-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How AMD is Going to Screw Nvidia
- Thread starter QaaQer
- Start date
Projectjustice
Banned
Faster and cheaper has never been the issue. AMD's TDP and heat has.
Corronchilejano
Member
YouTube needs an audio only mode.
I don't get why the video creators' market size on PC is so small, what exactly is being measured there? As far as I know nVidia has 75% of the PC space, or am I wrong?
I don't get why the video creators' market size on PC is so small, what exactly is being measured there? As far as I know nVidia has 75% of the PC space, or am I wrong?
Only this last generation though. nVidia had their share of missteps when it comes to those.
As for the video, I saw it somewhere last week. I appreciate how well-spoken it is and the amount of work he put into it, but it does feel a bit contrived. It's true AMD has been betting a lot on pushing GCN into the consoles and they are going all in with their new CPUs and GPUs. However, as mentioned in the video, marketing-wise they're laughable compared to Intel and nVidia and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Then there are also the typical stigmas such as heat and drivers that are hard to get rid of. Not that I'm denying those issues weren't there, and still are in some cases, people do love their hyperboles. Them suddenly slapping nVidia/Intel around with Zen/GCN4/the consoles falls under that as well.
I'm sure most people want them to at least become more relevant to keep competition healthy and they do have a shot at making good things happen. We'll just have to wait and see if they're going to pull it off.
nvidia did manage to move away from their earned reputation of their GPUs being housefire starters during Fermi.
Projectjustice
Banned
I remember those days. lol
Right, and that just it, isn't it? They currently have mindshare that absolutely dwarfs AMD and this is coming off of years when their GPUs had heat issues that make AMD at its worst seem frosty.
Like the video explained, nvidia has 75% of the pc hardware, but pc gaming represents only 10% of those 3 publishers revenue.
90% of the revenue was obtained on console, which runs 100% on amd hardware.
The numbers are factual, nothing we can dispute there. What we are disputing is the leap of faith the video is trying to propose, which is that these numbers will correlate to a dominant amd pc performance in the near future (in games coming from EA Ubisoft Blizzard).
However, pc gaming is not only EA Ubisoft and Blizzard. Far from that.
BleedOrange
Banned
Aaaaaaand subscribed. That was massively insightful.
They had mind share even when their GPUs were freaking hot and not particularly good.
CraigerGamer
Member
But that is exactly what the video is saying. DirectX12 is allowing SLI on chip. These chips will be very small, cheap, and manufacturing will have fewer dead chips. AMD is heading towards this type of setup in 2018-2019. With these cards in consoles, it will take a certain type of coding by devs to bring the multiple GPUs together. NVIDIA doesn't have this type of setup making porting very time consuming and expensive....a cost devs may not want to do (properly). AMD is basically pushing developers to make games specific to their hardware. Its a pretty amazing video. thanks for posting.
I watched the two videos a couple of days ago and i say it's all fine and dandy if you expect Nvidia to rest on the laurels which obviously they won't.
Look at all the projects Nvidia has and how they push on them... pushing your products is just as important as how good they are.
Still, i see AMD gaining marketshare in the near future.
Look at all the projects Nvidia has and how they push on them... pushing your products is just as important as how good they are.
Still, i see AMD gaining marketshare in the near future.
What? No.
DX12 will have no SLI or Crossfire. mGPU solutions will have to come from the game developers. It certainly wouldn't be on-chip, that really isn't every effective use of die space.
the myopic focus on the consumer gpu market is kind of ridiculous. server and high performance computing are far, far more important to AMD's future and those are areas where intel and nvidia have respective strangleholds even beyond desktop CPUs and GPUs. there's other credible competition there as well.
AMD has their work cut out for them and i don't think their fortunes will be improving anytime soon unless their new architectures are performant and cost-efficient in an unprecedented way.
AMD has their work cut out for them and i don't think their fortunes will be improving anytime soon unless their new architectures are performant and cost-efficient in an unprecedented way.
Bolivar687
Banned
Thanks for shouting me out in the OP QaaQer!
I figured there would be a lot of "I'll believe it when I sees it" responses but the reality is... it's already happening. Radeon cards are already beating their GeForce equivalents in DX11 and GameWorks titles in 2016, not just DX12. Both DX12 and Vulkan are Mantle successors that make the most of AMD's APUs. If Polaris 10 really is GTX 980Ti performance at R9 290 price points, I really don't see how Nvidia can compete with those economies of scale.
Which it will, once every console on the market is using multiple small Navi GPUs from AMD.
I figured there would be a lot of "I'll believe it when I sees it" responses but the reality is... it's already happening. Radeon cards are already beating their GeForce equivalents in DX11 and GameWorks titles in 2016, not just DX12. Both DX12 and Vulkan are Mantle successors that make the most of AMD's APUs. If Polaris 10 really is GTX 980Ti performance at R9 290 price points, I really don't see how Nvidia can compete with those economies of scale.
Which it will, once every console on the market is using multiple small Navi GPUs from AMD.
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
Funny part being current high end cards have as much, or even higher, TDP than that infamous GTX480.
But current coolers are a bit better and mindshare got used to those high power consumptions.
By, umm, offering 980TI+ performance at 970 price point?
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Did you even watch the video? The last 3rd of the video is about navi.
I maybe I misinterpreted what you are saying.
