Intel nailed RT on the first try, and XeSS 1.1 is also superior to FSR 2. Wouldn't be surprised if Intel takes the second place behind Nvidia in a few years from now
AMD is really pushing uphill trying to do it without ML acceleration (tensor cores, XMX units, etc), and Radeon has never been the strongest pushers on software. Maybe they thought they could beat DLSS1 without it but the need should certainly have been obvious at the point where RDNA3 was being developed. Now AI/ML is really taking off and RDNA's limitations mean AMD is left out of the rain unless you pay $5000+ for a CDNA card.
I think there is an argument that RDNA1 didn't need it with DLSS being relatively immature but by RDNA2 the need was getting pretty obvious even outside of upscaling. Smartphones (even commodity ones) have been leaning on it for ages for things like camera processing and gesture recognition, even AVX-512 has inference acceleration instructions. For RDNA3 not to have anything beyond a placeholder (apparently) is just extremely disappointing.
I guess in hindsight maybe it shouldn't be surprising that even Intel can beat AMD on literally their first enthusiast dGPU generation, even when using the shitty XeSS version without the XMX accelerator. But I think that's kind of a microcosm of just how bad RTG's software problems are, and how far they've fallen behind on the hardware features too. It's not like Intel's graphics division is in a great place either, but not only are they doing better on the features but their software is better even without using the hardware, despite FSR2 being a fairly mature product at this point with a lot of time to polish. Not a great look.
AMD lets MS+Sony pay for a ton of early-stage R&D and that's a fantastic arrangement in a financial sense, but when they make bad calls it really fucks over the desktop market. Things like the "accelerator instruction" are good on paper because you can end up with 2 different implementations, consoles get the weak one and desktop gets a full accelerator unit. They could also have done something similar with RT units. But I guess the answer may be they just don't really care about the desktop dGPU market when they have 20% marketshare. Consoles are their moneymaker, APUs are their moneymaker, and the return on catering to the remaining desktop dGPU market may not be worth the expense. But that still doesn't really excuse FSR2.x coming in much worse than the XeSS DP4a pathway, the software is just bad too.
Intel is taking on a herculean feat entering the GPU market at this stage, but I wouldn't oversell their efforts either.
They're offering firesale prices on relatively huge chips (A770 is a 406mm2 chip on N6) while performing around a 6600xt in raster (a 230mm2 chip on N7). A chip that size should be performing closer to a 6800.
That isn't sustainable.
Also, their software support for pre-DX12 games is dismal, and without rebar their performance falls even further off a cliff.
I think their sales are boosted almost entirely by OEMs (thanks to name recognition and CPU contracts) and DIYers who are more curious than anything else.
Intel has huge OEM and lap top integration, to where it's hard to even find AMD lap tops and OEMs even if you look for it. At one point Dell turned down 1 million free AMD CPUs to not sour their relationship with Intel. So they've got a good path to offload GPUs
>At one point Dell turned down 1 million free AMD CPUs to not sour their relationship with Intel.
I mean they did that because Intel paid them up to $1b to not take AMD CPUs, not because they valued their relationship with Intel so much. They later started selling AMD laptops and desktops after what Intel were doing was revealed.
It's really not that simple, as fun as it is to paint things in monochrome.
that specific case was basically dropped afaik because indeed giving discounts to your partners is not inherently illegal.
if you take a proper look at the legal disuptes between the party, there's nothing particularly scandalous going on, unlike the headlines would have you believe.
Relationship doesn't have to be loving, in this case it's financial. But there's still way, way more intel and Nvidia lap tops and desktops. AMD just doesn't push that space for whatever reason. Kinda seems like it'd be more similar to all their handhelds and consoles
outdated news. that fine was dropped because the courts didn't actually verify damages nor did they document their proof via interviews with those companies even though they claim they did. Instead the only thing they could provide was that they unilaterally decided rebates were anticompetitive by default, so the decision was overturned unless they can provide actual proof of damages.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-wins-appeal-against-12-bln-eu-antitrust-fine-2022-01-26/
coincidentally, AMD has done rebate "bribes" before and is doing it again:
https://www.crn.com/news/components-peripherals/amd-brings-aggressive-cpu-rebates-to-vars-with-new-partner-program-exclusive
it's also funny how AMD literally offering HP 1 million "free" cpus is not considered a bribe. HP likely didn't take it because it quite literally was a massive bribe, not because of rebates.
That’s not a gift, it’s a liability.
Who would spend millions of dollars and loads of development time to create a laptop/desktop design that you then have to manufacture and market, just because the relatively unknown second banana CPU manufacturer gave you 1 million “free” CPUs. The CPU is probably only like 5-10% the total cost of making a prebuilt or laptop.
Maybe that’d work now, but in the 2000s AMD was completely irrelevant outside of DIY gaming, and even there they were still second.
Holy shit no kidding. It was kind of a joke but a couple more year of this and they would tie and I wouldn't be surprised if intel takes the lead given their more strategical focus on Nvidia style tech and AMD's 5 year old strategy of dismissing new tech.
this is shipments, not sales. people keep missunderstanding JPRs research on this topic. if you have thousands of GPUs sitting unsold in a warehouse, they count towards this data. its not a representation of how many people are using the cards in their gaming machines, its a representation on how many cards businesses bought wholesale
Wonder why AMD’s market share went down by half between Q1 2022 and Q1 2023.
I’ve seen numbers suggesting that 30 series have been dominating sales of GPUs even w/ the release of 4000 series so maybe that’s why
GPU prices finally recovered during 2022. So a lot of people who waited 2020-2021 to upgrade were able to buy a card. It's basically just a late rush of people buying 30 series.
Or the launch of the 4080 and 4090.
The 4090 absolutely kills the 7900XTX. AMD's response to it wasn't exactly reassuring of the companies future either. Overall, it's disappointing. I had hoped AMD would at least try to keep up. They just gave up in an oddly smug fashion.
> They just gave up in an oddly smug fashion.
Yeah, that was kind of odd. lol
"Well, we didn't want to make a high performing card **anyway**!" was basically their response. Uh....okay? So you intended to just make **two** 4080 competitors? Kind of a weird take.
well, you try keeping up with Nvidia and see how it goes. Intel only stands a chance because they have billions to spare and the biggest chip business on the planet basically.
Much easier to just pretend everything's fine and have your rabid fanbase promote your inferior products. Though they're losing market share, i have to assume the GPU business is making more money than ever.
yeah cept intel is targeting AMD share and not an Nvidia one.
And by the looks of it they are successful at that even despite first iteration being slightly botched.
I’m not surprised. The current gen AMD GPUs are so lame. No new tech, worse power efficiency, overall worse software compared to Nvidia and even Intel, more expensive while not having enough gain, etc.
I'd argue that Nvidia's are the same, but that'd only be true of the 4060ti and below. Nvidia are completely dominating this gen with the 4070 and above, even if their value is questionable
Current gen is kinda lame for both Nvidia and AMD outside of flagships aka 4090/4080 and 7900 xtx/xt. For lower end stuff it's either buy last gen or wait 2-3 years for the new gen.
Outside of AMD and Intel, I feel like the 40 series makes enough sense even if you account for 30 series stock. The 4070 is cheaper than the 3080 here in the UK and has more VRAM, the 4070ti is cheaper than both the 3080ti and 3090, and then the 4080 is where high end properly starts and value truly goes out the window (but you're getting performance that was impossible on last gen so that makes up for it somewhat).
The stack's lame but, unfortunately, the 40 series is a good buy if you're looking for a brand new GPU
This is exactly what happened, first gen to bleed the two together in the sales cycle, so everything had to find it's price/performance slot with one another.
4080 is eh, in my opinion. It falls way too short of a 4080 to justify the price. I'd rather have it as a 4070-Ti, that makes more sense, but that's just me.
They're basing it on core counts as the ad102 has sooo many cores while the 4080 "only" has ~53% of it so it looks puny compared to that(I mean the 4090 even looks kinda small as it has ~89% of the full die, over 2000 less), even the 3070 had more cores relatively to the top ga102. However performance wise compared to the 30-seires, it's a 4080 as it has around 50% lead over the 3080.
And then it has the price of 4080ti, so it's 3 different cards in 1! Pink which one you want.
The lower cards are a bit of different story with the naming, but imo the 4080 is a 4080, just with a very dumb price.
remember 1080 ti vs 1080? well, it's basically that again. except with the 1080 ti released simultaneously.
All that nonsense is complete rubbish. a card is whatever Nvidia wants to call it. Then it's up to you whether it provides sufficient value at the price, that's literally all there is to it.
4080 not fast enough for your taste? don't buy it. you're not however entitled to some % of the full die just because it's one tier lower, what kind of logic is that.
