nVidia Q3: Revenue up 53%

[xpea]

haters will hate even more as Microsoft is buying tons of $129,000 DGX-1 for their Azure AI platform. Me expect same (bigger) topic next quarter

 

[Arachnotronic]

haters will hate even more as Microsoft is buying tons of $129,000 DGX-1 for their Azure AI platform. Me expect same (bigger) topic next quarter

I think some people genuinely can't stand that NVIDIA is thriving because the idea of a company getting paid for their products and innovations just burns them up. Consumers want amazing products as cheaply as possible, so this isn't too surprising of a mindset.

What's stunning were the many predictions on these forums and elsewhere about how 2016 would be the year that Pascal would show up later than competing FinFET GPUs and how NVIDIA was poised to lose the significant performance/efficiency lead that it had during the Maxwell generation, as well as a lot of market share.

The hard truth is that these predictions didn't work out at all, and those of us who were cautioning that these expectations were unrealistic at best and outlandish at worst are, IMO, vindicated.

 

[krumme]

Its not a matter of funds or product quality. Those just make nv even stronger. Go back to the tnt 2 launch and take a look of how nv wiped 3dfx off this earth. On a miniscule budget and 3dfx making a string of very bad moves nv moved in and used a facelifted tnt with a freq bump to destroy an entire company in a matter of month. They simply can set public goalpost for how a product is valued using pr and marketing. At that time it was what color depth is right and what kind of cpu power is right. Then they somehow defines what is both the goalpost and if eg high cpu power demands is right. Its more easy to tell in hindsight but going back to thg reviews its more or less a blatant pr piece and even anand walk the path set by nv. They know what technology is valued by consumers but they surely know even better how to tell them it even if its borderline.
Nv have always been incredible efficient and now they have the product r&d budget to back it up.

 

[Pariah]

Well you cant make up your mind if nv is doing business to please you? - and therefore is "screwing all of us" by raising prices.
So you made up your mind that they dont raise price contrary to what all other private business on this planet is expected to do to do best. Nv just delivered a slam dunk exceptional result with record margins and they did so without raising prices?

To that purpose you can cherrypick to fit this perspective. And it is the definition of fanboy perspective if thinking a companys purpose is not to earn money and that it by raising prices is "screwing" customers. Seriously is amd or apple screwing customers if they raise prices?
No it dont screw customers. Its taking advantage but the customer can go somewhere else and even buy a camera or an icecream if they think the 1080ti is to expensive. Its their choice. The company can complain their customers is stupid or the customers can and regulary do complain about prices. From icecreams to gfx. Thats how it is but every part is expected to do what is best for themselves on the market. In that way the market is actually working best. So its not screwing its making the market work best.

Did you accidentally quote me? Were you trying to agree with me or disagree? I have no idea as it appears you completely flipped around what I was saying by attributing the points I was trying to disprove as my own opinion and then argued against them yourself. Makes no sense to me what you were doing.

 

[Samwell]

Probably a 1080ti is a good deal more expensive to develop than a gtx 570 due to finfet and dev cost, but no not 300%

Fortunately there is a straightforward explanation to the profit -> Margins.

Actually the 16FF development cost are pretty much 300% of 40nm.

Then take into account the Die costs according to this:

Which leads to Die prices withouth taking in yield of :
GPU Transistors Cost
Fermi 3bil 58,2 $
Gf104 1,95 38 $
Gk110 7,1 92,3 $
Gk104 3,5 46$
Gm204 5,1 68 $
Gm200 8 Bil 104 $
Gp104 7,2 94$
Gp102 12 156$

So you'll see that GP102 is 3x the development cost of Fermi and 3x the wafer cost.
Nvidia added some margin, sure, but most of the higher prices are because of more expensive nodes.

 

[AtenRa]

Actually the 16FF development cost are pretty much 300% of 40nm.

Then take into account the Die costs according to this:

Which leads to Die prices withouth taking in yield of :
GPU Transistors Cost
Fermi 3bil 58,2 $
Gf104 1,95 38 $
Gk110 7,1 92,3 $
Gk104 3,5 46$
Gm204 5,1 68 $
Gm200 8 Bil 104 $
Gp104 7,2 94$
Gp102 12 156$

So you'll see that GP102 is 3x the development cost of Fermi and 3x the wafer cost.
Nvidia added some margin, sure, but most of the higher prices are because of more expensive nodes.

Actually this is the gate cost. 16nm Wafer cost in 2016 is not 3x more vs 40nm wafer cost back in 2010

What was the 40nm wafer cost back in 2010 ??
What yields did 529mm2 GF100 had in March 2010 ??

What is the 16nm wafer cost in 2016 ??
What yields does 471mm2 GP102 has in 2016 ??

Also,
What is the COGs for each Graphics Card (GTX 480 vs TITAN X Pascal) ??

Cost of PCB
Cost of Memory
Cost of Heat-Sink
etc etc

 

[Samwell]

That's right, it's gate cost, so probably they even take worse yields into account in newer nodes as well, as 16nm is a bit less than double the wafer prize. But as you have the transistor numbers for the different gpus you can calculate roughly the die costs. Of course it's not accurate numbers at all, but it's all the public information we have and you see, that the cost per die has gone way higher since fermi. Yield gets also lower for every new node and big dies are harder to produce than years before. As for cost of PCB and other stuff, other cost than the gpu or ram shouldn't change much. They basically stay the same, but they're also just a smaller part in cost. Everything beside gpu and ram maybe costs 50$ together. Probably less.

 

[zinfamous]

damn NVDA crushing it these days. If only I weren't such a poor and was interested in such things ~ 1 year ago, I'd be crushing it, too.

 

[railven]

I was watching some of BlizzCon and it just seems NV's marketing team does one hell of a job for them. NV logos everywhere. On the main stage, all the rigs set up were running NV, NV swag, stickers, freebies, give away.

I've personally ignored NV for years, but man once you notice them - they are every where. I'd love to see their marketing budget.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I was watching some of BlizzCon and it just seems NV's marketing team does one hell of a job for them. NV logos everywhere. On the main stage, all the rigs set up were running NV, NV swag, stickers, freebies, give away.

I've personally ignored NV for years, but man once you notice them - they are every where. I'd love to see their marketing budget.

Sales, general, and administrative expenses were $602 million last year.

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/n...esults-for-the-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-2016

AMD's was around $482 million.

NVIDIA is modestly outspending AMD in this area, but they are much more effective.

 

[railven]

Sales, general, and administrative expenses were $602 million last year.

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/n...esults-for-the-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-2016

AMD's was around $482 million.

NVIDIA is modestly outspending AMD in this area, but they are much more effective.

Mother of Deity! Trying not to sound like a fanboy, but come on now. I honestly would have guess NV's marketing budget would be way more (percentage wise) to AMDs. I even wanted to joke it was probably equal to AMD's R&D budget.

Welps, if anything Intel needs to keep a closer eye on NV.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Welps, if anything Intel needs to keep a closer eye on NV.

Intel should have purchased NVIDIA, IMO. Too late now, Intel couldn't afford it.

 

[Pariah]

Mother of Deity! Trying not to sound like a fanboy, but come on now. I honestly would have guess NV's marketing budget would be way more (percentage wise) to AMDs. I even wanted to joke it was probably equal to AMD's R&D budget.

AMD's much wider product portfolio forces them to spread out the money they spend. While pretty much all of Nvidia's $602 million goes towards promoting graphics products, AMD has to spend their $482 million on graphics and cpu promotion. Having such a focused product stack certainly helps Nvidia run a more effective marketing campaign.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I was watching some of BlizzCon and it just seems NV's marketing team does one hell of a job for them. NV logos everywhere. On the main stage, all the rigs set up were running NV, NV swag, stickers, freebies, give away.

I've personally ignored NV for years, but man once you notice them - they are every where. I'd love to see their marketing budget.

Take a look anywhere, and you will notice there are ton more NV reviews than AMD all over the web.

Besides, NV makes the partners happier at the business end of things, You think non-AMD only AIBs are really going to care about AMD, when NV lets them build at less BoM and sell at more volume in the same price bracket? The sheer difference in the # of SKUs between NV and AMD of the dual-sourcing AIBs proves this.

 

[witeken]

Intel should have purchased NVIDIA, IMO. Too late now, Intel couldn't afford it.

Intel could still sign foundry deal.
Intel could use their graphics IP and process lead to enter the dGPU market.

No real need for Nvidia M&A.

Nvidia's getting expensive but with $50B still possible.

 

[krumme]

Intel could still sign foundry deal.
Intel could use their graphics IP and process lead to enter the dGPU market.

No real need for Nvidia M&A.

Nvidia's getting expensive but with $50B still possible.

Intel wasted 4B a year just trying to enter mobile. 50B is a black friday steal.

NV is defacto brand for graphics
Extremely well managed and efficient
Innovative without spending to much cash

JHH and nv top management is 2 leages above the "plant managers" of Intel. Jhh got passion in spades, energy and tons of technology knowledge. Add a huge flawor of marketing and pr to his competences.

I would think nv stock is undervalued and always have been.

 

[Genx87]

With margins near 60%, Intel may find dGPUs viable again

But if AMD went with NV back in 2006 and Intel would had bought ATI, Intel-ATI would dominate both Desktop/Laptop APUs AND dGPUs and no matter who would be on the AMD + NV wheel they would eventually loose big time. Intel could spend huge amounts of resources for GPU R&D and with the manufacturing lead it had vs TSMC/GloFo at the time they would literally killed AMD+NV by now.

Just image Intel+ATI at 32nm vs AMD+NV at 40nm TSMC and especially when Intel had 22nm finfets in 2012 AMD+NV only had 28nm bulk.

I think Intel would had just taken ATIs IP and gone in a different direction. Intel has tried to get into the dGPU market and failed at every venture. Intel has a massive R&D budget compared to Nvidia. It tried to build a ray tracing GPU 6 years ago and failed hard. Likewise, I think if Nvidia and AMD merged, the AMD CPU division would be gone. Nvidia would take the IP and move it into their GPU division somewhere.

 

[Arachnotronic]

JHH and nv top management is 2 leages above the "plant managers" of Intel. Jhh got passion in spades, energy and tons of technology knowledge. Add a huge flawor of marketing and pr to his competences.

I have to agree 100% with this. There is a WORLD of difference between BK and JHH.