Source :- http://www.tweaktown.com/news/47105/amds-gpu-market-share-drops-again-even-release-fury/index.html
Even if the Fury X had good supply, it still wouldn't really help AMD shift back towards Nvidia. If you go back to the year 2000+ AMD/Nvidia Discreet chart, it's pretty obvious that unless there is a significant f*ck up in one company, the market almost never makes large shifts. The only two times it's ever happened was the FX series and the R600 series, the latter of which is when it shifted into what we see today and AMD has just been downhill from there. Basically, AMD doesn't need to merely compete with Nvidia it needs a chip that's like 30-40% faster and it needs to launch it within 4 months of Nvidia's product cycle. And if they want to capture OEM's they need that chip's power to perform at least equally to Nvidia's. I don't really see this happening anytime soon. Their R&D is most likely tied up with Zen. HBM essentially did nothing to help them overcome the competition (mostly because it was limited to 4GB), 14nmFF will be nice, but Nvidia will be shifting to it soon anyway. Nvidia's market diversification seems better as well, getting into cars was probably a pretty big thing for them. They will essentially be powering the vision/infotainment system behind every Audi, Honda, BMW, and Tesla. That + their recent push into focusing it's HPC efforts on neural networks will only further help them increase revenue. AMD needs Zen to come together in a big way. Hopefully with getting Jim Keller back into the hands of a CPU Arch, AMD can make that happen.
AMD is has been in Iffy shape for years. To many heads not enough brains, I really do hope AMD put rabbit out of it hat with zen. I don think they will live another super hyped cpu and fail to deliver
To be fair, the article is full of holes and jumped conclusions: 1)- Fury/Fury X weren't even released during this period. Neither was the 3xx rebrand series. 2)- If I'm not mistaken, the dGPU market also includes HPC systems, mobile, etc. All of the places where Nvidia has a much stronger presence today than ever. 3)- Windows 10/Intel Skylake update wait. People were waiting for Windows 10 and Intel Skylake to be released before buying a new system. All of these reasons impact the market share. That being said, the fact that the 3xx series were less than impressive and the Fury series were merely competitive at best didn't help matters either. Then there's the elephant in the room, do you really want to buy a $650 dollar card from a company that may not be around in over a year to support it...?
They'll be around as long as consoles are still popular. I wouldn't expect them to produce anything competitive though. They don't have the resources for proper R&D
Console makers don't make much on them, but AMD doesn't sell the chips to them for a loss. If they did then they'd be even dumber than we thought.
They thought it was better to stop fighting nvidia in the bang for buck department, here the results.
Not really, the graph is up to Q2. It doesn't show the results of what the Fury X/300 series did. That being said, I doubt they made much of a difference.
Maybe the good Dx12 benchmark will help them AMD needs to start selling we need AMD to stay competitive it would not be good for there R&D budget
That's true, although I don't think the whole feature level nonsense helps them any. AMD could say their cards are way faster than Nvidia, but Nvidia would just come around and say they don't support feature level 12_1.
Some of us know what results you get from marketing/survey companies on anything. You go to them to find out supporting 'evidence' for your cause. You pay and they deliver something, it may be honest and you do not like it. So you never return since you did not like it. They learn, use different population sample or anything what will make results good for you. And you return smiling, because you were not one who invented this lie. Steam stats for last month (July): 52.47% - nV 19.69% - intel 27.34% - AMD 0.5% - other Removing other and intel, will give: 65.74% - nV 34.26% AMD
What really would be interesting is to see how market share in Q4 - 15 looks like, once dx12 starts to come around with games, and the cake gets cut down anew.
You realise those figures are what people own and have bought in the past, not market share? Market share is proportion of sales over a set period, not what people have installed in their PC. Or is that just an example of: "You go to them to find out supporting 'evidence' for your cause. You pay and they deliver something, it may be honest and you do not like it. So you never return since you did not like it. They learn, use different population sample or anything what will make results good for you. And you return smiling, because you were not one who invented this lie."
Well then, if you want to take it that way... While nvidia sold so many new GPUs, their actual share remained same. That means AMD hardware stays relevant much more than nVidia's. So stuff like HD 7900 series stays over last 5 months at 2.42%. While GTX680 went from 0.68% to 0.61% (that's actually 11% of existing cards put to rest). GTX770 went from 2.3% to 2.06% (that's actually 10% of existing cards put to rest). In other words, nVidia users have reasons to cycle HW more therefore allowing nVidia to sell more, but old HW is put to box, or new is bought because old died. (in both cases it is no longer used) It is clear that nVidia is not getting into more homes than it already is in. Statistically: while people deem AMD as worse performance/$, it seems that actual average nVidia user pays more over time to stay in his performance level. Or maybe this Mercury Research company 'accidentally' included other GPU category, like tegra shileds or something.
I'm not even sure that steam is a good example of market share. Out of the 6 PC's in my immediate family, 5 of them have Nvidia GPU's in them. Only one of them is on steam and it's the one with integrated graphics. The company I work for is even worse, out of 45 PC's, 28 of them have an Nvidia GPU in it. 3 have an AMD GPU. Rest are intel iGPUs. None of those are on steam either. Remember most sales are going to be through OEM channels and having a quick look at dell.com, like 85% of their PC's are using Nvidia GPU's (when they have a discreet GPU). I'm not really sure you can conclude anything by looking at them. I'd imagine that a company that researches this stuff for investors would likely have access to additional/more information than steam.
yeah that's a classic and it usually includes something as painless as "cut their prices by %" /Irony_Off No. It doesn't work like that with Mercury Research. Back in the day AMD even used Steam stats in their public statements which are far less reliable than JPR/MR. It's not "this" Mercury Research company. There is them and there is JPR. They are both standard when it comes to graphic chips market stats. No mistakes here.
AMD's marketshare hopefully goes up it should really be over 30% tbh. But oh well we will see if Zen delivers and how AMD handles itself once they hit 14nm
