Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC]GTX 1060 spotted in Hong Kong
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[VC]GTX 1060 spotted in Hong Kong - Page 20

post #191 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

I've read the card only costs around $100 to make. That's plenty of margin especially if they're selling tens of thousands of them...

Absolute Bull. That 100 dollar figure is horrendous and common sense should make it obvious that it isn't true.

If cards were that cheap to produce, videocard companies would be much much richer companies and the industry would be more competitive because everyone would be diving to get in.

If a card like this cost 100 dollars to produce, it would basically means the chip costs 20-40 dollars to make, 60-66 dollars for rest of components from past previous estimates. This is also assuming the 1gb of ddr5(during the 6870 generation) has the same cost as 8gb of ddr5. And considering this is the newest variant of ddr 5, I think we would be lucky if 4gb of ddr5 cost the same as 1gb of ddr5 back then. This would means AMD has somehow been able to make their yields better than apples for their a9x(147mm2) which is a much smaller die.

Doing the math, Gross margins, if things were that cheap to make would be 68% which is impossible. 106(34 dollar cost) selling cost to board partners, 66 for card manufacturing+remaining parts, 10 dollars for packaging, 15% margin for board partners, 10 percent margin for retailers = 230 dollars

With Nvidia's high pricing, their overall gross margins are 58% and this average is increased by their professional lineup, data center and car division which have terrific margins, which makes up 42% of their revenue Considering the average gross margin of this division is somewhere along the lines of 80+ percent, it's their consumer lineup is what is dragging it down.

How could a GPU of this size on a new node which is notoriously expensive have margins this good, when they are selling it at a unprecedentedly low price?

The last time a card had a GPU this big on it on a new node, with this type of pricing was the 3870, and this was smaller than polaris by 20%. Before that, I can't remember when a chip this big was sold at the MSRP that Polaris has.

Polaris has very little margins and was released at this price to get marketshare above all else.
Edited by tajoh111 - 7/3/16 at 10:05pm
post #192 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

Absolute Bull. That 100 dollar figure is horrendous and common sense should make it obvious that it isn't true.

If cards were that cheap to produce, videocard companies would be much much richer companies and the industry would be more competitive because everyone would be diving to get in.

Doing the math, Gross margins, if things were that cheap to make would be 68% which is impossible. 106(34 dollar cost) selling cost to board partners, 66 for card manufacturing+remaining parts, 10 dollars for packaging, 15% margin for board partners, 10 percent margin for retailers = 230 dollars

So they got it wrong by around $20-$30?

Big deal.

You don't just 'dive into the GPU industry' because potentially there's lots of profit to be made (which there is - look at Nvidia)
post #193 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

So they got it wrong by around $20-$30?

Big deal.

You don't just 'dive into the GPU industry' because potentially there's lots of profit to be made (which there is - look at Nvidia)

For having a stanglehold of the industry, Nvidia actual profits are not particularly that impressive. They are only impressive because of how AMD is doing. A 15%-20% net profit, which 25% comes from the Intel lawsuit, just isn't that impressive. I.e 200-250 million off of 1.3-1.4 billion dollars in revenue. Without that intel money, its 150-200 million, which considering the revenue, is pretty standard stuff.

The cost to produce a card are more along the lines of 135-50 dollars for the 4gb(once they start using 4gb chips) and 155-170 for the 8gb. Add in packaging, cuts from partners and retailers and the margins are very thin. Probably in the 20% or less. With their rx 470, probably 10% or less.
post #194 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

I like how brazenly you flaunt your lack of reading comprehension. If you read the 'David and Goliath' bit in the context of his post he's merely stating that the Goliath (aka big guy) of GPU's, Nvidia, sets the terms of the engagement because of their vast lead in market-share. In the English language the David and Goliath metaphor doesn't always connote good versus evil. It can imply the leader versus underdog, which is pretty much how the quote you replied to made use of it. That said, I'm not surprised that a brilliantly verdant individual such as yourself chose to take it as an assault on your spiritual liege.

But that is all incorrect.

Despite market lead in the dGPU, AMD are not david, they are not the "little guy" vs the "big guy".
They have the complete control of the console market, they have the huge market of the apple macs. They have huge knowledge and understanding on the market and they have been putting quite similar money into R&D like AMD, and they have a better deal with global foundries than AMD has with TMSC as part of the fact that they sold their fabs and part of the deal was discounts in production (check their annual financial statements, it is all there).