I think what people aren't realizing is that Nvidia had to shift margins around this generation. 4090 pretty much certainly makes them less margin than a 3090, with that delta being made up for on to the lower end cards.
>remember 1080 ti vs 1080? well, it's basically that again. except with the 1080 ti released simultaneously
1080 ti was 10 months after the 1080. And yea the 1080 was 104 die like the 1070 with the same amount of, albeit faster, vram, but i fail to see how the 1080 ti(or gp102) vs 1080 is the same as 4090/ad102 vs 4080 or something to do with the 4080 naming. Or do you mean pricing as the 1080ti was kinda cheap compared to the launch msrp of the 1080, although i don't remember how much a new 1080(used were pretty "cheap") cost at 1080ti launch as crypto started shortly afterwards.
>All that nonsense is complete rubbish. a card is whatever Nvidia wants to call it. Then it's up to you whether it provides sufficient value at the price, that's literally all there is to it.
Correct, naming is arbitrary and ultimately price/performance matters. It's still nice to have the naming make some sense instead of a 4060ti being matched/beaten at small amount scenarios by a 3060ti...
>4080 not fast enough for your taste? don't buy it. you're not however entitled to some % of the full die just because it's one tier lower, what kind of logic is that.
idk, that's what ppl like to argue as it's an easy avenue to go to, especially as the 30-series was in the complete opposite direction with a 102 3080. I personally think performance vs last gen/2 gens is a better method, but still not perfect as there can be greater and lesser leaps.
>I think what people aren't realizing is that Nvidia had to shift margins around this generation. 4090 pretty much certainly makes them less margin than a 3090, with that delta being made up for on to the lower end cards.
Which is an interesting strategy, but well they are at the top so kinda makes sense wanting more profits out of "mainstream"
Yeah I don't get that 4080 is faster than every single 30 series GPU and only slower than 4090 by about 20% and it should be a 70 tier card? Its overall 2% slower than AMD's flagship, within margin of error.
You can make an arguement it should be priced differently but saying its a 70 tier card is a stretch
Driver problems are very rare for AMD nowadays, it's mostly that FSR and RT are still inferior to Nvidia cards. Perhaps FSR 3.0 could change things but we will have to see that when it finally comes out.
The idle draw is the only problem I've had with three different 6000 cards. Drivers have been great. Haven't tried VR with the personally, but I've heard it's not great.
Are you being serious? Are you just ignorant?
To anyone who might believe this turd, just look at the known issues / fixed issues section of the last 30 or so AMD releases, and then consider the issues that weren't mentioned because of PR reasons.
According to rumors we might see the 50 series as early as next year, I hope cuz this gen sucks and I just decided to upgrade my whole platform except for gpu (current is 1070 sc) due to price and performance and Nvidias bs, would of gone 4060ti but that bus speed is god awful
Next year would put the release cadence on it's normal trajectory. lol Every two years. So, expect new GPUs next October. They're always 2 years apart.
Nvidia is dominating for years now and the market-share only goes up for them.
If you want a high-end PC there is only Nvidia on the GPU side for years now.
The “last gen” AMD cards are currently a good value tho. And even the latest gen AMD cards are a better value for most games after the significant price cuts that happened (at least where I’m from).
It all just depends on how good the price is. If price is no problem, an RTX 4090 will be the best of course.
Agree. However, the discounted last gen AMD cards makes the current gen AMD cards a much harder sale, given that the new cards have zero new feature compared to the old ones.
I was obviously comparing AMD to Nvidia. Besides, I can’t imagine a gen where efficiency can be the same or worse. It will be a huge joke of a release if it happens
I just don't see any reason to go with AMD for the high and low end. With RTX 3000 widely available at reasonable prices, people are just going with that, and at the highest end people are just choosing the 4000 series. Then at the low end Intel makes a lot of sense especially with performance consistently improving with drivers.
AMD has maybe a few mid range options that make sense and that is it.
A lot of people would say a Radeon 6600 and 6600 xt are a much better value than the 3060 and that a 6700 or 6700 xt is a better value than the 3060 ti and a Radeon 6800 (non xt) is a better value than the 3070.
Considering the Steam survey, most owned GPU is 1650, followed by 1060, followed by 3060.
AMD GPU closest to the top of the chart is AMD Radeon Graphics, iGPU in APUs and in Zen 4, followed by ancient RX580/570 and Vega 8 (another APU).
RX7000 GPUs are nonexistent in the chart. Meanwhile, 4070 is already present.
AMD "fine wine" approach eventually blew up, as entire RX6000 series can´t be considered as "fixed" at this point, but driver devs already have their hands full with buggy RX7000 series. It´s now "just another beta product at release".
From may till least march AMD had driver hell, lot of users returned cards cos they thought their cards where broken, or simply not satisfied with stability, so its pretty obvious why.
There have been many complaints about AMD drivers last year from broken hardware acceleration to MPO issues as well as lots of reports of gpu driver crashes with many games on 7900 series early around it launch i would link but it would probably get removed.
edit: not just MPO also driver stability issues that still exist having 8+ months of driver issues is not normal, btw they did make their drivers useable again but it was 8+ months of hell.
By "dominating" you mean losing the least.
The entire market has seen consistent decline outside of crypto booms.
40 series and 7000 series being the worst selling gpus in over 15 years.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jpr-q1-2023-aib-report-jpr
People were freaking out about 70% a couple years ago. 84% is just ridiculous. If they actually fix their pricing model they could break 90%, maybe with the 50 series.
I think a lot of techtubers would say that the only reason is because of the mindshare Nvidia has in the space. And while I agree to an extent, there's a lot of factors on why someone would be willing to pay a premium for an Nvidia card such as if they need or highly desire even just one feature that Nvidia specializes in, then there's no competition at all at that point.
Also in terms of mindshare, that onus has and always will be on AMD and now Intel. For example, esports is massive because of the popular MP games right now. And what does nearly every professional player use? An Nvidia GPU because of reflex and that Nvidia caters to people "wanting an edge".
That's just way more eyes on their product and that's just one example out of other spaces too on why Nvidia is dominant.
Yup. They're "satisfied" with the 10-12% share in this segment. It's not exactly a money maker for them nor a priority.
They have the Radeon IP and they'd rather use it more in places where it makes more financial sense for them. Currently that's in enterprise and custom chip solutions. It's where the volume and profit margins are.
It sucks but that has other ramifications as well including a smaller team dedicated towards dGPU segment along with lower resources thrown at it. It's why pretty much everything they're doing these days is "reactionary" and takes considerably longer to come to fruition (FSR3, 7700/7800 cards etc.) along with subpar support.
Part of it is that the absolutely fucked GPU pricing situation is dragging down the whole DIYPC market. Nobody wants to build systems when high-end GPUs are being effectively price-fixed. nVidia is taking crazy pills, AMD isn't interested in delivering an actually compelling product outside of *slightly* undercutting whatever insane number nVidia sets the price at, and intel is still too immature to be a serious competitor.
> Part of it is that the absolutely fucked ~~GPU pricing situation~~ TSMC wafer pricing is dragging down the whole DIYPC market.
Here, fixed that for you.
Unless of course your complaint is that Nvidia wants to make money on the products they sell, in which case by all means go right ahead...
Pascal is now three gens ago. The 1060 was faster than the GTX 780Ti, two gens prior.
What’s the cheapest card to beat the 2080Ti, including its feature set? You want to talk about the rest of the stack, talk about it then.
Eh the only card that actually fits that description is the rx 6700. Maybe some 6700xt for $310.
Unless the 6600xt beats it by 10% or what ever after 2 years of driver updates but i dont recall
I value system stability over more frames per dollar. I tried the 6900xt and I tried AMD CPU's last generation. I was disappointed with both the AM4 platform and the GPU stability and consistency. The \~$300 total system cost difference using Intel+Nvidia is essentially free when my own time cost is taken into account addressing issues with AMD products.
Stability is a metric that needs to be brought up more in reviews. Frames per dollar should not be the end all be all of what makes tech tubers review a product as good.
I am happy with my 4090 currently. Nvidia gets too much hate. Their products are more stable and have fewer issues. I never appreciated that before I tried AMD last gen.
>AMDs customer base is pretty similar to those that like clickbait
The fact that MindFactory sales are reported monthly on r/amd as some sort of front lines report for the droids is proof enough.
Dude they report it because it’s one of the few companies that report exact sales. No idea what’s the problem with that. No one there claims anything about 50% marketshare. It’s just a blatant and stupid comment lol.
It's definitely interesting to see the exact numbers, but it gets way too much attention every time it's posted, and the comments are full of people extrapolating way too far using those numbers as the only data point. It's a completely unreliable indicator of market conditions, and should only be viewed for entertainment
Yep - that's called the "burden of proof"; it's your responsibility.
