9 ms·

It's up 50% over 2 years and 400% over 3. Idiot article. Ignore the crypto bubble/pump and NVDA is growing quickly - both the business and the stock.

bunnycorn 8y ago
This. Also, their P/E is at an healthy 19.99, reasonable. The article says that Apple is making their own GPUs, that doesn't matter, because Apple is not a nVidia client for a very very long time, and was never a big client. The others are even less suitable comparasion as those companies aren't making GPUs and they are not just going to walk in that market.
Animats 8y ago
Yes, their stock price is now back to June 2017. Not too bad. NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000.[1] The product they're now pushing to gamers, the 2080, is about $1000. It has some ray tracing hardware used by nothing. On existing games it's about the same speed as their 2-year old 1080, which NVidia just discontinued. [1] https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/accessories/apd/490-bens https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/accessories/apd/490-bens
- sigstoat 8y ago
  > NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. seems to me like they're making products available at all sorts of price points. i'm not an mba, but that strikes me as a good idea. not making quite enough mid-level products is unfortunate, but since that was temporary, it wouldn't have made sense for them to invest in increased production. (they should've abandoned the MSRP and just reverse auctioned inventory to the retailers, so that they could capture the value of their products, instead of letting folks selling on ebay get it.) > They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000 they have hardware that costs way more than that. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/dgx-systems/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/dgx-systems/
- cat199 8y ago
  well.. Yhe ML quote is from dell and looks to be 'appropriately' dell priced at ~50% markup vs mass retail.. but yes $8-10k is still alot. That said, if you need this stuff and your super fast $5k workstation is basically an otherwise 'worthless' I/O pump to the GPU, it's still worth the price tag.
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  Yeah, I wish they'd just sell a high-power but essentially commodity card with, say, double the 1080's power. But it's in my interest to want maximum bang for my buck and it's in Nvidia's interest to extract maximum money from it's customers. The only escape would be if AMD comes up with an equivalently powerful card and I haven't seen an indication of this happening. But yeah, it's hard to see them at any risk unless they really mismanaged their capital investment, which is always a risk for companies like this.
  - elif 8y ago
    They sell what you're asking for... it's 2 1080's in SLI. It takes twice the power and makes twice as much heat, but you'll save $200 over the 2080ti. If you want to double the framerate you are getting with a 1080 and be on one physical card, with reasonable power and heat, that is the 2080ti. If you ignore the ray tracing and machine learning features, this is still what you're asking for, is it not? Or do you mean, you want to pay the cost of a 1080, and get a card twice as good as a 1080? Because i would also love to trade my leaf for a tesla but pay nothing...
    - joe_the_user 8y ago
      What I meant was basically I wished they stuffed more cores where the ray tracing stuff is in the 2080 and sold it for the same price. Obviously, that may not be a decision particularly in their interests. The only way it would be would be if they had a competitor that would do that. Now, they add audience specific bells-and-whistles to each chip and sell the chips at price they calculate each audience will pay. They do have to recoup the truly vast expenses involved in developing this stuff. And sure, I want to Moore's Law pricing overall. Even if each generation is twice the power of the last generation, I still want each generation at the same price. But again, only with competition.
      - pas 8y ago
        is it that simple though? maybe raytracing is more power (so heat) efficient, and simply putting shader cores there wouldn't give the frame rate increase you want. or perhaps you're right and it's divide and conquer plain and simple.
- Wowfunhappy 8y ago
  As a gamer, I'm torn on the rtx line. On one hand, it really is super expensive for an entertainment product that will be outdated in a few years. On the other hand, the exceptionally large die justifies that cost on a technical level, and raytracing in real time games is legitimately cool—much more so, IMO, then just another resolution or fps bump. I certainly don't intend to upgrade, but I admire nVidia for the gutsy move, and I'm glad they're pushing the industry in this direction.
  - benj111 8y ago
    >raytracing in real time games is legitimately cool I may be (read am) an old git, and ray tracing just makes me think Wolfenstein 3D. I assume this is a different raytracing? Is it the origin of the rays rather than coming from the 'eye', coming from the light source? Isn't that inefficient? Or something else???
    - michaelmrose 8y ago
      Ray tracing produces the best results for complex dynamic lighting. This is why it's used for example in movies. It's also normally done on the cpu which is slow rtx is supposed to do something with specialized hardware on chip which is much faster although games would have to build Nvidia specific features which doesn't bode well.
      - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
        > although games would have to build Nvidia specific features which doesn't bode well. Actually, nVidia's raytracing stuff is—somewhat-uncharacteristically for the company—all done in open APIs.
        Wowfunhappy 8y ago
        I'm past the edit window, but tiny self-correction: I probably should have said "hardware agnostic APIs" instead than "open APIs". DirectX isn't "open" per se, although it depends on your definition.
- derefr 8y ago
  > They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000.[1] It's going to be purchased mainly by the cloud vendors to build more power-efficient (and vertically-scalable) instances. See also: the high-end of the NVMe market for the last five years (i.e. since its inception.)
- berbec 8y ago
  That card seems to "only" be $6,000 on Amazon. [1] Methinks Dell is adding a bit of markup? 1: https://amazon.com/dp/B076P84525 https://amazon.com/dp/B076P84525
- ethbro 8y ago
  > NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000. Here's the thing about gaming vs content creation vs ml pricing -- they're fundamentally different activities from a financial standpoint. Gaming (for the VAST majority) is a cost center. How much are you willing to spend on it? Content creation, and now ml, are profit centers. How much do you make from it? The latter question is directly related to your business. If you're running financial trading models and the card makes you 5% faster, that 5% may be worth USD$1M. If you're running a 1 acre farm, maybe it's worth $3. But by hardening and popularizing CUDA and GPGPU, Nvidia upscaled their most wealthy buyer from sfx studio to any company that makes predictions. It's a heck of a lot easier to deliver 1% improvement to a $100M company, than to deliver a 200% improvement to a $500k company.
- ksec 8y ago
  $1000 dollar card is an ~800mm2 Die with 8GB GDDR6. Yes the Die is only 90% enabled, but $1000. If you look at what Intel is selling you in terms of Die Size per dollar, and comes without High bandwidth GDDR6 Memory, the 2080 looks like a bargain. I would be happy if Intel sell me a ~700mm2 Die for $1000 without memory. I was initially thinking the same on Ray Tracing. But having seen more videos and more tuning so less performance loss when using RT, I am now fully convinced Ray Tracing is the future, and it is achievable. The next 5 years, 7nm, 5nm and 3nm from TSMC is going to make RT Gaming Everywhere.
gammateam 8y ago
> Ignore the crypto bubble/pump > It's up 50% over 2 years and 400% over 3. Idiot article. It's funny because that applies to all crypto articles too. Fauxbituary I should buy that domain
- jandrese 8y ago
  Yeah, all of those cryptocoins can fall back on their primary business of, um, rendering 3D games?
  - cultofmetatron 8y ago
    deep learning is also heavily based on gpus
  - gammateam 8y ago
    If there is a company behind the "cryptocoin", they can fall back on their primary business of releasing another “cryptocoin”. The sells are revenue. They haven't sold any equity yet, and if they did it would still be a growth story and nobody would care about how they actually made money. They have no debt, have sold no equity, and they have revenue from their zero cost basis crypto. They experience a slowdown from sales but are immune from the "bear market". The "cryptocoin" itself functions more like a commodity, a market which was never for the passive retail trader because there is no expectation for commodities to increase in value indefinitely, only in ebbs and flows based on supply and demand. So the prevalance of the retail trader in the cryptocoin market explains the misaligned value ideas, which are mostly analogies to a stock market. Oops. Although stocks are the only capital market prevalent amongst retail, try not to get the asset classes confused. "Cryptocoins" typically have a more transparent supply than non-digital commodities, and upgrades to their utility are also typically in open source projects which means these provides advantages in determining price targets in the future value and the scale of the addressable market participants. As in, how much any future market participant will want to own to access a provision provided by the network. As open source projects, and freely fungible, you can create utility for a new market until your positions are profitable, with near zero overhead costs.
cat199 8y ago
.. and ~10-20% of the px difference is general wall street sell-off of late.. see also: QQQ, XLK, etc.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ckastner 8y ago
> It's up 50% over 2 years and 400% over 3 So they've had an upwards trend in the past. That's no guarantee for future performance. > Ignore the crypto bubble/pump and NVDA is growing quickly Quoting the article: That bust is obvious in Nvidia’s revenues this year: they are essentially flat for three quarters now, hovering between $3.1 and $3.2 billion.
- aqme28 8y ago
  > That's no guarantee for future performance. Is anything a guarantee of future performance?
  - qubex 8y ago
    Clearly any stock that does not price into it the eventual heat death of the universe (and hence zero residual economic utility) is the product of irrational euphoria in the market...
- KaoruAoiShiho 8y ago
  No the uptrend is not just in the past, it's still continuing today. Just in the past year went too euphoric. We need to be able to distinguish between the 2 tailwinds. AI and crypto. Crypto turned out to be more of a factor than analysts anticipated, leading to the huge runup and then fall. Consider that done and dusted. However the AI story is consistent and strong. Now that the stock price has come back down to earth we're still looking at amazing returns, there's nothing to be displeased with here. The Q/Q performance is not concerning because of the product cycles. Every generational change there was a big drop in sales of the previous generation. Look at the first quarter of Pascal and first quarter of Maxwell's introduction and you'll see the same pattern. A flat quarter is actually an amazing improvement over the straight up declines of the previous generations. Major growth will return soon as new products get ramped.
  - mr_toad 8y ago
    The AI market could also falter if the use of TPUs becomes more common and other players, like AWS get in on it.

bunnycorn 8y ago

This. Also, their P/E is at an healthy 19.99, reasonable. The article says that Apple is making their own GPUs, that doesn't matter, because Apple is not a nVidia client for a very very long time, and was never a big client. The others are even less suitable comparasion as those companies aren't making GPUs and they are not just going to walk in that market.

Animats 8y ago

Yes, their stock price is now back to June 2017. Not too bad. NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000.[1] The product they're now pushing to gamers, the 2080, is about $1000. It has some ray tracing hardware used by nothing. On existing games it's about the same speed as their 2-year old 1080, which NVidia just discontinued. [1] https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/accessories/apd/490-bens https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/accessories/apd/490-bens

sigstoat 8y ago
> NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. seems to me like they're making products available at all sorts of price points. i'm not an mba, but that strikes me as a good idea. not making quite enough mid-level products is unfortunate, but since that was temporary, it wouldn't have made sense for them to invest in increased production. (they should've abandoned the MSRP and just reverse auctioned inventory to the retailers, so that they could capture the value of their products, instead of letting folks selling on ebay get it.) > They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000 they have hardware that costs way more than that. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/dgx-systems/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/dgx-systems/
cat199 8y ago
well.. