Originally Posted by tajoh111
Normally Nvidia takes 65-75 percent of the market, while AMD akes 25-35% of the market. This is a stable market which both companies are able to keep stock on shelves healthy. What AMD had thought had happened because their videocard sales were so good and selling out, is AMD thought they had taken 40% of the market, while Nvidia took 60 percent of the market. This is assumption thinking the pie could only exist and was limited to 100% was a huge mistake AMD had made.
What had actually happened was Nvidia ended up taking 80+ percent of the sales for high end gaming cards, AMD took 20% of the sales for graphics cards. While a new market, of mining cards took 35%. This add's up to over 100%, which normally doesn't make sense. But what it simply means is demand was 135% greater than normal for videocards. This mean't both companies were selling out, and having brisk sales beyond what was normally expected.
Nvidia cards were selling well because of AMD's lack of competition and value. And AMD cards were selling because of the mining craze. AMD interpreted it's stellar sales as all gaming, which caused them to overproduce their cards.
However the mining craze died overnight which basically corrected the market. Demand went back to 100 percent, but AMD had increased it's production to produce for a market of 135%. What this caused was AMD had enough demand to sell for 20% of that 55% it originally had, but this 35% mining market was gone and this lead to AMD videocards to accumulate and accumulate. This caused AMD sales and marketshare to drop overall because of two specific reasons. Because GPU mining was no longer profitable, miner were selling cards left and right which created an external source of cheap AMD videocards, which didn't add into AMD bottom line. Secondly, Nvidia cards had sold so well during the mining boom that it had saturated the market. Nvidia had took most of the public market that it normally does, but also took some of AMD sales and much of the value market.
Essentially, the extra 35% glut along which cause an over supply of Hawaii, along with the gm204's release and used hawaii market is what lead to the collapse of Hawaii pricing and marketshare loss.
Overall, it's why mining was bad for AMD cards. It cost them long term sales and profitability and forced AMD to sell their cards at cost which would remove all the financial benefit it gained during the mining craze
Uhh... nope there's no normally marketshare BS 65-75 nV to 35-25 AMD like you said.
AMD reached almost 60% during Fermi era. they lost most of the share from mobile market because that Optimus co-project between nV and intel worked pretty decent at that time. and they had nothing to counter it since they still messed with their mediocre APUs and Kepler gpus from nV were really competitive.
that's why nV took the lead and it's only one generation not usual.
After the release of GM204, AMD priced the completely rebranded Hawaii in a ******* meh... fashion. i still think R9 390/390X would sell if they just priced it at $250-300 or better just lowered the price of 290 series no need to release rebranded versions.
look at this. worse performance/price than the old 290 what a joke !!!
to make it worse. Tonga the chip that aimed to fill the gap between Tahiti and Hawaii completely failed. it didn't improve efficiency or performance from Tahiti.
and to make it even worse, they priced the Fury series not competitively at all. the same price as 980Ti but lower performance (even after driver update). WTH !!! who's gonna buy it ???
In conclusion, i think AMD might do well in the past year if they priced the rebranded Hawaii and Fury series right and they made Tonga worked. very little to do with the mining craze. and i haven't seen any person who usually posting BS without any backed up evidence like you.Edited by Travieso - 6/10/16 at 10:35pm