The fact that AMD has a less market share is not because they are the little guy. It is because they have been doing mistakes, and because their products are not up to par. Those two facts do not make them an underdog. An underperforming product should not be considered good because the company putting it out is claiming they are so so need the help of the people.

This is not about "spiritual liege". This is about understanding the basics of the two companies you are even comparing them. And in both cases, you both made the same mistake.
AMD have a huge advantage compared to nvidia because they have the full console market. They are setting the full direction of how development is going there, which is completely affecting the PC gaming market. They are not the underdog in any means.

If they put a good product and actually use a PR which isn't based on name calling, they could lead the market, as long as they don't repeat big mistakes over and over again.

And so because of all that, the analogy is out the window. It is incorrect and it is more based on fanboyism to AMD (most likely him being hurt that his precious titans no longer leading after a few months) than actually understanding what is going on in the market.

The analogy I put were of two big forces, the ottoman nation controlling the same country he was referring to, compared to the hug conjuring forces of the christians, is a lot more correct.
Don't forget that AMD had actually leading the market about 10 years ago, and it went all down hill from there. So that is a more accurate analogy. AMD still have their army (and 1B$ of R&D), they are not david. More like a steroid induced artificially enhanced david.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

I dunno, he always has a bizarre, almost schizophrenic reaction to any and everything I ever post. I actually think he's starting to like me! biggrin.gif

More like I don't like hypocritical name calling (remember the idiots post?) manipulative fanboys who don't even understand the companies he is even talking about smile.gif
Like you? Not really. Mostly think you are in somewhat of a bad influence and misinformation throw around person. I actually pity you sometimes thumb.gif
But as long as you enjoy those titans tongue.gif
Edited by Defoler - 7/3/16 at 11:36pm
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #195 of 199
Awww, come on man, you know I'm growing on you! thumb.gif
post #196 of 199


gotta be an error because right now in that store it costs almost the same as 1070 biggrin.gif
post #197 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

Doing the math, Gross margins, if things were that cheap to make would be 68% which is impossible. 106(34 dollar cost) selling cost to board partners, 66 for card manufacturing+remaining parts, 10 dollars for packaging, 15% margin for board partners, 10 percent margin for retailers = 230 dollars
34 + 66 = 100
100 + 10 = 110 (I'd hate to pay 10 $ for packaging.)
110*1.15 = 126.5
126.5*1.10 = 139.15 $
Paying local official to allow selling the card is the difference between 230 and 139.15.


edit:
My estimation is when current GTX 1070 costs more than GTX 980, then GTX 1060 would cost... like current prices of GTX970?
As I said, we are paying constant price in performance per $.
Edited by Raghar - 7/6/16 at 1:41pm
post #198 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raghar View Post

34 + 66 = 100
100 + 10 = 110 (I'd hate to pay 10 $ for packaging.)
110*1.15 = 126.5
126.5*1.10 = 139.15 $
Paying local official to allow selling the card is the difference between 230 and 139.15.


edit:
My estimation is when current GTX 1070 costs more than GTX 980, then GTX 1060 would cost... like current prices of GTX970?
As I said, we are paying constant price in performance per $.

$34 is less than the cost of the a9x chip, which is only 147mm2. Polaris 10 is 57% larger and costs go up unproportionally compared to die size increase. A a9x chip costs 70 percent more than a a9 chip which is 40% larger. So 34 dollars is low balling that big time. AMD doesn't have the budget and equipment to get the same yields as apple either to get their yields.

The cost of phone packaging is around 6-7 dollars with tablet packaging costing 10+ dollars.

Paying local official is BS. I am not going to answer that with a serious response even as it is absurd or hopefully a joke.
post #199 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

Absolute Bull. That 100 dollar figure is horrendous and common sense should make it obvious that it isn't true.

If cards were that cheap to produce, videocard companies would be much much richer companies and the industry would be more competitive because everyone would be diving to get in.

Nvidia is a 21 billion dollar company with over a billion in cash. That is a fairly big company, puts it in the global 2000.

http://investorplace.com/2016/05/nvda-stock-nvidia-corporation-earnings/
Edited by the9quad - 7/7/16 at 5:16pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC]GTX 1060 spotted in Hong Kong