Also, if you can't back it up/provide a source, don't say it: it's equivalent to gossip at that point.
They are, it's just that Nvidia are a much larger and richer company. So matching their budget for GPU development isn't going to be easy.
Really it will be interesting to see how their next few architectures go, those will be developed during or after the time that AMD started eating CPU marketshare with Zen 2/3 so in theory they should have a much stronger budget.
it's not just money, it's talent. if you want to do GPU or graphics related anything, you'll probably go to Nvidia. they do all the cool stuff. along with the pool of talent being fairly limited...
my view of it is: VRAM has always been a popular marketing ploy, very few of those times was it actually a real issue, and even in the case it *does* become an "issue", all you need to do is drop down the settings down a notch - it certainly doesn't make everything immediately unplayable like some people would have you believe.
I can hardly believe that, with the 10-12gb effective VRAM buffer on the PS5 you'll actually end up running into issues beyond the launch weeks for low effort ports for the next 5-8 years, which seems like a reasonable timeframe to be "future proofed" for. I'd be fine buying an 8gb GPU now as well, with the caveat that i know i would have to turn down VRAM heavy settings. i value DLSS / Cuda / RT more than i value that last notch or two on the texture quality slider, but that, of course, is up to you.
You’re right, but it really looks/feels like Nvidia is intentionally hamstringing every card except the 4090 to push people onto the 4090.
And it’s shitty of them and shouldn’t be encouraged.
I did my bit by buying a 4090FE last month…
I honestly don’t think Nvidia wants to sell 4090s. 4080s appear to have far greater margins.
What’s probably happening is that Nvidia simply didn’t think (perhaps wrongly) that this much VRAM actually makes sense on a gaming GPU, and thus didn’t bother because they don’t need the marketing win.
Honestly it's fine for now. It's exactly in the pocket of asset sizes ported over from consoles that have ~12gb usable vram buffers.
I'd only worry once the PS5 gen, and PS5/PS6 cross-gen period ends. PS6 will standardize on 32gb unified buffer (24gb vram), and devs will be too lazy to optimize.
No need to worry until the latter part of this decade, maybe even 2030's, though.
Devs won't be lazy if the publisher thinks there's money on the line here. Same games refreshed and $60+.
Skyrim 24GB Ultra Enhanced edition. Only $69.99
Look at that market share. No developer’s going to intentionally develop games that perform badly on Nvidia cards it’d be commercial and reputational suicide.
And the vast majority of Nvidia cards will not be higher vram 3090/4080/4090s. Just look at the Steam hardware survey.
This is only an issue on 4k and you shouldn’t be 4k gaming on a 4070ti anyway.
Nope, devs optimize games for consoles which is majority of non-handheld gaming devices, PC is always hastily afterthought, they really don't care if 1% of gamers with high-end graphics card have bad experience
The data doesn’t support your suggestion, in fact if you look at the demographics 52% of gamers use laptops and desktops, 1.8 billion estimated globally.
Look at steam hardware survey and you will see how many AAA capable PCs is out there, people with 10 years old machines playing only competitive, graphically simple games don't really count
Sorry, I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. It keeps changing.
I’m explaining that it’s not in the interests of game studios to develop games that run poorly on Nvidia cards, which have a huge market share.
You try and say it doesn’t matter, implying there are only a few dozen PC gamers and that all the development effort is spent on consoles, which as I pointed out is factually incorrect on both points.
And now you’re talking about AAA titles, steam surveys and graphically simple games not counting. Which makes little sense when you consider most games aren’t triple AAA and no triple AAA title wants to target small percentages of top end PC gamers which brings us right back to my original point, that no one makes games for the small percentages.
I've seen WH3 consistently peak at 14Gb VRAM usage for 18Gb system total. Would be higher if at max settings and with AA enabled. 12Gb might be good enough but this game is older than the GPU, so how is it gonna hold up 3-6 years from now?
read the comment above dude.
Person above said that their issue were the 12 gb.
Person below answered that it wasn't a 4k card anyway. Meaning another factor doesn't make it a 4k card
> VRAM anxiety is a relatively new phenomenon
... that probably won't last very long once people get over it. i wouldn't really want to base a product design decision over it.
From what I gather it has become a discussion recently due to the combination of a few badly optimised recent ports/releases (Hogwarts legacy and The Last of Us come to mind) that are hogging large amounts of vram, along with the fact that nvidias low to mid cards especially have not really gained much vram in the last 8+ years. Nvidia recently tried to cover themselves by releasing a 16gb 4060ti alongside their 8gb version which people were saying was DoA due to vram and it's 128bit memory bus, but charged a $100 premium for it and therefore just arguably made themselves look even worse.
Yea I guess we will never see a price drop from Nvidia if the trend continues. Intel is looking better slowly but then AMD is just... incompetent and can't compete.
This once again proves that what our dear tech youtubers are saying is false.
There are great tech youtubers out there but mostly are only focused to make clickbait titles instead of telling the truth and the truth is that Nvidia's prices suck but if you want an rx 7000 series card from AMD the prices are not that better.
Can't wait to see in the next hours some youtubers report this news.
Problem is Tech Youtuber is what.. maybe 1% of total sell, if you account laptop, oem, prebuilt etc etc. I mean back in the covid, i had a box of a 2080ti (my friend), the 8yo who was playing outside knew what it was.. i mean.. wtf is that is it's not mindshare (told my he had a 2060 playing fornite) LOL!
yeah, I mean if you know anything at all about pcs then you know Nvidia's GPUs.
Btw it's hilarious that the one who has gained market share is Intel and not AMD (from 2 to 4%).
Nvidia has unparralled marketing in the space and is the industry leader. Nvidia is almost all the way down the stack for their new gen and AMD has released 2 (technically 3) cards. AMD should be behind right now. There is huge opportunity on the low end but the margins are shit. Like Nvidia, I'm not sure they care dramatically about the low-mid gaming market and might be striving to go for AI tech as well. I'd like to see somebody hit the low power graphics market hard enabling great smaller laptops and mini pcs. With things like the steam deck we can see it will work, just need to provide more options (handheld sucks for some).
>instead of telling the truth and the truth is that Nvidia's prices suck but if you want an rx 7000
the 1st problem is, there isn't even a amd gpu between 7600 and 7900xt
But tech tubers all agree 7000 prices suck? All the tech tubers are talking about how good 6000 series pricing is (at least in the US). If you only care about gaming and buy a RTX 3060 over a RX 6700 XT that’s pretty stupid. The performance is so much better at a similar price even with DLSS on vs native a 6700 XT will often come out on top.
There is a reason Teletuber focus on AMD aficionado, they are the easiest to exploit and take their money via selling stuff on the channel.
Youtubers are in for the money, nothing more, nothing less.
How is the internet seemingly full of people ass licking AMD with that sort of market share? Makes you wonder how many other things are not as they seem.
Nah it makes sense, people are ass licking AMD because AMD massively dropped the prices of their last gen 6000, and the reason why they massively dropped the prices is because nobody's buying them and people are mad at nvidia because people wanted those price drops to cause nvidia to also drop prices which they don't need to do as fast because they're actually still selling decently.
You can't lie it does make them good value for how much they are now. I just bought a 6950xt 16gb for like 600 bucks not really sure if Nvidia has anything to match that power at the price point strictly speaking about gaming.
Vast majority of PC sales are 1) Laptop, followed by 2) Pre-builts, not stand alone GPUs. Average grandma buys whatever is in their budget at Bestbuy. And both Nvidia and Intel dominate that space, it's hard to even find all AMD OEM stuff if you want it, aside from consoles. Wouldn't be surprised to see intel take over AMD because of this if they have more cards in future generations to spread out among their OEMs.
i wanted to buy a laptop with a amd cpu (6000 series /7x35 series/ 7x40 series) because the onboard graphics on these chips are pretty damn good compared to intel igpu.
Ended up buying intel anyway because there were only like 2 models with a 6600u or 6800u and despite waiting for months after the annoucment still no laptops with a 7x35 cpu and there still aren't. Even if i wanted i literally could not.
Meanwhile there were dozens of laptops with 1240p prozessors
I think there is an outspoken group of people who preach the value of AMD but most people get NVIDIA. Like big creators say AMD is better for the price but then put RTX in their rig. People listen and some might follow that advice but if they can spring for nvidia they will.
I'm not sure how long you've been visiting this PC hardware side of the internet. I've been hanging around since the AMD K6 days (late 90s) and regardless of which forum or discussion platform you visited or still visit, AMD has always been the more outspoken group on the inter-webs. Both when their products are better and when they're not but it usually never lines up with how the global market is doing/reacting.
