Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
nVIDIA Tegra in Q4'2015 and new SHIELD
#1
So, nVIDIA Q4'2015 numbers were released last month and surprise, surprise, Tegra numbers were down Q over Q from $168 to $112. But I though that TK1 was going to be a homerun with Nexus 9 and all that jazz? TK1 Denver being the 64bit Google poster child for Lolipop it should have been used in other Android tablets! What happened? And what about Shield? Surely such a *cough* wanted *cough* product would have been a success in Christmas time!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8973/nvidi...-full-year

Let me also quote my reaction to the "Made to Game" event and new SHIELD console from another forum:

Quote:Yes I am, and somewhat disappointed. I was already expecting a games console, but I'm not sure going with Android TV is the best option. Ultimately they could have gone with an Android branch underneat and create their own user experience. I'm not a big believer in Smart TVs other than Chromecast. I would have preferred them to sell it as just a console.

I was half right about them working on porting other platforms games to run natively on SHIELD. However I agree that that function is merely a PR stunt and not substantial. Otherwise the system would have had more than the ridiculous 16GB of memory.

In my opinion GRID is not enough of a feature to sell this device in high quantity. That's why I was expecting them to not be as stupid as that and be serious about porting titles from other platforms. However, truth to be told the Tegra X1 is not nearly as powerful for that to happen extensively.

Ultimately, if I would have been in nVIDIA shoes I would have delayed this product for the next Tegra generation. Yes, it might have meant to lose the Android TV train, but I would not be interested on it anyway. There is plenty of OEMs working on Android TV already and that will be a market where nVIDIA does not stand to have a chance. This reminds me too much of XBOX One schizofrenia at launch: is it a TV or Gaming device? If it was "Made to Game" like they say, be serious about it instead of just going "me too" and "oh we do more than that".

A last note for the event itself: it was horribly presented and executed! Worst presentation from nVIDIA ever! Dull, lacked enthusiasm. It felt like even them do not believe in it. Just gives more strength to idea that since they can't get OEMs to adopt Tegra they have to develop their own products to get some revenue back.

I have no doubt this SHIELD will be another flop.. Possibly worse than SHIELD tablet.

Note: When I say that I was half-right about the porting of games from other platforms is because I predicted that nVIDIA would announce some kind of SDK to make the porting "easy" to make, which obviously did not happen.
Reply
#2
You quoted yourself?!

Maybe you missed the "record quarterly and annual revenue" headline of your link.

NVIDIA does not need Tegra to be one of the big players in the SOC market, or for SHIELD to succeed even. These are not their primary markets.

Your post is the equivalent of "GM back at number one car maker in the world with record 2014 revenues. Seat cover division revenues down.".

I'm personally not a huge fan of SHIELD, and my son (a console/computer gamer) said "Unless this thing runs on STEAM it won't go anywhere. Kids only know STEAM and aren't looking for Android gaming on their TV.". Then he dissed the controller design.

Am I correct in my understanding that my options for gaming with the thing are limited to using games on the GRID server? So I'd have to buy the games I want to play again? That's a deal breaker for me if so.
Reply
#3
(03-11-2015, 06:05 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: You quoted yourself?!

Maybe you missed the "record quarterly and annual revenue" headline of your link.

NVIDIA does not need Tegra to be one of the big players in the SOC market, or for SHIELD to succeed even. These are not their primary markets.

Your post is the equivalent of "GM back at number one car maker in the world with record 2014 revenues. Seat cover division revenues down.".

I'm personally not a huge fan of SHIELD, and my son (a console/computer gamer) said "Unless this thing runs on STEAM it won't go anywhere. Kids only know STEAM and aren't looking for Android gaming on their TV.". Then he dissed the controller design.

Am I correct in my understanding that my options for gaming with the thing are limited to using games on the GRID server? So I'd have to buy the games I want to play again? That's a deal breaker for me if so.

Yes, I quoted myself... and?

I was focusing on Tegra alone. I know nVIDIA had a great quarter and will continue doing so for many years. This not an anti-nVIDIA post at all. My post merely tackles a long argument I have been having with some guys on this forum. Of course nVIDIA does not need Tegra to succeed and in my opinion they should either:
- drop it;
- spin it off to a sister company (preferably together with another partner traditionally strong in the SoC market - just like Intel started doing with Rockship).

Option 2 is preferable, as long as the IP would be shared with the mother company, to be used on discrete GPUs.

The problem with Tegra, as I said many times here, is that it tackles markets which structure is completely alien to the their main discrete GPU business. The GPU business is driven by and commands high margins. That is what allows nVIDIA to spend so much in R&D and be able to bring us generally spectacular products (apart from "meh" products like GTX960, FX5800, etc.). And before you say that it is not a problem since they are now sharing the same IP between GPU and Tegra, think about Denver. Denver is exclusive to Tegra and it has been a money pit so far and was not even used on Tegra X1.

Now, Tegra targets markets where the margins are much much lower (even automotive is not stellar compared to GPU market.. we keep hearing about their deals but Tegra revenue barely changes.. that is because margins there are falling already). nVIDIA would need indeed Tegra to be one of the major SoCs, in order to have the volume to bring in much much bigger revenue than what they do now. Just think about it: if the Tegra markets commanded the same type of prices and margins as GPU does, how much revenue do you think they would be getting from it? It would most likely be an order to magnitude higher than what they are really getting, with exactly the same number of chips sold.

Concerning the new SHIELD, yes GRID will be the main "Made to Game" feature of that console. They are porting some games from other platforms to it, but lets be serious: only 16GB of memory? So you can have how many games installed on it? One at a time? The box was clearly made for GRID and sorry but that barely gives it the right to be called "Made for Game". Its a joke.
Reply
#4
Shield is a sad joke. apoppin likes it. Probably the only person outside of nvidia who does.
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
#5
(03-11-2015, 07:01 PM)gstanford Wrote: Shield is a sad joke.  apoppin likes it.  Probably the only person outside of nvidia who does.

Apoppin is in a different position than you or I- he get's it free.

With some things, that does not really matter at all in terms of "liking" it. E.G. When Nvidia gave me 6800GT SLi back in the day, it wasn't exactly hard to fap all over it. It was the best stuff money could buy, and I would have fapped all over it if I got it free or paid for it.

Shield is a different kind of animal though. There are several consoles that compete with it already in place, and from the looks of it, 4K resolution is it's main differentiating factor.

I just posted a link the other day that showed you can't even see a difference in 1080P and 4K unless you're sitting on top of it.

Maybe NV gave Apoppin a 4K tv and a Shield as a review pack. If so, it would be pretty easy to like Shield. I doubt it is a bad experience to game on one, Nvidia knows gaming more than anyone else IMHO.

For me though, I think my son nailed it: I'd be FAR more likely to buy a STEAM box because I already have all my games on STEAM and I actually kind of like the idea of moving back to gaming on a tv. Haven't been there since my Sega Genesis.

My teenager has pretty much claimed my main gaming PC as his own, and the tv/consoles in the same rec room are all his as well. For me to game now most of the time, I'd have to sit in my spare bedroom and use my 4690/2900/3007WFP-HC secondary rig. I'm in the living room with a 60" tv with VyperDrive, wouldn't be bad to be able to switch over to game on a STEAM box.
Reply
#6
You'd be even more likely to buy a Steam Link for merely $50 and get the streaming functionality you want.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#7
(03-11-2015, 06:45 PM)Picao84 Wrote: (a bunch of advice for company that seems to know how to make a lot of money year after year from an unknown person who may or may not have experience making these sort of decisions)

When I see posts like yours, I think:

1. Nvidia is succeeding. Why would they change anything? (especially over the small part of their business Tegra is)
2. Look ho selling SnapDragon worked out for ATi

NVIDIA has no reason to change, Tegra is not big enough to do them any damage, and may some day be their most important product.

(03-11-2015, 11:27 PM)SteelCrysis Wrote: You'd be even more likely to buy a Steam Link for merely $50 and get the streaming functionality you want.

Agreed for most people, but I have no PC in my living room and I could see getting the STEAM box instead of putting one their, just for the aesthetics.
Reply
#8
(03-11-2015, 11:32 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: Agreed for most people, but I have no PC in my living room and I could see getting the STEAM box instead of putting one their, just for the aesthetics.
Interesting reason. But given the relative failure of HTPCs to grow, I guess you are the exception to the rule.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#9
Rollo Wrote:Shield is a different kind of animal though. There are several consoles that compete with it already in place, and from the looks of it, 4K resolution is it's main differentiating factor.

I just posted a link the other day that showed you can't even see a difference in 1080P and 4K unless you're sitting on top of it.
I don't see the point of 4K if you are not going to increase the IQ as well.

I remember apoppin posting pics of HL2 running on the first shield on the old ABT forum and thinking it looked great.

I could see the aliasing and lack of texture filtering from outer space.

Increasing the resolution doesn't automatically fix IQ. I laugh when I see people post in forums that because they are using 4K (in the past it has been 2560, 1920 and even 1280) that they won't be neeeding to use AA anymore. LOL!

Here is the old thread where apoppin was loving HL2 on the original shield.

http://alienbabeltech.com/old_abt/viewto...d+halflife

and this is the image quality he loved so much. LOL! Looked like 3dfx voodoo 2 rendering!

[Image: HL2_1.jpg]

[Image: HL2_2.jpg]
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
#10
I have no doubts resolution can lower the need for anti aliasing, but it would have to be a lot higher than 4K on tvs to get that kind of pixel density.

If you ran 4k on a 20" monitor you'd be getting there.

Are those screenshots from a 4K tv with shield?
Reply
#11
Quote:Are those screenshots from a 4K tv with shield?
no they are screenshots taken with Shield itself.  Apoppin was using the builtin display.

720p has never looked so bad.  Orange Box on PS3 looks far superior to that muddy, aliased low detail mess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toxV57oM-cM
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
#12
Here you go, the point at which aliasing becomes invisible due to resolution/pixel density:

https://gamintafiles.wordpress.com/2012/...er-needed/

Quote: To get 300 ppi on a reasonable sized monitor of 21.5″, we would have to increase the resolution to 5760×3240, an incredible 9 times the pixels of the standard 1920p resolution available today.

So we might get there some day, but the "4K revolution" isn't it. What we have now is companies trying to sell us new tvs and monitors, because they have to sell us something to stay in business.
Reply
#13
I guarantee 5760x3240 @ 21.5" will still look better with AA on than with it off.

And yeah, 4K in a postage stamp is basically what apoppin is doing now with his 24" budget 4K monitor. But it is for benching not IQ purposes so I'll forgive him
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
#14
I thought about getting a good 4K monitor for myself a few months ago, stuck with my 30" 25X16 panels.
Reply
#15
(03-11-2015, 11:32 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:
(03-11-2015, 06:45 PM)Picao84 Wrote: (a bunch of advice for company that seems to know how to make a lot of money year after year from an unknown person who may or may not have experience making these sort of decisions)

When I see posts like yours, I think:

1. Nvidia is succeeding. Why would they change anything? (especially over the small part of their business Tegra is)
2. Look ho selling SnapDragon worked out for ATi

NVIDIA has no reason to change, Tegra is not big enough to do them any damage, and may some day be their most important product.

1. No one is talking about doing big damage to nVIDIA, but its just stupid to keep a part of the business that is not being successful alive and in the same situation just "because". The definition of madness is "doing always the same thing expecting different results". Apart from Tegra 3 (and that was because it was the first quad core on the market), pretty much every Tegra has been a fail. They can surely change strategy to make it successful? Because their strategy was wrong from the beginning. They went for the moon and what they called "superphones". They were very arrogant and dumb to not realise (or maybe they did but simply did not care) that they needed to have a full lineup of SoC, just like they have on GPUs. They were a new player in a SoC Market already dominated by big companies like Qualcomm. They were arrogant to think they could just arrive and win it all with one single SoC every year.

2. Do you know the meaning of spin off? Seems like you don't. A spin off is not a sale like ATI made to Qualcomm. On a spin off, nVIDIA would create another company where they would still have a stake on. And better yet, like I said also, they could create it as a joint venture together with another company that has more experience and market power in the SoC world (think Mediatek for example, and all the rumours about AMD getting involved with them.. in this case AMD looks to be smarter.. hugely late to the game, but smarter). That is what you do when you want to enter a Market you have no presence in: you negotiate your entry through a partnership with an incumbent. That is what nVIDIA should be doing, instead of chasing ridiculous patent litigations. Unfortunately their own corporate culture (which is very very EGO-istic) does not let them do that. They want to do everything on their own, when sometimes partnerships are the best way to go.

(03-12-2015, 06:56 AM)gstanford Wrote:
Rollo Wrote:Shield is a different kind of animal though. There are several consoles that compete with it already in place, and from the looks of it, 4K resolution is it's main differentiating factor.

I just posted a link the other day that showed you can't even see a difference in 1080P and 4K unless you're sitting on top of it.
I don't see the point of 4K if you are not going to increase the IQ as well.

I remember apoppin posting pics of HL2 running on the first shield on the old ABT forum and thinking it looked great.

I could see the aliasing and lack of texture filtering from outer space.

Increasing the resolution doesn't automatically fix IQ. I laugh when I see people post in forums that because they are using 4K (in the past it has been 2560, 1920 and even 1280) that they won't be neeeding to use AA anymore. LOL!

Here is the old thread where apoppin was loving HL2 on the original shield.

http://alienbabeltech.com/old_abt/viewto...d+halflife

and this is the image quality he loved so much. LOL! Looked like 3dfx voodoo 2 rendering!

[Image: HL2_1.jpg]

[Image: HL2_2.jpg]

Gah. That looks horrible indeed. Why did they not wait for TK1 to do it? They could obviously make it leaps and bounds better looking than that! That just shows you how far a good, well though, strategy is missing for Tegra. nVIDIA is a behemot and knows very well how to work in the GPU world, but on SoC world they are still a learning infant. And worse than that, an infant that refuses to learn. *sigh*
Reply
#16
Guys I think you are missing the point about Tegra. The Tegra K1 with the Denver cores is extremely impressive. The only reason Apple is able to beat them with the A8 and the A8X is because they are on a smaller node. On a smaller node nVidia could easily catch them if not beat them. A quad core Denver would be 25% faster than the A8X which is already as fast as a mobile i5 CPU (extremely impressive).

If these gains continue, pretty soon we will see Tegra offering low end desktop performance in a tablet. They haven't been at this for that long and already they are catching up with Intel.
Reply
#17
(03-12-2015, 03:55 PM)Picao84 Wrote: 1. No one is talking about doing big damage to nVIDIA, but its just stupid to keep a part of the business that is not being successful alive and in the same situation just "because". The definition of madness is "doing always the same thing expecting different results". Apart from Tegra 3 (and that was because it was the first quad core on the market), pretty much every Tegra has been a fail. They can surely change strategy to make it successful? Because their strategy was wrong from the beginning. They went for the moon and what they called "superphones". They were very arrogant and dumb to not realise (or maybe they did but simply did not care) that they needed to have a full lineup of SoC, just like they have on GPUs. They were a new player in a SoC Market already dominated by big companies like Qualcomm. They were arrogant to think they could just arrive and win it all with one single SoC every year.

2. Do you know the meaning of spin off? Seems like you don't. A spin off is not a sale like ATI made to Qualcomm. On a spin off, nVIDIA would create another company where they would still have a stake on. And better yet, like I said also, they could create it as a joint venture together with another company that has more experience and market power in the SoC world (think Mediatek for example, and all the rumours about AMD getting involved with them.. in this case AMD looks to be smarter.. hugely late to the game, but smarter). That is what you do when you want to enter a Market you have no presence in: you negotiate your entry through a partnership with an incumbent. That is what nVIDIA should be doing, instead of chasing ridiculous patent litigations. Unfortunately their own corporate culture (which is very very EGO-istic) does not let them do that. They want to do everything on their own, when sometimes partnerships are the best way to go.

How do you sit there and say those things yet complement AMD? Have you looked at how much money that company hasnt made in like 50 forevers? So should AMD just close its doors then? They could actually make money just by putting the millions they loose in a savings account. They would be much much better off even if this savings account only payed .5% interest a year.

AMD is still in business because they hope and have faith that one day they can turn things around. That one day they can find a way to make it work.

honestly, i really truly think that nvidia still has a far better chance at making tegra profitable than AMD does at this point.

As for the tegra K1, i did think it would do better. I think that Q1 would be a better quarter to weigh in the nexus 9 win though. Its surely not been easy for nvidia and their CPU ambitions but i am not so sure they should just drop it. Not so fast.

I believe that tegra is a long term project of theirs. It is a footing into the android world. With so many betting and screaming the death of PC, nvidia has decided to put efforts in other outlets. The truth is that x86 isnt dieing anytime soon. But that doesnt mean it is smart for them to just drop tegra. I think nvidia really believes that the android market will continue to expand. They believe it will be bigger than phones and tablets. They really feel that it is gonna continue to grow and could become a serious outlet for gaming. They continue to try to sway developers towards android and have planted seeds they are watering to grow.

As long as tegra isnt dragging them down, i cant see how its so bad that they continue to invest into it. Android really isnt going anywhere and it is expanding to become larger than phones, just like nvidia has bet on. It may not be instant gratification but their ambitions still could pay off one day. And the potential is there, maybe not around the corner but there is still this real possibility that android keeps expanding. It makes sense this is somewhere Nvidia wants to remain. They already have built up a system and have teams. The tegra division is full of employees that were displaced when they were forced out of chipsets. There is so much already in place, from patents, procedures, structure, and sharing of technologies. Nvidia finds this division beneficial and there is still this real chance that the android market will expand into something much more ripe for nvidia.
This is probably a much better chance for nvidia and their tegra division than their is AMD right now. I really dont see why they should just drop it. This could turn out to be a huge mistake.

You cannot deny that android has expanded. And just because there isnt a huge place for nvidia in this market now, doesnt mean there wont be one in the future. The only way to insure there wont be is if nvidia decided to completely drop out.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)