Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Videocardz] AMD Vega with 64 Compute Units spotted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Videocardz] AMD Vega with 64 Compute Units spotted - Page 57

post #561 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Patekar View Post

8800 GTX -> 9800 GTX -> GTS 240?

Rebrands aren't new.. You can also check out the GeForce 4 mx .. didn't have the programmable shaders of its generation (and its competing ATI cards) but it outsold everything despite being a polished turd.
Despite Fermi being an inefficient furnace and being outperformed by its rival ATI card, it still sold far more.. nVidia retained their market share despite releasing a turd. People bought it in droves because marketing works wonders.

nVidia is the Apple of GPU manufacturers, because like Apple, they have excellent marketing and mindshare. Their greatest asset isn't technical, its branding. They could rebrand the same architecture for years with minor tweaks and additions and still charge a premium as long as AMD's offerings aren't significantly faster. As long as they have that one crazy fast card the majority won't buy that wins the benchmarks, people will buy their other cards thinking they are cut from the same cloth.

We see this with intel too.. its not an nVidia thing, its a human psychology thing.

AMD gained some major ground during the 48xx series and during the 5xxx series. Don't generalize not succeeding by not outright selling Nvidia. AMD took back a huge portion of their marketshare during that period. The brand with greater brand value will outsell the other brand when they are able to match or nearly match price to performance vs the lower brand. When AMD launched a strong product, Nvidia lowered pricing or quickly added a new product to counter AMD. Add in Nvidia game bundles which were none existent on AMD prior to the 7970 series and Nvidia had a very successful strategy to prevent marketshare loss.

BTW, gtx 9800 and gtx 8800 are different GPU chips. Either way, GTS 240 was not widely celebrated. It was a rebrand, no one was bragging that it was innovative. And it was scorned and not reviewed by some reviewers because it was a rebrand. This is more flak then any rebrand we have today.

I never said rebrands are new and Nvidia didn't rebrand in the past. But Nvidia has stopped rebranding for the most part practice and this is where they have really put the beating on AMD. During it's peak AMD had 45% marketshare(not counting it as ATI). If Nvidia continued to rebrand and slow down it's product release, no way would it have the lead it has today.

Compared that to today where Nvidia has 70 to 82% it has now and AMD has 18-30%.

But the last 5 years or so, Nvidia has pushed out products aggressively and this is where Nvidia product stack has really seen an uptick in review reception and marketshare.

Adoredtv analysis is terrible if that is where you getting your mindshare excuse from.

If what adoredtv analysis was correct, all dominant companies would stay on top and there would never be a change in the industry but it does happen. It just takes time and capitalizing on mistakes. Take GM vs Toyota. Marketing is just part of the picture but consistent product execution and taking advantages of your competitions mistakes has a bigger roll in the long run.
post #562 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

AMD gained some major ground during the 48xx series and during the 5xxx series. Don't generalize not succeeding by not outright selling Nvidia. AMD took back a huge portion of their marketshare during that period. The brand with greater brand value will outsell the other brand when they are able to match or nearly match price to performance vs the lower brand. When AMD launched a strong product, Nvidia lowered pricing or quickly added a new product to counter AMD. Add in Nvidia game bundles which were none existent on AMD prior to the 7970 series and Nvidia had a very successful strategy to prevent marketshare loss.

BTW, gtx 9800 and gtx 8800 are different GPU chips. Either way, GTS 240 was not widely celebrated. It was a rebrand, no one was bragging that it was innovative. And it was scorned and not reviewed by some reviewers because it was a rebrand. This is more flak then any rebrand we have today.

I never said rebrands are new and Nvidia didn't rebrand in the past. But Nvidia has stopped rebranding for the most part practice and this is where they have really put the beating on AMD. During it's peak AMD had 45% marketshare(not counting it as ATI). If Nvidia continued to rebrand and slow down it's product release, no way would it have the lead it has today.

Compared that to today where Nvidia has 70 to 82% it has now and AMD has 18-30%.

But the last 5 years or so, Nvidia has pushed out products aggressively and this is where Nvidia product stack has really seen an uptick in review reception and marketshare.

Adoredtv analysis is terrible if that is where you getting your mindshare excuse from.