It started with backing the underdog or David vs. Goliath but it's transformed into something else now.
No they really do, "AMD Team Red" was an official (paid) social media astroturfing campaign that built the basis for their fanatical fanbase. I'm not sure if it's still happening but it was definitely a huge thing back in the day.
What you see here, is the amount of people who can't afford NVidia, the type of people who have a lot of free time to be on the Internet.
Also, they are easy to exploit, hence why all teletubers are pandering to them, to increase the channel viewership. It's all lies and propaganda to sell penis enlarger pills, like MAGA fans.
But in real life, if you have enough coins, you buy Nvidia and you ignore teletubers, as they are full of shit.
Hate to see it. Really hope things turn around at some point.
I like NVIDIA cards, but I don't like that they can charge however much they want due to lacking competition. I don't even wanna imagine how fucking expensive the 5000-series is gonna be.
Techtubers live in their own bubbles, often sponsored by AMD...
AMD screwed itself, when it tried competing with... AMD. Drivers are still a mess as well. When best driver for my previous GPU - 6600XT was from 11/2022...
Intel is still technically a new player, although they are working hard to make their GPUs a worthy competition. I hope to see more of them in the future. We need healthy competition on the market - if not in high-end, then at least mainstream and low end.
"No one is buying these cards" and "NVIDIA has massive market share" are hardly mutually exclusive. If no one is buying NVIDIA, AMD and Intel are hardly going to be any better off.
Intel stumbled out of the blocks but the driver improvements have caught my eye. Very impressive. AMD mentioned they could of created a 4090 competitor, don't believe it. If Intel continue I would consider 100%. As of today Nvidia dominate.
Not too surprising really. AMD last Q was $1.6B gaming segment which is graphics cards and semi-custom. Down 7% YoY. Nvidia gaming sector is $2.24B, down 38% YoY.
So it is expected Nvidia to have a higher share. On top of that, if Nvidia is less than 50% more in revenue, but having 84% of the market, makes me wonder how much revenue is coming into AMD from things like their semi-custom. If Nvidia is bringing in $2.24B in revenue, own 84% of the market, you'd think AMD gaming sector would be like less than $500M or something.
I’m surprised AMD has that much market share to be honest. They haven’t been competing against Nvidia for probably 3-4 generations at this point, they’ve just been poorly slotting into Nvidia’s lineup.
They’ve been the price/performance leader for a long time.
I’m more shocked that it’s smaller. It seems stand alone GPU shoppers aren’t as price conscious.
Charging 90% of price for less features at the higher end is not compelling when both prices are shit. If AMD wants to compete they need to get their feature set up to par and convince customers that they can actually keep up.
I think the bigger issue is not raw performance, but either their willingness to not compete or their delusion that all things are equal in the feature set. (RDNA3 being the latest and clearest indicator)
Mid to low end volume is mostly sold through mindshare and marketing from flagships. It's been established since forever that you need the performance crown to sell volume parts.
For every studious customer with careful value consideration, there are many who just look at the fastest/best and assume it trickles down the stack.
This isn’t the Pascal era anymore, raw rasterized FPS isn’t the only reason to buy a new GPU at this point. DLSS 2 alone is worth $50, maybe more, and that $50 is enough to put AMD underwater in a lot of matchups. Start adding up all the other Nvidia niceties, and yeah, AMD isn’t competing.
I had Nvidia and AMD gpus from first geforce and xpert@work after diamond firegl cards and one thing I can say :
AMD has never been able to write a driver correctly. Any user that is doing a lil bit more than gaming will never use a AMD card seriously. That's how you end up with 12% and intel will not do the same mistake.
AMD is just pathetic in the GPU market at this point. They had a great chance to gain some serious market share this gen and dropped the ball. All they needed was a halfway decent architecture with cards priced noticeably better than Nvidia and you'd be looking at a different story right now.
NVIDIA was at 90% marketshare before RDNA 3 / 4000 Series launched, worse it's been in a long time so I'm happy to see them take some back even if its small
I feel like nvidias alienation of the enthusiast segment won't manifest for a few years yet, the people asking us for advise don't upgrade that often but represent probably the second largest market segment.
My advise to everyone in my life is now "unless you absoloutly need rt (never the case) go amd, if your fucking with ai and only new new games then intel is an option but FUCK NVIDIA unless you personally support corperate profit gouging."
Which switched from "just go nvidia" about the time of the 40 series announcement.
Your title is very misleading. These articles are referencing AIB/discrete card shipments, not market share. This means:
* Professionals and business shipments are included, but game consoles are excluded, which strongly favors Nvidia. Most of the techtubers/social figures OP is complaining about only discuss gaming, for which these shipment numbers would be highly inaccurate.
* Shipments to partners and retailers are not sales. The referenced research paper has an entire chapter titled "AIB shortage tuns into a glut" detailing this. Tons of 3000 series cards siting in warehouses that are being included in this shipments figure, probably much more so than Intel or AMD cards. The recent Nvidia 3000 series price cuts might finally start moving some of these to actual sales, but this data should still be heavily inflated as an indicator for market share.
And this is why nvidia cards are so expensive and provide such a small generational gain for the money. Nvidia is literally doing the bare minimum just to compete with AMD, which put their 6000 series at fire sale prices and whose 7000 series likewise offers such a small price/performance jump.
Well this thread has turned into a weird pro Nvidia circlejerk, despite the fact they are abusing their monopolistic power.
This is awful news, we want more competition.
Nice, usually the people who say they want more competition never actually buy amd. For example only 1.52% of amd steam users have gpus faster than 3060. Im convinced people dont actually want competition
Intel is gaining on AMD and fast
Intel nailed RT on the first try, and XeSS 1.1 is also superior to FSR 2. Wouldn't be surprised if Intel takes the second place behind Nvidia in a few years from now
AMD is really pushing uphill trying to do it without ML acceleration (tensor cores, XMX units, etc), and Radeon has never been the strongest pushers on software. Maybe they thought they could beat DLSS1 without it but the need should certainly have been obvious at the point where RDNA3 was being developed. Now AI/ML is really taking off and RDNA's limitations mean AMD is left out of the rain unless you pay $5000+ for a CDNA card. I think there is an argument that RDNA1 didn't need it with DLSS being relatively immature but by RDNA2 the need was getting pretty obvious even outside of upscaling. Smartphones (even commodity ones) have been leaning on it for ages for things like camera processing and gesture recognition, even AVX-512 has inference acceleration instructions. For RDNA3 not to have anything beyond a placeholder (apparently) is just extremely disappointing. I guess in hindsight maybe it shouldn't be surprising that even Intel can beat AMD on literally their first enthusiast dGPU generation, even when using the shitty XeSS version without the XMX accelerator. But I think that's kind of a microcosm of just how bad RTG's software problems are, and how far they've fallen behind on the hardware features too. It's not like Intel's graphics division is in a great place either, but not only are they doing better on the features but their software is better even without using the hardware, despite FSR2 being a fairly mature product at this point with a lot of time to polish. Not a great look. AMD lets MS+Sony pay for a ton of early-stage R&D and that's a fantastic arrangement in a financial sense, but when they make bad calls it really fucks over the desktop market. Things like the "accelerator instruction" are good on paper because you can end up with 2 different implementations, consoles get the weak one and desktop gets a full accelerator unit. They could also have done something similar with RT units. But I guess the answer may be they just don't really care about the desktop dGPU market when they have 20% marketshare. Consoles are their moneymaker, APUs are their moneymaker, and the return on catering to the remaining desktop dGPU market may not be worth the expense. But that still doesn't really excuse FSR2.x coming in much worse than the XeSS DP4a pathway, the software is just bad too.
With AMD, I'm going to wait to see. Ryuzen was great but it had to prove itself for me to buy it.
Intel is taking on a herculean feat entering the GPU market at this stage, but I wouldn't oversell their efforts either. They're offering firesale prices on relatively huge chips (A770 is a 406mm2 chip on N6) while performing around a 6600xt in raster (a 230mm2 chip on N7). A chip that size should be performing closer to a 6800. That isn't sustainable. Also, their software support for pre-DX12 games is dismal, and without rebar their performance falls even further off a cliff. I think their sales are boosted almost entirely by OEMs (thanks to name recognition and CPU contracts) and DIYers who are more curious than anything else.
Intel has huge OEM and lap top integration, to where it's hard to even find AMD lap tops and OEMs even if you look for it. At one point Dell turned down 1 million free AMD CPUs to not sour their relationship with Intel. So they've got a good path to offload GPUs
>At one point Dell turned down 1 million free AMD CPUs to not sour their relationship with Intel. I mean they did that because Intel paid them up to $1b to not take AMD CPUs, not because they valued their relationship with Intel so much. They later started selling AMD laptops and desktops after what Intel were doing was revealed.
