Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nvidia Threatens to Become A Monopoly
#81
(03-13-2015, 06:24 PM)Picao84 Wrote: Last things I say on this thread:
1) You keep trying to compare what is not comparable (Intel is facing indirect competition from ARM because of the trends changing from PC/Laptops to Tablets/Phones; none of that is happening with nVIDIA.. mobile gaming is casual at best). For someone who hold a BS-Business, your so-called analyses are pretty poor, since you try to mix companies, from different sectors, in different contexts, in the same bag. Plus you keep ignoring facts that do not agree with your theory.
2) For someone who holds a BS-Business its very strange for me to have to explain what a "spinoff" is, since you read it as what ATI did, selling its mobile unit to Qualcomm (on the thread about Tegra)
3) Good try to turn this thread into nVIDIA vs AMD bullshit. My Core i5 4590 + my GTX750Ti sitting here next to me do not agree. Again, if you hold a BS-Business, you should know there are other ways to deal with a monopoly, which do not involve helping the underdog. The underdog is the underdog for a reason: it could not compete and throwing money at it would not help either.
4) Lets see in two years, when AMD is probably no more, how will nVIDIA act, if not "threatened" by any other company, shall we?

Intel is facing indirect competition? Is that your reasoning their prices havent skyrocketed?
So in that case, Nvidia would is competing with the consoles just as well! What about intel? They actually are by far the largest PC graphics solution.....sure you can ignore that, but hopefully you can soon see that this is still very very relevant. But lets move on


You have to realize-
It is not all about market share, thats all in your head. Intel is not worried about marketshare anymore, they are absolutely have to sale chips.

Nvidia has to sale chips. They cannot get to 80% market share and be done. They cant get to 90% and win the golden monopoly award.
They actually still have to sell chips. They have to bring in money. And because they are a publicly traded compnay, there is great pressure to improve in this area.

Nvidia cannot survive on the golden monopoly award. They actually have to continue to make money, every quarter after quarter. And to do this,
1) They have new HW to sale. If there is no new HW, no sale
2) it has to have meaningful improvements, if not no sale
3) they have to have products reasonably priced, if not people will not buy them

These are just a few simple glaring issues that you havent thought about. Nvidia having the monopoly in discrete PC graphics will not make them invincible. They will need to continue to sale GPUs and will even be pressured to increase the rate at which they sale them. You cannot just stop.
There are so many other outlets for gaming, PC is but one. Nvidia has to offer compelling reasons or people will not continue to buy their cards. Nvidia has to offer better and better cards at different price points or they will loose volume in sales. There is no shake up, no one forcing anyone to buy GPUs. If they do not offer performance increases, no one will buy their cards. Since the majority of GPU sales are in the 300$ and less bracket, Nvidia cannot abandon this segment. If they do, they loose big time. They cant throw away 85% of their business, 85% of the volume. There is no way they can raise prices enough on the elite products to justify the volume loss. There is just no way.

You cant say that things will be soo terrible in an Nvidia monopoly because PC discrete graphics cards are not a necessity. No one is forced to buy them. There are plenty of outlets for gaming and their lagest bulk of sales comes from cards priced 300 or less.
You also dont realize that nvidia already commands 76% market share. When intel had 20%, people considered them a monopoly. Nvidia is already targeting their own user base for sales, look at the maxwell presentation and they marketed it as the route that 600 series users should take. They already understand that the bulk of sales are not from customers they can steal from AMD, they marketed the GM204 (gtx 980, 970) as the route gtx 600 series owners should take. You must also realize that the bulk of Q4's 76% market share was from nvidia GPU owners in the first place. It just doesnt work like you think. Winning the imagined monopoly trophy doesnt give nvidia magic powers and endless cash. They still have to earn sales, just like they always have had to.

I say all this but dont think i want AMD to go out of business. But at the same time, i think sickbeast brings up a great point in the dual core entry CPUs from intel. See, intel could have very well moved to quads long ago. But they already have completely embarrassed AMD CPUs at the same or similar price points. I dont think intel is in a hurry to completely run AMD out of business. Intel dual cores offer AMD some slim chance in the low end. Just as nvidia pricing the 980 at 550. Think of the total devastation had nvidia priced the 980 at 299. Pricing the gm204 where they did already had devastating results. Completely hammering AMD down without even pricing them aggressive. See, I just dont think that Nvidia is has been trying to wipe AMD off the map. I know for sure that intel isnt. If they were, they would have been much more aggressive. And this leads me to my last suggestion.......
AMD, aka "the competition" is not driving innovation right now. They are not forcing intel to make better CPUs but might actually be having the reverse effect. intel is careful and mindful, not trying to prevent any chance of AMD selling chips. The gm204 was priced against the competitors product but had not AMD been around, nvidia would still have to try to move as much volume as they could. The small improvements made were only amplified when you compared the gm204 to hawaii, just as intel dual cores only look okay when you compare them to AMDs budget line. You cannot say that AMD helped neither of these to become cheaper. No way.

If there was no 290x selling for 550-600 when the gtx980 launched, what would things be like? It might actually be the reverse, and that AMDs lack of progress is having a negative effect. If you cant go that far, you have to at least see that recently, the competition (AMD) is not driving the innovation. Nvidia released the GM204 because they needed to make money. They were able to snag up millions of sales and advertized to people with 600 series GPUs. This was their main focus, their slides, their charts. They sold maxwell and presented it as the option for 600 series owners. Because to nvidia, the bulk of current nvidia customers is much more appealing to them than the shrinking marketshare AMD has left.

Think about it.
Reply
#82
Quote:I say all this but dont think i want AMD to go out of business. But at the same time, i think sickbeast brings up a great point in the dual core entry CPUs from intel. See, intel could have very well moved to quads long ago. But they already have completely embarrassed AMD CPUs at the same or similar price points. I dont think intel is in a hurry to completely run AMD out of business.
That is correct. It is not in nvidia or intel's interests to simply kill AMD, far better to have AMD critically injured and ensure no government interest in monopoly investigations.

The intel dual-cores are pretty damn decent with Hyperthreading. That effectively makes them entry level quads, good enough that AMD's entry level quads have no hope of competing against them.
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#83
Great post ocre!

It would be hilarious if Nvidia and/or intel were sending AMD hints or employees to try to help them make little advances.

"C'mon you knuckleheads! We've got TONS of good stuff we want to release, but if we put you out of business the government will break us up like the phone company! Can't you guys do ANYTHING!?"

People forget "AMD" never really did much of anything.

They bought NexGen after 486 days and publicly admitted they couldn't compete with intel:

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-21/b...-maker-amd

Quote:We never felt that we could compete with intel alone

And they bought ATi to compete against Nvidia when ATi was basically going broke competing against Nvidia.

AMD is like an investor trying to take on the market leaders with the market followers.

(although I was a NexGen fan back in the day, and they did indeed put the smack down on intel for a couple years)

Look at what is popular with kids now for gaming- Minecraft, Clash of Clans, app games.

Tablets, phones, and chromebooks may not seem like "comparable goods" to middle aged or older gamers who spent their lives chasing resolution, AA levels, and polygon fill rates, but to the people who are 25 and younger a lot of the gaming they do has nothing to do with spending a $1000+ on a gaming pc.

An intel IGP running games at 10X7 medium detail becomes a competitor to NVIDIA if they price their products at a level people won't pay.

Some people think the fact that a small number of people will pay over $600 for a video card means everyone will if AMD assumes room temp and Nvidia sets that price.

Hardly.

The market for gaming that doesn't cost a lot of money has always been much, much larger and there is plenty of competition there. If intel and Nvidia say "All gaming hardware costs twice as much now, AMD is gone." they will find out quickly that high res doesn't mean quite as much as they thought it did.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)