If what adoredtv analysis was correct, all dominant companies would stay on top and there would never be a change in the industry but it does happen. It just takes time and capitalizing on mistakes. Take GM vs Toyota. Marketing is just part of the picture but consistent product execution and taking advantages of your competitions mistakes has a bigger roll in the long run.

To that end, AMD is prime for slaughtering Nvidia due to the price gouging. The only issue I see is they're almost always 1 generation late to the party. When Nvidia released maxwell, AMD was fighting flagship Kepler and low-mid Maxwell, When Nvidia released Polaris, AMD was fighting flagship Maxwell/the future low-mid Pascal.

They simply do not compete in the enthusiast bracket and until Crossfire works almost flawlessly, I sincerely doubt that will change. Nvidia knows that they have a monopoly on that price bracket...which in turn has lead to price gouging which in turn has lead to a mistake that AMD can capitalize off of...provided they can actually attain modern enthusiast performance for once. I'm hoping vega will be that but I won't get my hopes up.
Edited by DIYDeath - 4/26/17 at 1:11pm
post #563 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIYDeath View Post

To that end, AMD is prime for slaughtering Nvidia due to the price gouging. The only issue I see is they're almost always 1 generation late to the party. When Nvidia released maxwell, AMD was fighting flagship Kepler and low-mid Maxwell, When Nvidia released Polaris, AMD was fighting flagship Maxwell/the future low-mid Pascal.

They simply do not compete in the enthusiast bracket and until Crossfire works almost flawlessly, I sincerely doubt that will change. Nvidia knows that they have a monopoly on that price bracket...which in turn has lead to price gouging which in turn has lead to a mistake that AMD can capitalize off of...provided they can actually attain modern enthusiast performance for once. I'm hoping vega will be that but I won't get my hopes up.
Simply because developers (understandably) choose to support nVidia hardware more than AMD hardware. AMD hardware is more than capable. But their features go ignored most of the time.
post #564 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

BTW, gtx 9800 and gtx 8800 are different GPU chips.

"On April 1, 2008 the GeForce 9800 GTX was officially launched. It was basically an 8800 GTS 512MB with two SLI connectors, higher clock speeds, and support for ..."

Rebrands aren't a new thing. But yes, they're truly abusing them nowadays. I'm not sure if its due to the cancelled 20nm node or if its due to lack of competition (nVidia) or lack of resources for R&D (AMD).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

But Nvidia has stopped rebranding for the most part practice and this is where they have really put the beating on AMD. During it's peak AMD had 45% marketshare(not counting it as ATI). If Nvidia continued to rebrand and slow down it's product release, no way would it have the lead it has today.

One thing we shouldn't ignore: intel integrated graphics. In the not so distant past every PC shipped with a discreet graphics card.. and the DELLs, HPs and Gateways of the past would bundled the cheapest cards they could find. That may skew the market share values (in units) and give us a false impression.

If you compare sales volume (in units) for their mid and high end parts, you get a better idea. But even that won't give us a global picture, nor would historical steam survey data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

But the last 5 years or so, Nvidia has pushed out products aggressively and this is where Nvidia product stack has really seen an uptick in review reception and marketshare.

I don't know, I find the GPU market stagnated. 680 GTX being the top card was nVidia holding back and waiting. The titan was nothing but a larger 680 GTX (the chip they would have called 680 GTX if AMD could compete at the time). No innovation there. The 780 GTX launched as a new "generation", but it was a cut Titan. Then the 780 TI launched to counter AMD. All this was the same architecture, Kepler.

The 980 GTX is essentially a 680 GTX with the double precision units cut out with a few architectural improvements to scale clocks.. but other than that.. Maxwell's not a new architecture. (Its like intel and its core architecture, each revision is has only a few tweaks here and there). 980 TI and titans were released, much like the generation before them... same architecture, different die size and configurations.

And then we got Pascal. Which in many ways is just maxwell with a few features added with a node shrink. Now, thanks to the node shrink its finally interesting but the launch prices for a 300 mm^2 die is rather high.. so the 1080 GTX is like a node shrunk 680 GTX without its double precision and a few new features and changes to scale clocks. This is a nice jump.

And once again about prices: prices are high not because of manufacturing costs, and not due to R&D (that seems directed towards Tesla more than anything imho). No, prices are high because of AMD's absence in the market in those segments.

Don't get me wrong, GCN is also long in the tooth too. AMD has definitely stagnated as well. I blame the last 5 years on AMD's inability to compete. And I blame nVidia's mindshare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

If what adoredtv analysis was correct, all dominant companies would stay on top and there would never be a change in the industry but it does happen. It just takes time and capitalizing on mistakes. Take GM vs Toyota. Marketing is just part of the picture but consistent product execution and taking advantages of your competitions mistakes has a bigger roll in the long run.

You should take a closer look at the markets. Mindshare (aka brand name awareness) is very important.. why do you think marketing companies are printing money? Where do you think Google's wealth came from? The only times mindshare fades and your sales tank is when a younger generation specifically avoid "the old folk's" brand. That's what happened to Jaguar basically. Or if a company gets arrogant and disrespects their clientele (PR disaster) and they get boycotted. I wonder if United is an example of this.. (note: not that any airline has mindshare at this moment anyway.. consumer perception of all players seems low.)

But if the quality of their service and product degrades, the strength of their brand will carry them for quite a while. Unless their competition have a slam dunk like a new innovative technology that changes the game. Don't underestimate marketing in business management, its the mistake AMD made long ago. Cards don't sell on their performance alone, because quite frankly, most of the consumer base is clueless.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.
post #565 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIYDeath View Post

When Nvidia released maxwell, AMD was fighting flagship Kepler and low-mid Maxwell, When Nvidia released Polaris, AMD was fighting flagship Maxwell/the future low-mid Pascal.

Don't think this ever happened. wink.gif
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3570K [Delid] Asrock Z77E-ITX XFX Radeon R9 Fury X G.SKILL 2133MHz 8GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB Silicon Power S60 120GB Western Digital Blue Scorpio 1TB Seagate Constellation 2 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II XSPC RX240+EX240 [Painted White] 5x 2150RPM Gentle Typhoons PWM [Painted Black+W... Bitspower Water Tank Z-Multi 80 Inline Reservoir  
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 LG 34UC88-B 34" Ultrawide 3440x1440 75Hz HP ZR2240w IPS WASD CODE 87-Key [MX Clear + PBT Keycaps] 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonix X-750 Case Labs Mercury S3 Logitech G502 Sennheiser HD 598 SE 
Audio
Micca OriGen 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3570K [Delid] Asrock Z77E-ITX XFX Radeon R9 Fury X G.SKILL 2133MHz 8GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB Silicon Power S60 120GB Western Digital Blue Scorpio 1TB Seagate Constellation 2 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II XSPC RX240+EX240 [Painted White] 5x 2150RPM Gentle Typhoons PWM [Painted Black+W... Bitspower Water Tank Z-Multi 80 Inline Reservoir  
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 LG 34UC88-B 34" Ultrawide 3440x1440 75Hz HP ZR2240w IPS WASD CODE 87-Key [MX Clear + PBT Keycaps] 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonix X-750 Case Labs Mercury S3 Logitech G502 Sennheiser HD 598 SE 
Audio
Micca OriGen 
  hide details  
Reply
post #566 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Patekar View Post

One thing we shouldn't ignore: intel integrated graphics. In the not so distant past every PC shipped with a discreet graphics card.. and the DELLs, HPs and Gateways of the past would bundled the cheapest cards they could find. That may skew the market share values (in units) and give us a false impression.

I doubt AMD APU's and Intel Sandy Bridge changed the amount of oem's that shipped with a discrete card all that much. Most oem machines shipped without a dedicated gpu before APU's came along, the onboard graphics were handled by the northbridge.
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1080ti FE (EK block) CORSAIR Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Evo Mushkin Reactor Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Ben Q BL3201PT Logitech G110 EVGA 1300w Thermatake Core P5 
MouseAudio
LOGITECH G502 PROTEUS CORE Corsair 2100 
  hide details  
Reply
Computer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1080ti FE (EK block) CORSAIR Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Evo Mushkin Reactor Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Ben Q BL3201PT Logitech G110 EVGA 1300w Thermatake Core P5 
MouseAudio
LOGITECH G502 PROTEUS CORE Corsair 2100 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Videocardz] AMD Vega with 64 Compute Units spotted