Page 121 of 225 FirstFirst ... 2171111119120121122123131171221 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,210 of 2245

Thread: Radeon HD 6800 series performance discussion thread

  1. #1201
    Anything that AMD sells is not immediately a lost sale to Nvidia. If NV could maintain the R&D and introduce a competitive chip at 28 nm, they would be better off allowing AMD to make more money on GPUs this year (and indirectly hurting Intel in the process), rather than trying to prevent them from making profit.
    The more they order, the sooner they'll bleed to death. It's not like they can keep on ordering chips forever. If NV is arrogant enough to be making the four-sixties still, they will end up with an inventory that's already too large to offload at the prices they want and will be obsolete in about a year, assuming 28 nm ramps up for production before Autumn 2011.

    By that time Nvidia won't have the money to buy production at TSMC, and AMD will have got a lot of trust at TSMC to have openings for more wafers.
    There are two types of people: Those who make backups and those who will.

    Opinions presented in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

  2. #1202
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    363
    If ATI want's kill off the $200 marketspot, they can do so already.
    The problem with the statement is that it implies the converse: that, because ATI has not done so, they clearly must not want to. The statement ignores the fact that ATI very much wants to, but simply does not have the product that would best do so yet. And unlike NVIDIA, they're not willing to shave profits to do so.

    AMD did leave the room for NV on purpose - their only spot left. The so called sweet spot, is turning into a hell spot for Nvidia forcing them to sell with no profit.
    Saying that ATI did this "on purpose" suggests that they're clairvoyant. Indeed, looking at the split for Barts and Cayman (Barts being 2/3rds Cayman, while Juniper was a full half Cypress) shows that ATI is specifically trying to fill that gap. Which means that they didn't want the gap there to begin with. They consider it a mistake in the 5xxx series which they are correcting with the 6xxx series.

    This is assuming similar yields.
    Yes, but since this is the same 40nm process that ATI has already done well with, there's no reason to expect yields to go down.

    If NV could maintain the R&D and introduce a competitive chip at 28 nm, they would be better off allowing AMD to make more money on GPUs this year (and indirectly hurting Intel in the process), rather than trying to prevent them from making profit.
    The problem there is two-fold. First, NVIDIA keeps screwing up GPU development. The entire GT300 line was a lost-cause, and Fermi is far from good. It's hard to think that they can turn this around in one hardware generation. Even after the R600 failure, it took ATI a couple of generations to get to R770's stunning success. And even that required a leap of faith.

    Second, marketshare is important. Investors are important. If everyone sees that you are basically out of the running in terms of product, they'll sell your stock. They'll lose faith in your company. And other bad things. Ceding marketshare without a fight is only done when you know you can make it back up soon. Even if they introduce a competitive chip at 28nm (and NVIDIA has a problem with jumping to new processes. See Fermi and the GeForce FX), ATI would still have the advantage due to marketshare.

  3. #1203
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Crouch View Post
    If ATI want's kill off the $200 marketspot, they can do so already. Was that clear enough?
    The problem with the statement is that it implies the converse: that, because ATI has not done so, they clearly must not want to. The statement ignores the fact that ATI very much wants to, but simply does not have the product that would best do so yet. And unlike NVIDIA, they're not willing to shave profits to do so.
    You people are arguing semantics. I think we can all agree that if AMD wanted to sell 5850 for $200, they could - whether they'd take a loss or reduce profits.

    That they are not doing so means they want something else more. Either the profits or brand value or even just make the new series land with a bigger boom.

  4. #1204
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,250
    yes yes, AMD is giving nvidia room to breathe, as if it is not enough for AMD that nvidia has high profit workstation market. AMD are bleeding for money themselves, why would they leave something to nvidia to sell? I suppose they are getting reasonable money for 5850 and other cards and they don't want to lose that profit margins and they just waiting to release 6 series to go after 460. I am not saying that 460 is a problem for AMD, but just little inconvenience.

  5. #1205

    AMD is a money burning machine, they need to go for profit

    Quote Originally Posted by muziqaz View Post
    yes yes, AMD is giving nvidia room to breathe, as if it is not enough for AMD that nvidia has high profit workstation market. AMD are bleeding for money themselves, why would they leave something to nvidia to sell? I suppose they are getting reasonable money for 5850 and other cards and they don't want to lose that profit margins and they just waiting to release 6 series to go after 460. I am not saying that 460 is a problem for AMD, but just little inconvenience.
    They know NV have the wafers, they know they need marketshare for keeping the valuable brand. AMD is in a position to influence where NV will target their cards. Who says 460 is in between 5770 and 5850? The one that make the price the 5770 and 5850.

    And i vote for the Profit reason. AMD needs money on the short, medium and long term, and the time in between. They have been burning cash since the dawn of cpu. AMD is a money burning machine.

  6. #1206
    640k who needs more?
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    863
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    The problem with the statement is that it implies the converse: that, because ATI has not done so, they clearly must not want to. The statement ignores the fact that ATI very much wants to, but simply does not have the product that would best do so yet. And unlike NVIDIA, they're not willing to shave profits to do so.
    You really are trying your best not to understand? or just don't want to?

    It is a simple statement "If ATI want's to kill off the $200 marketspot, they can do so already"

    And as I tried to make clear in the last post, YES i know there are a number of factors to take into account that I didn't. Alll that on purpose for that matter.... For example:
    - Die size/manufacturing cost would be a good start.
    - Current market situation, trends and marketshare for the card/chip we want to use are nice to know.
    - Current competitors trends and share at the market spot we intend to make a push for.
    - Time for possible replacement for both my card and my competitor would also be very usefull info before a marketing push.

    But as I have tried to tell you in my posts for a bit now.... regarless of all that, it can all still be boiled down to just one statement! :

    If ATI want's to kill off the $200 marketspot, they can do so already

    That's the bottom line! As simple as that!

    EDIT : If you can say whatever it is you want to say, in a simple way that still catches that which it is you want to have said, I strongly think you should do so. Details can be worked out later, if even needed.

  7. #1207
    Administrator Copper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    5,419
    I begin to wonder IF they actually will price it at/around 200. I wonder if they won't move the whole line UP in pricing and improve their ASP and their shareholder's bottom line? It's not as if leaving that 200 dollar "hole" in their line-up a bit longer will truly hurt them....

    /just musing
    Specialization is for insects. - Heinlein
    Laugh dammit, life is too damned short not to laugh
    ------------------------
    I don't care if the sub-pixels are so small I need TWO magnifying glasses to see them. I want a phone that has longer battery life.

    -Q

  8. #1208
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7,533
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT View Post
    Why isn't the big chip the one released first?
    Because it has no competition and the mid-range does. 58xx outsell GF100 based parts 100:1 or more.

    Quote Originally Posted by DFT View Post
    Isn't that kind of a bad sign that the Cayman chip is in trouble and has delays? Then Antilles will be in even deeper trouble...
    And then they're stuck with Barts which are rumored to be slower than Cyrpess
    There is no trouble or delay.

    Barts is slower than Cypress, so what? Juniper is slower than Cypress too you know. GF104 and GF106 are slower too.

    -Charlie

  9. #1209
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    Why would you want to release the big one first? ATI's primary competitive issues are at the ~$200 price range, which Barts should slide into nicely. If you already won the top spot, why lead with it?

    And it's not like there's a huge timing difference. It's one month.


    If Cayman and Barts finished development at the same time, and taped out at around the same time, what do you suppose it would take for ATI to say, "We want to ship Barts first?"

    My guess? Sending orders for Barts production before Cayman. It's really that simple. Just tell TSMC to make Barts for a month, then make some Caymans.

    Cayman was not "delayed". It was willingly and deliberately pushed back, and Barts was similarly brought forward, as an explicit tactic to hurt NVIDIA's marketshare and, not coincidentally, line ATI's pockets.

    In general, the only reason to lead with the high end GPU if you have a choice is if you need to prove that you have the fastest hardware out there. ATI already does. So they don't need to prove anything. They're taking careful and deliberate aim at the pricing area that NVIDIA has an advantage.
    You are right on everything except one point, Barts taped out about a month before Cayman.

    Ironically enough, Barts is hitting market about a month before Cayman. Coincidence?

    -Charlie

  10. #1210
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    363
    But as I have tried to tell you in my posts for a bit now.... regarless of all that, it can all still be boiled down to just one statement!
    My point is that the statement is a gross oversimplification of reality that suggests things that are not true.

    If NVIDIA wanted, they could rule the market simply by selling the 480 for $2 and ordering a whole lot of them from TSMC. This is basically true.

    But it's also a worthless statement because it ignores the simple and obvious fact that this cannot happen. It would ruin NVIDIA financially in a scant few months. Sure, for those months they would rule the industry. But they'd still be ruined.

    Since the statement posits something that cannot happen, the statement doesn't say anything more than that NVIDIA has the freedom to commit ritual suicide in the most glorious way possible. A company making a choice not to jump off a cliff doesn't tell you much except that their executives are not insane.

    Boiling ATI's situation down to that statement doesn't work because it fundamentally ignores reality. It is technically true, but misleading and ultimately says nothing about why they aren't controlling the $200 market.

    If you can say whatever it is you want to say, in a simple way that still catches that which it is you want to have said, I strongly think you should do so. Details can be worked out later, if even needed.
    And if you say things in so simple a way as to eradicate all useful meaning, then you have gone too far. I think the quote from Einstein goes something like this: "A theory should be as simple as possible, but no simpler."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux