GPU shipments increased last quarter

[Wreckage]

http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/16825#jazz

Economic upturn?

JPI says global GPU shipments have fallen by 4.31% on average between the fourth and first quarters of every year since 2001. This year, however, they went up a cool 3.29%.

 

[OCGuy]

Wow....even with the success of 4XXX, nV is pretty much where they were at the start of 2008. Even with the mobile debacle....

What is is going to take for them to lose marketshare?


Glad to see spending on luxury items is on the upswing, people must be feeling more comfortable with thier finances.

 

[BenSkywalker]

What is is going to take for them to lose marketshare?

What is different then in Q1 '08 between nV and ATi? nVidia owned the high end market, but those numbers are based on volume shimpments, not dollar amounts. Shouldn't be surprising that they haven't lost much market share. Looked at another way, if you already have a supplier and they have been providing you with competitive products at competitive prices, why change? Of course this is the laptop issue, but to offset that nV landed all of Apple's laptops. That was a segment that Intel dominated in the PC space anyway, so picking up Apple likely offset any potential lost sales in that segment. Those are the situations where ATi could pick up marketshare, but from what we saw it looks like they weren't in a position to be more attractive then Intel at that time.

Honestly, a lot of people acted shocked because the 4xxx series parts didn't suck, it isn't like they are blowing away the competition(a few fps here or there to either nV or ATi at the same price point almost across the board).

 

[bgeh]

Hm, since Intel's also managed to increase its shipments, and since we're primarily concerned with discrete graphics cards here, and given Nvidia's design wins with Apple especially with their integrated graphics, it probably isn't too surprising (assuming the shipments include both integrated and discrete cards). Would be interesting if they could give the numbers for discrete cards, then we would probably be able to discern the effect of the introduction of the 4xxx series.

 

[Hacp]

I think its mainly due to the 9400m line, which has been a huge hit. ATI's power saving features aren't as advanced. Their GPUs have way more heat.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

 

[mmnno]

Originally posted by: OCguy


What is is going to take for them to lose marketshare?

They'd have to lose Apple, for one. Even that wouldn't do it, since they own the rest of the non-Intel mobile space too.

 

[TC91]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I think its mainly due to the 9400m line, which has been a huge hit. ATI's power saving features aren't as advanced. Their GPUs have way more heat.

This.

 

[Wreckage]

What's amazing is that NVIDIA is just 10% behind Intel in Marketshare and is getting close to double ATI's marketshare. Also did you notice the huge jump "others" made.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

NVIDIA is reporting its market share result. While its overall market share remained fairly steady with a .3% increase in Q1 2009. In looking at both mobile and desktop discrete graphics market share, NVIDIA increased to about 66% of the total market, up 3% for the quarter. When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt. I also don't own shares in either AMD/ATI or nVidia, so long as they both are competitive to keep prices of video cards down, I'll be happy.

 

[BenSkywalker]

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt.

Not commenting on that particular comment directly, but while companies are free to spin/lie their way stupid about benchmarks, being dishonest when you are reporting financial figures for a publicly traded company is against the law. It can land you in jail.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

NVIDIA is reporting its market share result. While its overall market share remained fairly steady with a .3% increase in Q1 2009. In looking at both mobile and desktop discrete graphics market share, NVIDIA increased to about 66% of the total market, up 3% for the quarter. When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt. I also don't own shares in either AMD/ATI or nVidia, so long as they both are competitive to keep prices of video cards down, I'll be happy.

Is that marketshare figure for units sold or $-volume?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt.

Not commenting on that particular comment directly, but while companies are free to spin/lie their way stupid about benchmarks, being dishonest when you are reporting financial figures for a publicly traded company is against the law. It can land you in jail.

Actually if you read the graphs the numbers are from Mercury Research.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt.

Not commenting on that particular comment directly, but while companies are free to spin/lie their way stupid about benchmarks, being dishonest when you are reporting financial figures for a publicly traded company is against the law. It can land you in jail.

In general I always take numbers quoted by companies with a grain of salt. They are usually peppered with marketing and the numbers can be the "truth" while still being deceptive. This is not aimed just at nVidia but at all companies. Heck, Apple is notorious for speed claims but there is always a little qualifier somewhere about where they got those claims.

While in school one of my instructors called it "the weasel claim" and there are various types. Basically you can tell the truth, or say absolutely nothing, while being deceptive. Heck, look at that graphic (provided by nVidia) which shows what appears to be a 50% gain in market share by nVidia.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
What's amazing is that NVIDIA is just 10% behind Intel in Marketshare and is getting close to double ATI's marketshare. Also did you notice the huge jump "others" made.

Where are you seeing that?

I see that Nvidia lost share to Intel and now trails by nearly 20%, and "others" dropped some 60%+ year over year.

Maybe you are reading the charts backwards?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

Holy smokes!

Not what I really expected with all of the 4XXX recommendations I see.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

Holy smokes!

Not what I really expected with all of the 4XXX recommendations I see.

Agreed, assuming those numbers are accurate. I honestly believe in this round most in most pricing segments AMD had/has better value, dollar to performance ratio than Nvidia. Maybe Nvidia's name is just that strong with gamers since AMD/ATi had so little to offer since the launch of the of the 8800GTX/GTS until the 48x0 launch.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt.

Not commenting on that particular comment directly, but while companies are free to spin/lie their way stupid about benchmarks, being dishonest when you are reporting financial figures for a publicly traded company is against the law. It can land you in jail.

In general I always take numbers quoted by companies with a grain of salt. They are usually peppered with marketing and the numbers can be the "truth" while still being deceptive. This is not aimed just at nVidia but at all companies. Heck, Apple is notorious for speed claims but there is always a little qualifier somewhere about where they got those claims.

While in school one of my instructors called it "the weasel claim" and there are various types. Basically you can tell the truth, or say absolutely nothing, while being deceptive. Heck, look at that graphic (provided by nVidia) which shows what appears to be a 50% gain in market share by nVidia.

Sounds like you are basically saying you eye anyone using statistics with a bit of skepticism.

Casting them all as being at the level worthy of "taking it with a grain of salt" may be a tad overzealous, but it is prudent to seek confirmation of the provided information.

Its not just business by the way, instructors in academia have a habit of over-stating statistics in their favor as well. Its human nature to self-promote.

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Originally posted by: Wreckage
What's amazing is that NVIDIA is just 10% behind Intel in Marketshare and is getting close to double ATI's marketshare. Also did you notice the huge jump "others" made.

Where are you seeing that?

I see that Nvidia lost share to Intel and now trails by nearly 20%, and "others" dropped some 60%+ year over year.

Maybe you are reading the charts backwards?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the 20%/10% statement may be based on simple matter of mathematics, although possibly unintentional.

If NV gained 10% marketshare it would require everyone else to lose an aggregate amount of marketshare equally 10%. If the entirety of the marketshare losses were carried by Intel then they lose 10% and NV gains 10%, placing them with equal marketshare if they started out with a 20% marketshare differential.

To make this "funny math" seem less "funny" lets use a simple example. Let's say Intel has 60% and NV has 40% and no one less exists in the market. NV gains 10% marketshare (at Intel's expense) so NV moves up to 50% marketshare and Intel moves down to 50% marketshare.

In a somewhat atypical application of statistics, one could say NV is 10% behind Intel in marketshare as all it would take is for NV to capture 10% more of the market and they'd then be at equal marketshare.

It's the old "my 3GHz CPU is clocked 50% faster than your slow-ass 2GHz CPU" versus "no, my 2GHz CPU is merely clocked 33% slower than your way-overpriced 3GHz CPU" situation with statistics.

Again this is just my interpretation of what Wreckage might have been trying to say, for all I know he really meant to say the marketshare gap between the two is only 10%, which as you are pointing out is incorrect as the gap is more like 20%.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Sounds like you are basically saying you eye anyone using statistics with a bit of skepticism.

A little bit of skepticism is healthy. Just don't forget to be skeptical of your own biases.

 

[SirPauly]

Sure it's healthy but depends where the numbers are derived from. When one quotes mercury research; one takes more notice.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I'd like to see the numbers for discrete graphics cards.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/...rovement-over-q4-2008/

When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

Wow that's huge! :Q

NVIDIA is reporting its market share result. While its overall market share remained fairly steady with a .3% increase in Q1 2009. In looking at both mobile and desktop discrete graphics market share, NVIDIA increased to about 66% of the total market, up 3% for the quarter. When examining just the desktop market, NVIDA reported a 5.4% gain to claim 67% of the total market.

In conjunction with the graphics and the bolded part of the quote, I'd take the 67% report with a grain of salt. I also don't own shares in either AMD/ATI or nVidia, so long as they both are competitive to keep prices of video cards down, I'll be happy.

These are discrete numbers. They dont include integrated chipsets. 67% is probably realistic in the discrete market. I bet Intel owns 50-60% of the total market when you start including integrated chipsets into the mix.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Genx87


These are discrete numbers. They dont include integrated chipsets. 67% is probably realistic in the discrete market. I bet Intel owns 50-60% of the total market when you start including integrated chipsets into the mix.

Yeah NVIDIA made huge gains on the laptop front and is clearly dominating the discrete market. However the integrated market on desktops is probably even 80% Intel. Especially when you consider businesses which buy a ton of those kinds of systems.

 

[Idontcare]

Does anyone know if we are talking marketshare in terms of "units sold" or "revenue"?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Does anyone know if we are talking marketshare in terms of "units sold" or "revenue"?

The first link in this thread has a graph showing units sold.