Bolivar687
Banned
They just don't have the same economies of scale to underprice AMD. Polaris chips are going to Macs, laptops, and consoles.
I never said they didn't.
Why would they? Console APUs are custom, it is far more effective to add more CUs than completely replicate entire GPUs on the same die. If it is off die then arguably Nvidia is much closer transparent mGPU solutions with Nvlink, which is analogous to QPI or Hypertransport (which AMD could put in their own GPUs).
I wasn't disagreeing, it was just as an addendum. One could take it to mean that Nvidia crawled back, when they actually never left at all.
Bolivar687
Banned
Please watch the video.
IcyRhythms
Member
The video is very good. Nobody should be saying anything until they've watched it all the way through. That said, his comparison with Quantum Break performance is retarded. The game is a poorly optimized piece of dogshit on ANY hardware.
Massive over analysis of an enthusiast / layman level of understanding of both development and business + a LOT of wishful thinking...
I'd rather AMD provide decent competition to Nvidia in the PC games market over the long term, but I didn't hear a single thing in this video (which I scanned through, admittedly, because I don't think it's worthwhile to hear someone drone on about stuff they know less than me about without at least some well-defined outline) that necessarily grants AMD any advantage in the short term.
I'd rather AMD provide decent competition to Nvidia in the PC games market over the long term, but I didn't hear a single thing in this video (which I scanned through, admittedly, because I don't think it's worthwhile to hear someone drone on about stuff they know less than me about without at least some well-defined outline) that necessarily grants AMD any advantage in the short term.
Aztechnology
Member
Those are the Polaris 11 chips. The 10 are supposed to be a midrange desktop GPU/s and high end notebook GPU's.
Sephiroth_VII
Member
The consumer dGPU market has only existed for a few decades. Things change.
Bolivar687
Banned
http://wccftech.com/amd-polaris-10-desktop-polaris-11-notebook-gpu/
Polaris 10 is confirmed for high end notebooks and rumored for PS4. It would make sense if the 800mhz sample is for console.
There is nothing there about on-die multi gpu solutions. Everything he talked about was software solutions found in dx12. You need software support, there is no implicit hardware mGPU solution.
Aztechnology
Member
I was about to link that and corrected my post. That's basically confirming what I said. The midrange desktop likely and high end notebook.
Nvidia has done the same thing 970/980 970m/980m etc.
Maybe I just didn't understand your post. I was without context so it just looked like you said the Polaris chips weren't going to include desktop basically.
Bolivar687
Banned
Please watch the end of the video.
Nope. Still not seeing it. You're going to have to point this out.
Projectjustice
Banned
I jumped on a r9 290 this gen and I'm very happy with my decision. AMD video cards have always been competitive. I'm really looking forward towards what they are doing with Polaris.
IcyRhythms
Member
Hasn't SHIELD completely flopped? What a disaster
Projectjustice
Banned
I dont understand how people here still brought the 970 knowing they were gimped.
IcyRhythms
Member
Dat price was calling their name
Plus I received Witcher 3, Batman: AK, and MGSV. Worth it.
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
Because they really aren't in any real world gaming scenario?
I guess, but a bit after the GTX970 came out, I picked up the R9-290 for $225 instead of getting the GTX970 for $350, and today in modern games, the R9-290 is almost equal to the GTX970, if not faster.
Could the GTX980-Ti have been an 8GB card with a similar memory config as the GTX970, BUT the blowback from the issues with the 970 convinced nVidia with just going with 6GB.
Bolivar687
Banned
The last section of the video is very explicitly titled "multi GPU consoles." His argument is:
1. Yields are far more cost effective when manufacturing lots of little dies on a wafer rather than fewer big dies.
2. Mainstream GPUs in Crossfire have far better performance per dollar than single Enthusiast GPUs. Around the GTX 980 launch, I bought two R9 290s for less and absolutely blew it away in Crossfire enabled games.
3. Developers won't have a choice but to support Crossfire when 95% of their audience are using AMD consoles with lots of little Navi GPUs.
This allows console manufacturers to sell very powerful and cost effective consoles.
dgrdsv
Member
So the video is very good but parts of it are retarded? How is this even possible?
The video is some fantasy land rumblings with a great deal of personal agenda. There are more than one example of technical and logical fallacy in this video and the key idea he's trying to communicate in it is very simple - would've probably fit into one minute instead of a 26 something but if he'll just say it out loud it'll just be stupidly obvious how baseless that idea is in the first place.
mGPUs aren't going to save AMD or help AMD in any way.
Projectjustice
Banned
I go by principal.
IcyRhythms
Member
It's possible because the positives of the video far outweigh the few negatives? That's usually how any aspect of life works.
WTF.
1. If you're manufacturing small dies then you're not doing multiple GPUs on the same die.
2. Crossfire is dead (as is SLI). Even then this has nothing to do with hardware based mGPU. It is all software based and supported by a generic API.
3. See above. It isn't about supporting crossfire, it is about supporting something like dx12 mGPU.
So what's the price break on ordering 10 million of a chip vs 1 million? Or do you not know because you're making things up using a high school level understanding of economics and manufacturing?
Bolivar687
Banned
Please watch the video.
Fuck it, this is utterly tiresome. It is going in one ear and out of the other.
I watched it. How does any of that disprove what I said?
let me just quote the original point: