good for nvidia, bad for us, with almost zero competition the prices will only rise 🙁 Pascal is not going to be cheap

omg they killed it again. $1.4B wooot!! facebook, google, MS, alibaba, amazon, IBM - they got data-centers market cornered

And this is what the "fanboys" on this forum don't get; Nvidia is a company that is healthy, AMD is one with no real future. Just look at the breakdown: https://simplywall.st/compare/NasdaqCM:AMD-NasdaqGS:NVDA

And this is what the "fanboys" on this forum don't get; Nvidia is a company that is healthy, AMD is one with no real future. Just look at the breakdown: https://simplywall.st/compare/NasdaqCM:AMD-NasdaqGS:NVDA

whatta lovely graphs, bookmarked! everything running on Quadros no doubt 😀

Their products are very good. It's a healthy profitable company. There is nothing wrong with that. I expect AMD to improve somewhat this year but I really do not expect them to soar. When Nvidia outs Pascal we will be here again to discuss their colossal market gains.. In any case the best product will prevail.

And this is what the "fanboys" on this forum don't get; Nvidia is a company that is healthy, AMD is one with no real future. Just look at the breakdown:

And what are you trying to prove with that ? Seem like you're happy with the actual situation, are you by any chance a Nvidia shareholder ?

Even though it's good that a company makes profit it can be negative to us customers. Like some have said, the competition is very light thus enabling nVidia to put less money in R&D, increasing its margins and lowering the amount of support for current products (drivers). For example, anyone else think that nVidia should make a completely new control panel? The one we've got is slow, unoptimised and has been around for a long time. Anyone else think that QC for upcoming driver releases is faltering of late? Aren't the current top cards a bit overpriced?

Am pretty sure that NVIDIA fanboys would not mind AMD bringing something really good.It would pull the prices down and possibly give us more fps. What I think most people here say is that AMD don't know how to do business. They have proven it so many times in the last few years. What needs to happen is that they go bust and somebody with actual money for R&D and proper business plans for future will buy them. So we actually have a competitor.

And this is what the "fanboys" on this forum don't get; Nvidia is a company that is healthy, AMD is one with no real future. Just look at the breakdown: https://simplywall.st/compare/NasdaqCM:AMD-NasdaqGS:NVDA

With those graphs it looked like they are actually missing some data on AMD's side, or did I read that wrong? Not really familiar with stock exchanges (aka witchcraft sabbaths).

Even though it's good that a company makes profit it can be negative to us customers. Like some have said, the competition is very light thus enabling nVidia to put less money in R&D, increasing its margins and lowering the amount of support for current products (drivers). For example, anyone else think that nVidia should make a completely new control panel? The one we've got is slow, unoptimised and has been around for a long time. Anyone else think that QC for upcoming driver releases is faltering of late? Aren't the current top cards a bit overpriced?

I definitely think they should depreciate the legacy CP and roll it into Experience. But everytime I see it mentioned on Guru3D or Reddit people seem to just hate the idea. On a SB the Nvidia legacy CP is nearly unusable due to scaling -- and forget about trying to do it with touch. As for everything else, Nvidia has actually increased R&D spending over the past quarter and few years in general. Granted a lot of that is due to competition in the mobile market. You have to remember that Nvidia is using it's desktop architecture on mobile GPU's now. So even if AMD isn't competitive, ARM/Qualcomm/Samsung are and Apple's GPU crushes them in nearly every category. Cards are probably cheaper then they ever have been. A 8800GTX launched at $650 in 2006 and a 7800 GTX cost $600. In today's pricing that's $764 and $728 respectively.

With those graphs it looked like they are actually missing some data on AMD's side, or did I read that wrong? Not really familiar with stock exchanges (aka witchcraft sabbaths).

Yeah, its missing data. But honestly if the data was there it would be even worse. AMD has to pay back ~1B in loans by 2019 and another 500M by 2020. They currently pay nearly the same in interest on that debt as they do in R&D annually (~180M in interest vs 220m in R&D). They sold and leased back their own HQ to help generate money, that's how desperate they are. Obviously I'd like to see AMD do well, not only for the competition, but because I own roughly ~1000 shares of their stock, but Chillin is right. The reason why Nvidia is not in AMD's position is because the company makes more financially correct decisions that may not necessarily always benefit the customer. Not giving away everything for free is probably a big one or buying companies that for nearly twice what other's were willing to spend on them is another. Anyway I think they'll have a strong year with Polaris & Zen. The problem comes with what they can do after. They can't just be competitive, they need to regain a lot of lost ground, which they wont do unless they put up substantially better products then the competition. In the GPU space I think it will be easier for them. As for CPU's, well, that Anandtech article on Carizzo painted a really terrible picture of AMD's OEM relationships. Even if Zen is good, I'm not even sure they'll be able to move it. And after that, well Jim Keller is gone, so it will be up to AMD's engineers to move Zen forward, which they don't seem to have a good track record of doing in general. This year is going to be interesting though for sure.

They nailed it with 970/980/980ti prices and performance! I hope they dont go completely big headed and we wont need to take a mortgage out for pascal!

Yeah, its missing data. But honestly if the data was there it would be even worse. AMD has to pay back ~1B in loans by 2019 and another 500M by 2020. They currently pay nearly the same in interest on that debt as they do in R&D annually (~180M in interest vs 220m in R&D). They sold and leased back their own HQ to help generate money, that's how desperate they are. Obviously I'd like to see AMD do well, not only for the competition, but because I own roughly ~1000 shares of their stock, but Chillin is right. The reason why Nvidia is not in AMD's position is because the company makes more financially correct decisions that may not necessarily always benefit the customer. Not giving away everything for free is probably a big one or buying companies that for nearly twice what other's were willing to spend on them is another. Anyway I think they'll have a strong year with Polaris & Zen. The problem comes with what they can do after. They can't just be competitive, they need to regain a lot of lost ground, which they wont do unless they put up substantially better products then the competition. In the GPU space I think it will be easier for them. As for CPU's, well, that Anandtech article on Carizzo painted a really terrible picture of AMD's OEM relationships. Even if Zen is good, I'm not even sure they'll be able to move it. And after that, well Jim Keller is gone, so it will be up to AMD's engineers to move Zen forward, which they don't seem to have a good track record of doing in general. This year is going to be interesting though for sure.

As I've hardly got the insight or interest about AMD's or Nvidia's economical standings, what you describe only matches what I thought (loans etc.). I haven't noticed AMD making any profit for years now, and that usually does not lead to a single product's launch that turns it around totally. I do too think that now with dx12 / vulkan and if Zen holds true to AMD's primises, they can get a decent year. But what's afterwards? I've always got the feeling that Intel on the one side and Nvidia on the other have their business plan in their desk drawers and are just waiting what AMD does... they are profitable companies with stocks and shareholders... they keep it up, and see for constant profits / revenues, whereas to me as a customer, it looked like AMD was always trying to catch up since the Athlon64. I hope they do indeed show their muscle now that APIs and drivers finally go more into the direction which was always their intention, parallelism and paralleled computing tasks and that stuff. Competition is good for business as they say. The other question is, how long will this go on? I have Nvidia cards and had cards of both vendors (as well as AMD CPUs too), yet I do not dare to imagine a monopolistic market for dGPUs with just Nvidia there. Or CPUs with just Intel.

The ONLY reason nVidia is doing so well is solely because of Gameworks! Aggressive deals with AAA publishers assured the games were going to run far better on nVidia hardware at launch than AMD. I find the majority of gamers to be whiney children who will jump ship in an instant because they couldn't wait for AMD to get their hands on the game's code to optimize their drivers. (like myself when the GeForce 600 series dropped...never again) If reviewers would come back a few weeks later and re-test AMD cards with the latest updated drivers, we would be shown that AMD cards often CRUSH nVidia in the benchmarks, offering far better price to performance ratio. But no, once a game is released and benchmarked, reviewers move on. The funny thing is that sites, such as Guru3D, bloody well KNOW THIS as they report on this constantly. But like American justice, what's done is done and it's time to move along to the next.

The ONLY reason nVidia is doing so well is solely because of Gameworks! Aggressive deals with AAA publishers assured the games were going to run far better on nVidia hardware at launch than AMD. I find the majority of gamers to be whiney children who will jump ship in an instant because they couldn't wait for AMD to get their hands on the game's code to optimize their drivers. (like myself when the GeForce 600 series dropped...never again) If reviewers would come back a few weeks later and re-test AMD cards with the latest updated drivers, we would be shown that AMD cards often CRUSH nVidia in the benchmarks, offering far better price to performance ratio. But no, once a game is released and benchmarked, reviewers move on. The funny thing is that sites, such as Guru3D, bloody well KNOW THIS as they report on this constantly. But like American justice, what's done is done and it's time to move along to the next.

Yeah except in the case of Project Cars, AMD completely lied about working with the devs. And in the case of Witcher 3, they never got the source, but made still were able to fix the performance issues, same with various other games. In fact, before last year, I don't think Nvidia even licensed out the source for GameWorks to anyone. So in literally every case of AMD fixing the performance after the fact, it had nothing to do with having access to the source. The whole source code thing is a red herring. What's even more amusing is that no one bats an eye when AMD does the same thing. The 2013 Tomb Raider launched with TressFX code that Nvidia didn't get to see. They suffered initial performance problems on launch. How did Nvidia respond? By simply saying they'll fix the issue, and they did. As opposed to Richard Huddy who **** a brick about Witcher 3. Also EkTekniks or whatever that site is that gets blocked here did a review a few years ago on 680/780 launch drivers vs current drivers. Same with GCN hardware. In fact Hexus did the same test a year ago. http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/79245-amd-nvidias-2014-driver-progress/?page=6 Both reviews show Nvidia's performance improvements from drivers are greater than AMD's improvements in various titles. So if Nvidia beat AMD on launch of a few games there is no way they are being "Crushed" by AMD now. I'm sure you can find examples of some games where AMD has made bigger strides, but overall, no. http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2015/09/amds-outspoken-plucky-underdog-routine-is-doing-more-harm-than-good/ I agree with Mark Walton 100%, AMD's marketing on these issues is terrible.

The ONLY reason nVidia is doing so well is solely because of Gameworks! Aggressive deals with AAA publishers assured the games were going to run far better on nVidia hardware at launch than AMD. I find the majority of gamers to be whiney children who will jump ship in an instant because they couldn't wait for AMD to get their hands on the game's code to optimize their drivers. (like myself when the GeForce 600 series dropped...never again) If reviewers would come back a few weeks later and re-test AMD cards with the latest updated drivers, we would be shown that AMD cards often CRUSH nVidia in the benchmarks, offering far better price to performance ratio. But no, once a game is released and benchmarked, reviewers move on. The funny thing is that sites, such as Guru3D, bloody well KNOW THIS as they report on this constantly. But like American justice, what's done is done and it's time to move along to the next.

Yeah!.....we should divide the games launch date in XBOX ONE , PS4, PC Nvidia and PC AMD .....so, for example, the dates for Quantum Break should be like: PC Nvidia - Apr/05/2016 and PC AMD - Sep/05/2016.......so they have the time to polish the drivers and you dont have the feeling that you paid $70 for a bad port. Maybe that model would be great because 4 months later, when AMD finally releases a good driver for that game, you only have to pay $50, because no one is interested in that game anymore and is waiting for the next AAA title. /sarcasm=OFF 🤓 Sorry mate, not trying to be disrespectful but if I pay top dollars for a top of the line card and a AAA game, I want to play it on day 1. All these problems started when AMD bought ATi........ATi was doing fine at that moment, I had several ATi cards and they were great......most of the times better than Nvidia ones........but that is the problem when you try to do too many different things at the same time, instead of focusing in what you really know how to do best.

Most of the people in here knows there are some golden rules when the time comes to buy a game or a new piece of equipment these days. 1-You do not pre-order a game, bc it could be a total fiasco. You wait and read some reviews first about the quality, bugs, performance. 2-You dont do SLI/CF unless you have some money to burn and or time to do some troubleshooting. You just go for the best single card you can buy. 3-You never buy the first generation of any card......usually 4 months later they have the xx50HD or the Ti version which runs 25% faster at the same or lower price. and finally..... 4-You just buy Intel K processors and OC the hell out of them 😉 just because you know they are the best and you will not find any weird compatibility issue, or temperature problem, or misterious BSOD out of the blue.

good for nvidia, bad for us, with almost zero competition the prices will only rise 🙁 Pascal is not going to be cheap

right now exept for top high end actual NV gen is lower in price than previous in shop... on AMD side it is far more expensive than previous one (and Fury series is even 100 Euro more than it's NV equivalent 🙁 ).

whatta lovely graphs, bookmarked! everything running on Quadros no doubt 😀

There is 2 problems for AMD in data center and pro use: -the performance (despite the price is really good... but on pro market price is not too important). -the aviability, as already said despite big commercial, it is nearly impossible to get an AMD product (personaly i found that is sad, it exist but you cannot buy, one, twice, then you don't even care for the maybe cool next product... 🙁 )

I really couldn't give a damn about AMD, Intel or Nvidia; I don't have holdings in any of them (to the best of my knowledge, mutual funds you know). I just care in getting the best product for the price; and I'm tired of the fairies and rainbow dreams floating around this forum that has AMD somehow coming back in overtime and winning a dual-front war with no resources. Sorry, that's not the way the world works. It's harsh and unfair. I don't like Nvidia anymore than anyone else, and I haven't used an Nvidia card in over a year (using AMD APU's and Intel's iGPU's right now); but I'll be damned if it isn't impressive how they've weathered the downturn in the PC market; especially with a nice amount of the user base disappearing with the mobile revolution.