department & Intel in the CPU department, then by all means let's keep bashing the underdog AMD. It's a tiny company compared to the other 2, let's not expect the sun & moon from it.

 

[Sweepr]

All that tells me is they move a lot of EVGA cards, not surprising, it easily the favourite brand for geforce.

Germany: 3 GTX 1070s in Top 6
https://www.amazon.de/gp/bestsellers/computers/430161031/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_427956031

Japan: 3 GTX 1070s and 1 GTX 1080 in Top 7
https://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/bestsellers/computers/2151911051/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_2151901051

Doesn't look like a small market, and there's no EVGA cards here.


Trolling, flamebait, and OT. This was reported by 3 members, as well, as I agree.
Markfw900

 

[Glo.]

Germany: 3 GTX 1070s in Top 6
https://www.amazon.de/gp/bestsellers/computers/430161031/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_427956031

Japan: 3 GTX 1070s and 1 GTX 1080 in Top 7
https://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/bestsellers/computers/2151911051/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_2151901051

Doesn't look like a small market, and there's no EVGA cards here.

What does this have anything to do with AMD Vega? This is your typical dick waving about your favorite brand. Which is fair enough. But do it in Nvidia threads, not crap all over AMD threads.

 

[zinfamous]

AMD has gained marketshare in Q3'16?

No one knows, as those numbers aren't available until mid-October (though I imagine market share gains probably not until Novemberish, if going by the numbers for Q2 that came out roughly 2-3 weeks ago).

AMD gained roughly 4% market share through Q2, however, and none of those sales are attributed to the Polaris and Pascal release cycles, afaik. Q3 sales and market movement will be the first informative data regarding the most recent node shift in the industry.

 

[Sweepr]

What does this have anything to do with AMD Vega? This is your typical dick waving about your favorite brand. Which is fair enough. But do it in Nvidia threads, not crap all over AMD threads.

Ask Leadbox, I was responding to this post:

The fact that AMD has picked up a little more market share with a only old and low end new parts tells us just how small the market for nVidia's largely high-end offerings is.

You can go back to your predictions now.

 

[Glo.]

Ask Leadbox, I was responding to this post:



You can go back to your predictions now.

At least I was sticking to the thread topic. You are rarely doing this.

End-off top.

 

[showb1z]

Nvidia is greatest company! Nvidia sells all the cards! Nvidia makes all the money!

Give it a rest already, nobody cares.

Threadcrapping is not allowed.
Markfw900
Anandtech supermoderator

 

[zinfamous]

Germany: 3 GTX 1070s in Top 6
https://www.amazon.de/gp/bestsellers/computers/430161031/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_427956031

Japan: 3 GTX 1070s and 1 GTX 1080 in Top 7
https://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/bestsellers/computers/2151911051/ref=zg_bs_nav_computers_2_2151901051

Doesn't look like a small market, and there's no EVGA cards here.

Yet you can look at actual market data that has been released and is freely available to the public. You pointing out the positioning of one or two units in a limited piece of the world market is wholly uninformative, but it is your shtick, and you will now proceed to complain to the mods that I typed "your shtick." There is one data set that shows actual market share, and it shows exactly what Leadbox is claiming. Your pedestrian attempts to spin that with uninformative data is pure thread crappary.

But I wonder, since you cry and moan about people bringing up AMD in "your" nVidia threads (you know, the ones where you explicitly challenge AMD in the thread titles, thus inviting actual on-topic mention of AMD products despite your complaints to the contrary), what precludes you to think that behaving the exact same way in a thread discussing your "vile enemy of a silicon-manufacturing company" is warranted?

Don't you think that it is now only fair that you proceed to once again litter the inboxes of all the over-worked mods, but with complaints about yourself crapping in this thread?

 

[Sweepr]

Your pedestrian attempts to spin that with uninformative data is pure thread crappary.

Sure, as long as it doesn't show what you want to see. The fact is, +$250 dGPUs are dominating the Top 10 in three different continents right now, and AMD will have zero presence here till H1-2017. This is not a small market, despite your goalpost changes to market share.

Good luck competing with an improved GP104 / GP102 (if not Volta) when your current 14nm VGAs can't match 28nm Maxwell perf/watt.

 

[zinfamous]

Sure, as long as it doesn't show what you want to see. The fact is, +$250 dGPUs are dominating the Top 10 in three different continents right now, and AMD will have zero presence here till H1-2017. This is not a small market, despite your goalpost changes to market share.

Good luck competing with an improved GP104 / GP102 (if not Volta) when your current 14nm VGAs can't match 28nm Maxwell perf/watt.

What are you talking about? The comment was about market share. You are the one that tried to shift it away from market share towards a relatively meaningless data point within the sea of actual relevant data. I'm the one keeping you within the goalposts.

You are really bad at this. At some point, I wonder if you will ever actually post comments and salient information, rather than simply spam marketing images and assume that they will do your talking for you. Quite frankly, I'm sick of ignoring your blatant bull-turd artistry that you attempt to pass off as real discussion.

 

[Arachnotronic]

What are you talking about? The comment was about market share. You are the one that tried to shift it away from market share towards a relatively meaningless data point within the sea of actual relevant data. I'm the one keeping you within the goalposts.

You are really bad at this. At some point, I wonder if you will ever actually post comments and salient information, rather than simply spam marketing images and assume that they will do your talking for you. Quite frankly, I'm sick of ignoring your blatant bull-turd artistry that you attempt to pass off as real discussion.

As I said in another thread, market share numbers are misleading. The gains that AMD has seen have come primarily from winning in things like the iMac and MacBook Pro, as well as the sea of cheap laptops that come with crap low end dGPUs in an attempt to command a slightly better selling price. A lot of these designs, and I track a lot of them, have shifted from low end NVIDIA to low end AMD.

A lot of volume in these markets, but not really reflective of gaming dGPU share.

 

[Glo.]

As I said in another thread, market share numbers are misleading. The gains that AMD has seen have come primarily from winning in things like the iMac and MacBook Pro, as well as the sea of cheap laptops that come with crap low end dGPUs in an attempt to command a slightly better selling price. A lot of these designs, and I track a lot of them, have shifted from low end NVIDIA to low end AMD.

A lot of volume in these markets, but not really reflective of gaming dGPU share.

Yeah, because everywhere in the world there are people as wealthy and rich as they are in Australia, United States, Germany, UK, etc, and they will always go for highest end. In Poland for example RX 480 is 1299 PLN, and minimal salary is 1850 PLN. You think people can afford this GPU easily everywhere?

If you believe this you are delusional. AMD gained marketshare, quite a lot in recent months which demand for their hardware reflects. They have to hire Samsung fabs to keep up with demand for their hardware. And that very reason: the price and performance of this GPU and timing of it, was the reason for all this demand.

Amazon can show that numbers for sales of Nvidia GPUs are high in United States, and other rich countries. But the world is not only there.

 

[Arachnotronic]

If you believe this you are delusional.

Study AMD's and NVIDIA's financial results and you'll eventually come to the same conclusions that I have. It's all there in the open for everyone to see, if they are only willing to actually look.

 

[zinfamous]

As I said in another thread, market share numbers are misleading. The gains that AMD has seen have come primarily from winning in things like the iMac and MacBook Pro, as well as the sea of cheap laptops that come with crap low end dGPUs in an attempt to command a slightly better selling price. A lot of these designs, and I track a lot of them, have shifted from low end NVIDIA to low end AMD.

A lot of volume in these markets, but not really reflective of gaming dGPU share.

Yes, and that is the entire point of AMDs strategy: regain overall marketshare in the GPU space. dGPUs alone are simply one part of that and it's no secret that AMD's very recent success has to do with their contracts with Apple, Sony, Microsoft, etc. No one is pretending otherwise.

But Polaris and Pascal aren't in the overall data yet. This will only be seen somewhere between October-November. Amd obviously has problems (and apparently bigger problems) competing with nVidia in the enthusiast market for the next year, but that was always an issue they acknowledged with their current strategy. If the numbers coming from vendors (like Microcenter and Overclockers for one) are to be believed, AMD shipped vastly more GPUs in Q2 than did nVidia (Polaris vs Pascal)--and that is dGPU sales. But that will never be anything but assumptions until Q3 comes out and is later analyzed. No one is pretending that AMD isn't targeting the mainstream and low-end segment, because they have mentioned this explicitly several times. It also shouldn't be surprising if they did ship a factor greater number of current GPUs, because the high-end targetted by nVidia is a very niche market. Here at AT, we aren't really representative of the actual market. It's easy to get lost in this bubble--I know I'd like to see more competition at the 1070+ tier and it personally feels like a letdown that AMD seems to be failing at that now, and for longer than expected--but nothing has really changed from their actual strategy.

The pretty clear movement to Q2 2017 for Vega is very disappointing for many reasons, but I don't think it really hurts their current plan--well not yet anyway. It sure sucks for the enthusiast market, though.

 

[linkgoron]

As I said in another thread, market share numbers are misleading. The gains that AMD has seen have come primarily from winning in things like the iMac and MacBook Pro, as well as the sea of cheap laptops that come with crap low end dGPUs in an attempt to command a slightly better selling price. A lot of these designs, and I track a lot of them, have shifted from low end NVIDIA to low end AMD.

A lot of volume in these markets, but not really reflective of gaming dGPU share.

According to this thread, they did not really gain a lot in notebooks, but gained quite a bit in discrete desktop sales.

AMD's shipments of desktop heterogeneous GPU/CPUs, i.e., APUs, for desktops decreased -22.2% from the previous quarter. AMD's shipments were down -0.4% in notebooks. Desktop discrete GPUs increased 4.03% from last quarter, and notebook discrete shipments decreased -3.7%. AMD's total PC graphics shipments decreased -1.4% from the previous quarter.

That doesn't mean that they don't sell a lot in craptops, but they shipped less than they did the previous quarter. Discrete sales could be strengthened by Apple sales, but if I remember correctly (i.e. I may be mistaken) they've had those for quite a while so I'm not really sure why we would only see it now.

 

[Glo.]

Study AMD's and NVIDIA's financial results and you'll eventually come to the same conclusions that I have. It's all there in the open for everyone to see, if they are only willing to actually look.

Mainstream market is 4 times bigger than high end. It is better to sell 800 thousand GPUs for lower price, than to sell 200 thousand for 2 times higher price.

 

[zinfamous]

Study AMD's and NVIDIA's financial results and you'll eventually come to the same conclusions that I have. It's all there in the open for everyone to see, if they are only willing to actually look.

AMD is actually doing better than their targets, and are currently regaining actual marketshare as they have been planning to do. returning to massive revenue is great, but they simply aren't at that step yet.

I'm confused why one feels the need to beat their chest at the ability of one company to singly command a piece of market, thus allowing the consumer the "privilege" of paying $100-200 more than they should be paying for a product in the absence of real competition. That is nothing but a loss for the consumer--you and me--so it just baffles me that we discuss these things in this way.

It makes me think that half of you guys relish paying more for brute force tech vs paying competitive prices when more "elegant" solutions are able to compete. Be honest: You would rather pay $500 for the same GTX 1080 vs paying $700-800, right?

Is there a consumer argument to be made for paying more for something? I've never heard one that convinced me, at least.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Mainstream marketshare is 4 times bigger than high end. It is better to sell 800 thousand GPUs for lower price, than to sell 200 thousand for 2 times higher price.

And when will we see this result financially?

 

[zinfamous]

And when will we see this result financially?

Q3 results for AMD and nVidia will be public ~mid-late October. Total marketshare data is probably out a month later, going by the most recent releases.

 

[maddie]

AMD is actually doing better than their targets, and are currently regaining actual marketshare as they have been planning to do. returning to massive revenue is great, but they simply aren't at that step yet.

I'm confused why one feels the need to beat their chest at the ability of one company to singly command a piece of market, thus allowing the consumer the "privilege" of paying $100-200 more than they should be paying for a product in the absence of real competition. That is nothing but a loss for the consumer--you and me--so it just baffles me that we discuss these things in this way.

It makes me think that half of you guys relish paying more for brute force tech vs paying competitive prices when more "elegant" solutions are able to compete. Be honest: You would rather pay $500 for the same GTX 1080 vs paying $700-800, right?

Is there a consumer argument to be made for paying more for something? I've never heard one that convinced me, at least.

I think some mechanism like this is at least part of the reason.

In economics, Veblen goods are types of material commodities for which the demand is proportional to its high price, which is an apparent contradiction of the law of demand; Veblen goods also are commodities that function as positional goods. Veblen goods are types of luxury goods, such as expensive wines, jewelry, fashion-designer handbags, and luxury cars, which are in demand because of the high prices asked for them. The high price makes the goods desirable as symbols of the buyer's high social status, by way of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure; conversely, a decrease of the prices of Veblen goods would decrease demand for the products.