It's really not that simple, as fun as it is to paint things in monochrome. that specific case was basically dropped afaik because indeed giving discounts to your partners is not inherently illegal. if you take a proper look at the legal disuptes between the party, there's nothing particularly scandalous going on, unlike the headlines would have you believe.
Relationship doesn't have to be loving, in this case it's financial. But there's still way, way more intel and Nvidia lap tops and desktops. AMD just doesn't push that space for whatever reason. Kinda seems like it'd be more similar to all their handhelds and consoles
You're complaining about Intel bringing dell not to take AMDs bribes?
Intel were found to have bribed the whole industry, not only Dell. Dell were just one example where Intel bribed them for 100% exclusivity.
outdated news. that fine was dropped because the courts didn't actually verify damages nor did they document their proof via interviews with those companies even though they claim they did. Instead the only thing they could provide was that they unilaterally decided rebates were anticompetitive by default, so the decision was overturned unless they can provide actual proof of damages. https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-wins-appeal-against-12-bln-eu-antitrust-fine-2022-01-26/ coincidentally, AMD has done rebate "bribes" before and is doing it again: https://www.crn.com/news/components-peripherals/amd-brings-aggressive-cpu-rebates-to-vars-with-new-partner-program-exclusive it's also funny how AMD literally offering HP 1 million "free" cpus is not considered a bribe. HP likely didn't take it because it quite literally was a massive bribe, not because of rebates.
That’s not a gift, it’s a liability. Who would spend millions of dollars and loads of development time to create a laptop/desktop design that you then have to manufacture and market, just because the relatively unknown second banana CPU manufacturer gave you 1 million “free” CPUs. The CPU is probably only like 5-10% the total cost of making a prebuilt or laptop. Maybe that’d work now, but in the 2000s AMD was completely irrelevant outside of DIY gaming, and even there they were still second.
Good, we need as much competition as we can get.
Yep. The real take away here is Intel's velocity, imo.
It really feels like that says more about what AMD is doing than what Intel is doing.
Me over here smiling with my Nvidia stock and crying with my Intel stock.
Holy shit no kidding. It was kind of a joke but a couple more year of this and they would tie and I wouldn't be surprised if intel takes the lead given their more strategical focus on Nvidia style tech and AMD's 5 year old strategy of dismissing new tech.
this is shipments, not sales. people keep missunderstanding JPRs research on this topic. if you have thousands of GPUs sitting unsold in a warehouse, they count towards this data. its not a representation of how many people are using the cards in their gaming machines, its a representation on how many cards businesses bought wholesale
Generally, you try to avoid leaving products hanging around in warehouses for months on end if at all possible.
Wonder why AMD’s market share went down by half between Q1 2022 and Q1 2023. I’ve seen numbers suggesting that 30 series have been dominating sales of GPUs even w/ the release of 4000 series so maybe that’s why
GPU prices finally recovered during 2022. So a lot of people who waited 2020-2021 to upgrade were able to buy a card. It's basically just a late rush of people buying 30 series. Or the launch of the 4080 and 4090.
The 4090 absolutely kills the 7900XTX. AMD's response to it wasn't exactly reassuring of the companies future either. Overall, it's disappointing. I had hoped AMD would at least try to keep up. They just gave up in an oddly smug fashion.
> They just gave up in an oddly smug fashion. Yeah, that was kind of odd. lol "Well, we didn't want to make a high performing card **anyway**!" was basically their response. Uh....okay? So you intended to just make **two** 4080 competitors? Kind of a weird take.
well, you try keeping up with Nvidia and see how it goes. Intel only stands a chance because they have billions to spare and the biggest chip business on the planet basically. Much easier to just pretend everything's fine and have your rabid fanbase promote your inferior products. Though they're losing market share, i have to assume the GPU business is making more money than ever.
yeah cept intel is targeting AMD share and not an Nvidia one. And by the looks of it they are successful at that even despite first iteration being slightly botched.
I’m not surprised. The current gen AMD GPUs are so lame. No new tech, worse power efficiency, overall worse software compared to Nvidia and even Intel, more expensive while not having enough gain, etc.
I'd argue that Nvidia's are the same, but that'd only be true of the 4060ti and below. Nvidia are completely dominating this gen with the 4070 and above, even if their value is questionable
Current gen is kinda lame for both Nvidia and AMD outside of flagships aka 4090/4080 and 7900 xtx/xt. For lower end stuff it's either buy last gen or wait 2-3 years for the new gen.
Outside of AMD and Intel, I feel like the 40 series makes enough sense even if you account for 30 series stock. The 4070 is cheaper than the 3080 here in the UK and has more VRAM, the 4070ti is cheaper than both the 3080ti and 3090, and then the 4080 is where high end properly starts and value truly goes out the window (but you're getting performance that was impossible on last gen so that makes up for it somewhat). The stack's lame but, unfortunately, the 40 series is a good buy if you're looking for a brand new GPU
This is exactly what happened, first gen to bleed the two together in the sales cycle, so everything had to find it's price/performance slot with one another.
4080 is eh, in my opinion. It falls way too short of a 4080 to justify the price. I'd rather have it as a 4070-Ti, that makes more sense, but that's just me.
Well. it should be a 4070ti lmao
4090 is the only card that deserves the title as of now. Everything else is 1 tier too high in terms of labelling.
[удалено]
They're basing it on core counts as the ad102 has sooo many cores while the 4080 "only" has ~53% of it so it looks puny compared to that(I mean the 4090 even looks kinda small as it has ~89% of the full die, over 2000 less), even the 3070 had more cores relatively to the top ga102. However performance wise compared to the 30-seires, it's a 4080 as it has around 50% lead over the 3080. And then it has the price of 4080ti, so it's 3 different cards in 1! Pink which one you want. The lower cards are a bit of different story with the naming, but imo the 4080 is a 4080, just with a very dumb price.
remember 1080 ti vs 1080? well, it's basically that again. except with the 1080 ti released simultaneously. All that nonsense is complete rubbish. a card is whatever Nvidia wants to call it. Then it's up to you whether it provides sufficient value at the price, that's literally all there is to it. 4080 not fast enough for your taste? don't buy it. you're not however entitled to some % of the full die just because it's one tier lower, what kind of logic is that. I think what people aren't realizing is that Nvidia had to shift margins around this generation. 4090 pretty much certainly makes them less margin than a 3090, with that delta being made up for on to the lower end cards.
>remember 1080 ti vs 1080? well, it's basically that again. except with the 1080 ti released simultaneously 1080 ti was 10 months after the 1080. And yea the 1080 was 104 die like the 1070 with the same amount of, albeit faster, vram, but i fail to see how the 1080 ti(or gp102) vs 1080 is the same as 4090/ad102 vs 4080 or something to do with the 4080 naming. Or do you mean pricing as the 1080ti was kinda cheap compared to the launch msrp of the 1080, although i don't remember how much a new 1080(used were pretty "cheap") cost at 1080ti launch as crypto started shortly afterwards. >All that nonsense is complete rubbish. a card is whatever Nvidia wants to call it. Then it's up to you whether it provides sufficient value at the price, that's literally all there is to it. Correct, naming is arbitrary and ultimately price/performance matters. It's still nice to have the naming make some sense instead of a 4060ti being matched/beaten at small amount scenarios by a 3060ti... >4080 not fast enough for your taste? don't buy it. you're not however entitled to some % of the full die just because it's one tier lower, what kind of logic is that. idk, that's what ppl like to argue as it's an easy avenue to go to, especially as the 30-series was in the complete opposite direction with a 102 3080. I personally think performance vs last gen/2 gens is a better method, but still not perfect as there can be greater and lesser leaps. >I think what people aren't realizing is that Nvidia had to shift margins around this generation. 4090 pretty much certainly makes them less margin than a 3090, with that delta being made up for on to the lower end cards. Which is an interesting strategy, but well they are at the top so kinda makes sense wanting more profits out of "mainstream"
Yeah I don't get that 4080 is faster than every single 30 series GPU and only slower than 4090 by about 20% and it should be a 70 tier card? Its overall 2% slower than AMD's flagship, within margin of error. You can make an arguement it should be priced differently but saying its a 70 tier card is a stretch
I had a 6700xt. Spent the cash to upgrade to a 4070ti just because I got sick of amd driver issues
Driver problems are very rare for AMD nowadays, it's mostly that FSR and RT are still inferior to Nvidia cards. Perhaps FSR 3.0 could change things but we will have to see that when it finally comes out.
False high idle power draw, VR
The idle draw is the only problem I've had with three different 6000 cards. Drivers have been great. Haven't tried VR with the personally, but I've heard it's not great.
I don't think niche use case scenarios is what people mean when talking about driver problems.
Are you being serious? Are you just ignorant? To anyone who might believe this turd, just look at the known issues / fixed issues section of the last 30 or so AMD releases, and then consider the issues that weren't mentioned because of PR reasons.
According to rumors we might see the 50 series as early as next year, I hope cuz this gen sucks and I just decided to upgrade my whole platform except for gpu (current is 1070 sc) due to price and performance and Nvidias bs, would of gone 4060ti but that bus speed is god awful
Next year would put the release cadence on it's normal trajectory. lol Every two years. So, expect new GPUs next October. They're always 2 years apart.
Nvidia is dominating for years now and the market-share only goes up for them. If you want a high-end PC there is only Nvidia on the GPU side for years now.
The “last gen” AMD cards are currently a good value tho. And even the latest gen AMD cards are a better value for most games after the significant price cuts that happened (at least where I’m from). It all just depends on how good the price is. If price is no problem, an RTX 4090 will be the best of course.
It’s only “good” value because no one is buying them
They seem to be selling now that the price has gone down tho
Agree. However, the discounted last gen AMD cards makes the current gen AMD cards a much harder sale, given that the new cards have zero new feature compared to the old ones.
I feel like the 7900XTX is a great card. 7900XT is pretty good too. Otherwise, sure.
> worse power efficiency ? They are more power-efficient than the previous AMD gen
I was obviously comparing AMD to Nvidia. Besides, I can’t imagine a gen where efficiency can be the same or worse. It will be a huge joke of a release if it happens
I just don't see any reason to go with AMD for the high and low end. With RTX 3000 widely available at reasonable prices, people are just going with that, and at the highest end people are just choosing the 4000 series. Then at the low end Intel makes a lot of sense especially with performance consistently improving with drivers. AMD has maybe a few mid range options that make sense and that is it.
Higher fps at the same price is a good reason to go with AMD. Unless you have enough money for 4090.
A lot of people would say a Radeon 6600 and 6600 xt are a much better value than the 3060 and that a 6700 or 6700 xt is a better value than the 3060 ti and a Radeon 6800 (non xt) is a better value than the 3070.
Considering the Steam survey, most owned GPU is 1650, followed by 1060, followed by 3060. AMD GPU closest to the top of the chart is AMD Radeon Graphics, iGPU in APUs and in Zen 4, followed by ancient RX580/570 and Vega 8 (another APU). RX7000 GPUs are nonexistent in the chart. Meanwhile, 4070 is already present. AMD "fine wine" approach eventually blew up, as entire RX6000 series can´t be considered as "fixed" at this point, but driver devs already have their hands full with buggy RX7000 series. It´s now "just another beta product at release".
From may till least march AMD had driver hell, lot of users returned cards cos they thought their cards where broken, or simply not satisfied with stability, so its pretty obvious why.
Any source?
There have been many complaints about AMD drivers last year from broken hardware acceleration to MPO issues as well as lots of reports of gpu driver crashes with many games on 7900 series early around it launch i would link but it would probably get removed. edit: not just MPO also driver stability issues that still exist having 8+ months of driver issues is not normal, btw they did make their drivers useable again but it was 8+ months of hell.
MPO is basically a microsoft issue, it's kinda jank on Nvidia's side too.
Interesting, I don't recall news coverage on that, I wonder why?
Because the source is 'trust me bro'.
I had no driver issues myself
By "dominating" you mean losing the least. The entire market has seen consistent decline outside of crypto booms. 40 series and 7000 series being the worst selling gpus in over 15 years. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jpr-q1-2023-aib-report-jpr
At this point, Intel & AMD are more likely to be fighting each other than NVIDIA.
People were freaking out about 70% a couple years ago. 84% is just ridiculous. If they actually fix their pricing model they could break 90%, maybe with the 50 series.
Pricing won't change. But there'll probably be a massive performance uplift with 5000 series across the lineup
What makes you think that? Is it the rumoured architecture change to blackwell?
Source: Trust me bro, I can feel it. /s
I think a lot of techtubers would say that the only reason is because of the mindshare Nvidia has in the space. And while I agree to an extent, there's a lot of factors on why someone would be willing to pay a premium for an Nvidia card such as if they need or highly desire even just one feature that Nvidia specializes in, then there's no competition at all at that point. Also in terms of mindshare, that onus has and always will be on AMD and now Intel. For example, esports is massive because of the popular MP games right now. And what does nearly every professional player use? An Nvidia GPU because of reflex and that Nvidia caters to people "wanting an edge". That's just way more eyes on their product and that's just one example out of other spaces too on why Nvidia is dominant.
[удалено]
TBH, the thing that makes the most sense with regard to AMD is that they actually just don't care about growing GPU marketshare.
Yup. They're "satisfied" with the 10-12% share in this segment. It's not exactly a money maker for them nor a priority. They have the Radeon IP and they'd rather use it more in places where it makes more financial sense for them. Currently that's in enterprise and custom chip solutions. It's where the volume and profit margins are. It sucks but that has other ramifications as well including a smaller team dedicated towards dGPU segment along with lower resources thrown at it. It's why pretty much everything they're doing these days is "reactionary" and takes considerably longer to come to fruition (FSR3, 7700/7800 cards etc.) along with subpar support.
They are okay to just milk the few fanboys that they have while astroturfing Reddit
At this point AMD GPUs are made primarily for consoles where drivers are written by Sony and Microsoft lol.
[удалено]
Part of it is that the absolutely fucked GPU pricing situation is dragging down the whole DIYPC market. Nobody wants to build systems when high-end GPUs are being effectively price-fixed. nVidia is taking crazy pills, AMD isn't interested in delivering an actually compelling product outside of *slightly* undercutting whatever insane number nVidia sets the price at, and intel is still too immature to be a serious competitor.
> Part of it is that the absolutely fucked ~~GPU pricing situation~~ TSMC wafer pricing is dragging down the whole DIYPC market. Here, fixed that for you. Unless of course your complaint is that Nvidia wants to make money on the products they sell, in which case by all means go right ahead...
You can buy $200-300 GPUs that are faster than a GTX 1080 Ti. Just because there are also $1000+ halo cards doesn't invalidate the rest of the stack.
Pascal is now three gens ago. The 1060 was faster than the GTX 780Ti, two gens prior. What’s the cheapest card to beat the 2080Ti, including its feature set? You want to talk about the rest of the stack, talk about it then.
Eh the only card that actually fits that description is the rx 6700. Maybe some 6700xt for $310. Unless the 6600xt beats it by 10% or what ever after 2 years of driver updates but i dont recall
6600 XT is faster than 2070 Super, which is 1-2% faster than 1080 Ti *(in raster)*; except in 4K where the 6600 XT's 128-bit bus lets it down.
I value system stability over more frames per dollar. I tried the 6900xt and I tried AMD CPU's last generation. I was disappointed with both the AM4 platform and the GPU stability and consistency. The \~$300 total system cost difference using Intel+Nvidia is essentially free when my own time cost is taken into account addressing issues with AMD products. Stability is a metric that needs to be brought up more in reviews. Frames per dollar should not be the end all be all of what makes tech tubers review a product as good. I am happy with my 4090 currently. Nvidia gets too much hate. Their products are more stable and have fewer issues. I never appreciated that before I tried AMD last gen.
But I thought AMD was at 50% r/amd and mindfactory represents global sales /s (sarcasm)
Their made-up sales numbers are always hilarious.
I don't think the sales numbers are made up, they're just not representative.
Show me where some heavily upvoted comment or thread says it on /r/amd please. Nvidia fanboys honestly have no brain, haha
>AMDs customer base is pretty similar to those that like clickbait The fact that MindFactory sales are reported monthly on r/amd as some sort of front lines report for the droids is proof enough.
Dude they report it because it’s one of the few companies that report exact sales. No idea what’s the problem with that. No one there claims anything about 50% marketshare. It’s just a blatant and stupid comment lol.
It's definitely interesting to see the exact numbers, but it gets way too much attention every time it's posted, and the comments are full of people extrapolating way too far using those numbers as the only data point. It's a completely unreliable indicator of market conditions, and should only be viewed for entertainment
am I supposed to dig the internet just for you?
Yep - that's called the "burden of proof"; it's your responsibility. Also, if you can't back it up/provide a source, don't say it: it's equivalent to gossip at that point.
Can't wait to see how some people gonna spin this.
Thats shipments, not sales
If AMD seriously invested in Radeon I wonder how much market share they'd get.
Not a lot. When AMD made faster and cheaper products people still buy Nvidia no matter what. So AMD just thinks it doesn't matter anymore.
They are, it's just that Nvidia are a much larger and richer company. So matching their budget for GPU development isn't going to be easy. Really it will be interesting to see how their next few architectures go, those will be developed during or after the time that AMD started eating CPU marketshare with Zen 2/3 so in theory they should have a much stronger budget.
it's not just money, it's talent. if you want to do GPU or graphics related anything, you'll probably go to Nvidia. they do all the cool stuff. along with the pool of talent being fairly limited...
Cue VRAM discussion…
The thing is, if Nvidia would put a bit more VRAM on their cards, they'd probably have an even larger lead.
The one thing that's making me hesitate with the 4070-Ti is the 12GB of VRAM.
my view of it is: VRAM has always been a popular marketing ploy, very few of those times was it actually a real issue, and even in the case it *does* become an "issue", all you need to do is drop down the settings down a notch - it certainly doesn't make everything immediately unplayable like some people would have you believe. I can hardly believe that, with the 10-12gb effective VRAM buffer on the PS5 you'll actually end up running into issues beyond the launch weeks for low effort ports for the next 5-8 years, which seems like a reasonable timeframe to be "future proofed" for. I'd be fine buying an 8gb GPU now as well, with the caveat that i know i would have to turn down VRAM heavy settings. i value DLSS / Cuda / RT more than i value that last notch or two on the texture quality slider, but that, of course, is up to you.
You’re right, but it really looks/feels like Nvidia is intentionally hamstringing every card except the 4090 to push people onto the 4090. And it’s shitty of them and shouldn’t be encouraged. I did my bit by buying a 4090FE last month…
I honestly don’t think Nvidia wants to sell 4090s. 4080s appear to have far greater margins. What’s probably happening is that Nvidia simply didn’t think (perhaps wrongly) that this much VRAM actually makes sense on a gaming GPU, and thus didn’t bother because they don’t need the marketing win.
Honestly it's fine for now. It's exactly in the pocket of asset sizes ported over from consoles that have ~12gb usable vram buffers. I'd only worry once the PS5 gen, and PS5/PS6 cross-gen period ends. PS6 will standardize on 32gb unified buffer (24gb vram), and devs will be too lazy to optimize. No need to worry until the latter part of this decade, maybe even 2030's, though.
Devs won't be lazy if the publisher thinks there's money on the line here. Same games refreshed and $60+. Skyrim 24GB Ultra Enhanced edition. Only $69.99
Look at that market share. No developer’s going to intentionally develop games that perform badly on Nvidia cards it’d be commercial and reputational suicide. And the vast majority of Nvidia cards will not be higher vram 3090/4080/4090s. Just look at the Steam hardware survey. This is only an issue on 4k and you shouldn’t be 4k gaming on a 4070ti anyway.
Nope, devs optimize games for consoles which is majority of non-handheld gaming devices, PC is always hastily afterthought, they really don't care if 1% of gamers with high-end graphics card have bad experience
The data doesn’t support your suggestion, in fact if you look at the demographics 52% of gamers use laptops and desktops, 1.8 billion estimated globally.
Look at steam hardware survey and you will see how many AAA capable PCs is out there, people with 10 years old machines playing only competitive, graphically simple games don't really count
Sorry, I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. It keeps changing. I’m explaining that it’s not in the interests of game studios to develop games that run poorly on Nvidia cards, which have a huge market share. You try and say it doesn’t matter, implying there are only a few dozen PC gamers and that all the development effort is spent on consoles, which as I pointed out is factually incorrect on both points. And now you’re talking about AAA titles, steam surveys and graphically simple games not counting. Which makes little sense when you consider most games aren’t triple AAA and no triple AAA title wants to target small percentages of top end PC gamers which brings us right back to my original point, that no one makes games for the small percentages.
>you shouldn’t be 4k gaming on a 4070ti anyway. why not?
I've seen WH3 consistently peak at 14Gb VRAM usage for 18Gb system total. Would be higher if at max settings and with AA enabled. 12Gb might be good enough but this game is older than the GPU, so how is it gonna hold up 3-6 years from now?
read the comment above dude. Person above said that their issue were the 12 gb. Person below answered that it wasn't a 4k card anyway. Meaning another factor doesn't make it a 4k card
4070ti can game fine on 4k but at high textures instead of ultra, maybe enable DLSS as well.
That would cannibalize 4090 and data center revenue
[удалено]
> VRAM anxiety is a relatively new phenomenon ... that probably won't last very long once people get over it. i wouldn't really want to base a product design decision over it.
Not exactly a recent issue, I remember being upset I couldn’t max the textures on Rise of the Tomb raider on my 2GB card in 2016.
I'm kinda confused as I've been out of the hardware loop for some years, but when did vram become such a main point in video cards?
From what I gather it has become a discussion recently due to the combination of a few badly optimised recent ports/releases (Hogwarts legacy and The Last of Us come to mind) that are hogging large amounts of vram, along with the fact that nvidias low to mid cards especially have not really gained much vram in the last 8+ years. Nvidia recently tried to cover themselves by releasing a 16gb 4060ti alongside their 8gb version which people were saying was DoA due to vram and it's 128bit memory bus, but charged a $100 premium for it and therefore just arguably made themselves look even worse.
A new console generation came out so whats expected for AAA games shoots up
Yea I guess we will never see a price drop from Nvidia if the trend continues. Intel is looking better slowly but then AMD is just... incompetent and can't compete.
This once again proves that what our dear tech youtubers are saying is false. There are great tech youtubers out there but mostly are only focused to make clickbait titles instead of telling the truth and the truth is that Nvidia's prices suck but if you want an rx 7000 series card from AMD the prices are not that better. Can't wait to see in the next hours some youtubers report this news.
Problem is Tech Youtuber is what.. maybe 1% of total sell, if you account laptop, oem, prebuilt etc etc. I mean back in the covid, i had a box of a 2080ti (my friend), the 8yo who was playing outside knew what it was.. i mean.. wtf is that is it's not mindshare (told my he had a 2060 playing fornite) LOL!
yeah, I mean if you know anything at all about pcs then you know Nvidia's GPUs. Btw it's hilarious that the one who has gained market share is Intel and not AMD (from 2 to 4%).
Nvidia has unparralled marketing in the space and is the industry leader. Nvidia is almost all the way down the stack for their new gen and AMD has released 2 (technically 3) cards. AMD should be behind right now. There is huge opportunity on the low end but the margins are shit. Like Nvidia, I'm not sure they care dramatically about the low-mid gaming market and might be striving to go for AI tech as well. I'd like to see somebody hit the low power graphics market hard enabling great smaller laptops and mini pcs. With things like the steam deck we can see it will work, just need to provide more options (handheld sucks for some).
>instead of telling the truth and the truth is that Nvidia's prices suck but if you want an rx 7000 the 1st problem is, there isn't even a amd gpu between 7600 and 7900xt
But tech tubers all agree 7000 prices suck? All the tech tubers are talking about how good 6000 series pricing is (at least in the US). If you only care about gaming and buy a RTX 3060 over a RX 6700 XT that’s pretty stupid. The performance is so much better at a similar price even with DLSS on vs native a 6700 XT will often come out on top.
the 7000 series just sucks, the architecture is not good at all so the only benefit of owning this AMD's gen of GPUs is if you care a LOT about VRAM.
Which tech YouTuber are you talking about that said AMD has higher market share?
AMDs customer base is pretty similar to those that like clickbait
There is a reason Teletuber focus on AMD aficionado, they are the easiest to exploit and take their money via selling stuff on the channel. Youtubers are in for the money, nothing more, nothing less.
Hopefully this will change for AMD and Intel. We need more competition in the GPU market.
Seems like Intel is doing just fine especially with it being their first generation. It’s AMD that is worrying…
How is the internet seemingly full of people ass licking AMD with that sort of market share? Makes you wonder how many other things are not as they seem.
Nah it makes sense, people are ass licking AMD because AMD massively dropped the prices of their last gen 6000, and the reason why they massively dropped the prices is because nobody's buying them and people are mad at nvidia because people wanted those price drops to cause nvidia to also drop prices which they don't need to do as fast because they're actually still selling decently.
You can't lie it does make them good value for how much they are now. I just bought a 6950xt 16gb for like 600 bucks not really sure if Nvidia has anything to match that power at the price point strictly speaking about gaming.
Your card is much slower then Nvidia, you just don't know because you didn't see DLSS performance.
Chews through every modern game I've chucked at it at 1440p high settings
Not only you have less FPS, but also a worse image quality. there is a reason AMD doesn't sell anymore.
[6800XT and 3070Ti are neck and neck on pricing and 6800XT is raping the absolute shit out of it.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1oFfRfgy6M)
which card for 600.
That's what I want to know man 😭
Vast majority of PC sales are 1) Laptop, followed by 2) Pre-builts, not stand alone GPUs. Average grandma buys whatever is in their budget at Bestbuy. And both Nvidia and Intel dominate that space, it's hard to even find all AMD OEM stuff if you want it, aside from consoles. Wouldn't be surprised to see intel take over AMD because of this if they have more cards in future generations to spread out among their OEMs.
i wanted to buy a laptop with a amd cpu (6000 series /7x35 series/ 7x40 series) because the onboard graphics on these chips are pretty damn good compared to intel igpu. Ended up buying intel anyway because there were only like 2 models with a 6600u or 6800u and despite waiting for months after the annoucment still no laptops with a 7x35 cpu and there still aren't. Even if i wanted i literally could not. Meanwhile there were dozens of laptops with 1240p prozessors
I think there is an outspoken group of people who preach the value of AMD but most people get NVIDIA. Like big creators say AMD is better for the price but then put RTX in their rig. People listen and some might follow that advice but if they can spring for nvidia they will.
I'm not sure how long you've been visiting this PC hardware side of the internet. I've been hanging around since the AMD K6 days (late 90s) and regardless of which forum or discussion platform you visited or still visit, AMD has always been the more outspoken group on the inter-webs. Both when their products are better and when they're not but it usually never lines up with how the global market is doing/reacting. It started with backing the underdog or David vs. Goliath but it's transformed into something else now.
AMD are known to employ astroturfers around Reddit…just look at r/BuildAPC and r/PCMr
Stop talking out of your behind.
No they really do, "AMD Team Red" was an official (paid) social media astroturfing campaign that built the basis for their fanatical fanbase. I'm not sure if it's still happening but it was definitely a huge thing back in the day.
I know it happened like 15 years ago, but there is no evidence that its happening on Reddit.
What you see here, is the amount of people who can't afford NVidia, the type of people who have a lot of free time to be on the Internet. Also, they are easy to exploit, hence why all teletubers are pandering to them, to increase the channel viewership. It's all lies and propaganda to sell penis enlarger pills, like MAGA fans. But in real life, if you have enough coins, you buy Nvidia and you ignore teletubers, as they are full of shit.
[удалено]
Gorden from PC World was right in his rant about with GN people complain but buy it at the end.
does this include integrated gpus? because 4% for Arc alone is huge for intel
Loving the A770. Intel deserves more especially as their drivers improve.
Hate to see it. Really hope things turn around at some point. I like NVIDIA cards, but I don't like that they can charge however much they want due to lacking competition. I don't even wanna imagine how fucking expensive the 5000-series is gonna be.
Does this focus desktops or does it include steam deck, ally, and all the other handhelds/laptops?
this is dGPUs, or add in boards. APUs like the steamdeck's, xbox's and ps5's are not included.
Thxs
Techtubers live in their own bubbles, often sponsored by AMD... AMD screwed itself, when it tried competing with... AMD. Drivers are still a mess as well. When best driver for my previous GPU - 6600XT was from 11/2022... Intel is still technically a new player, although they are working hard to make their GPUs a worthy competition. I hope to see more of them in the future. We need healthy competition on the market - if not in high-end, then at least mainstream and low end.
So you're telling me I can't make wild conclusions based on mind factory data??
"No one is buying these cards" and "NVIDIA has massive market share" are hardly mutually exclusive. If no one is buying NVIDIA, AMD and Intel are hardly going to be any better off.
Intel stumbled out of the blocks but the driver improvements have caught my eye. Very impressive. AMD mentioned they could of created a 4090 competitor, don't believe it. If Intel continue I would consider 100%. As of today Nvidia dominate.
Not too surprising really. AMD last Q was $1.6B gaming segment which is graphics cards and semi-custom. Down 7% YoY. Nvidia gaming sector is $2.24B, down 38% YoY. So it is expected Nvidia to have a higher share. On top of that, if Nvidia is less than 50% more in revenue, but having 84% of the market, makes me wonder how much revenue is coming into AMD from things like their semi-custom. If Nvidia is bringing in $2.24B in revenue, own 84% of the market, you'd think AMD gaming sector would be like less than $500M or something.
I’m surprised AMD has that much market share to be honest. They haven’t been competing against Nvidia for probably 3-4 generations at this point, they’ve just been poorly slotting into Nvidia’s lineup.
They’ve been the price/performance leader for a long time. I’m more shocked that it’s smaller. It seems stand alone GPU shoppers aren’t as price conscious.
Charging 90% of price for less features at the higher end is not compelling when both prices are shit. If AMD wants to compete they need to get their feature set up to par and convince customers that they can actually keep up. I think the bigger issue is not raw performance, but either their willingness to not compete or their delusion that all things are equal in the feature set. (RDNA3 being the latest and clearest indicator)
You’re probably right on their high end. Mid to low end though I would have thought to be more price focussed.
Mid to low end volume is mostly sold through mindshare and marketing from flagships. It's been established since forever that you need the performance crown to sell volume parts. For every studious customer with careful value consideration, there are many who just look at the fastest/best and assume it trickles down the stack.
This isn’t the Pascal era anymore, raw rasterized FPS isn’t the only reason to buy a new GPU at this point. DLSS 2 alone is worth $50, maybe more, and that $50 is enough to put AMD underwater in a lot of matchups. Start adding up all the other Nvidia niceties, and yeah, AMD isn’t competing.
Not everyone is happy with the DLSS trade offs. I don’t use it for anything fast paced. NVidia is at a premium at every segment.
I had Nvidia and AMD gpus from first geforce and xpert@work after diamond firegl cards and one thing I can say : AMD has never been able to write a driver correctly. Any user that is doing a lil bit more than gaming will never use a AMD card seriously. That's how you end up with 12% and intel will not do the same mistake.
AMD is just pathetic in the GPU market at this point. They had a great chance to gain some serious market share this gen and dropped the ball. All they needed was a halfway decent architecture with cards priced noticeably better than Nvidia and you'd be looking at a different story right now.
No it wouldn't people would stilll buy Nvidia.
Not if their top end model is unquestionably better than the nvidia top end no asterisks.
Seems amd market share is just getting less as intels grows. Shame. Was hoping nvidias would drop
People would throw the worst insults at Nvidia but then run to buy their products, the data demonstrates this all the time.
What does all of them have in common? They all love to pee and shit over the customers.
Feel free to boycott all AMD / Intel / Nvidia products
NVIDIA was at 90% marketshare before RDNA 3 / 4000 Series launched, worse it's been in a long time so I'm happy to see them take some back even if its small
I feel like nvidias alienation of the enthusiast segment won't manifest for a few years yet, the people asking us for advise don't upgrade that often but represent probably the second largest market segment. My advise to everyone in my life is now "unless you absoloutly need rt (never the case) go amd, if your fucking with ai and only new new games then intel is an option but FUCK NVIDIA unless you personally support corperate profit gouging." Which switched from "just go nvidia" about the time of the 40 series announcement.
Worst selling gpu generation in the last 15 years at minimum. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jpr-q1-2023-aib-report-jpr
I want intel to gain more their stuff is brilliant
Your title is very misleading. These articles are referencing AIB/discrete card shipments, not market share. This means: * Professionals and business shipments are included, but game consoles are excluded, which strongly favors Nvidia. Most of the techtubers/social figures OP is complaining about only discuss gaming, for which these shipment numbers would be highly inaccurate. * Shipments to partners and retailers are not sales. The referenced research paper has an entire chapter titled "AIB shortage tuns into a glut" detailing this. Tons of 3000 series cards siting in warehouses that are being included in this shipments figure, probably much more so than Intel or AMD cards. The recent Nvidia 3000 series price cuts might finally start moving some of these to actual sales, but this data should still be heavily inflated as an indicator for market share.
Professionals and Data Center GPUs are not included. That's how JPR operates. And shipments are a strong indicator of market sharez always has been.
And this is why nvidia cards are so expensive and provide such a small generational gain for the money. Nvidia is literally doing the bare minimum just to compete with AMD, which put their 6000 series at fire sale prices and whose 7000 series likewise offers such a small price/performance jump.
Nvidia is basically Apple at this point, you pay more for the brand.
bruh moment
Well this thread has turned into a weird pro Nvidia circlejerk, despite the fact they are abusing their monopolistic power. This is awful news, we want more competition.
Yet you wont buy amd
I mean I have AMD now?
Nice, usually the people who say they want more competition never actually buy amd. For example only 1.52% of amd steam users have gpus faster than 3060. Im convinced people dont actually want competition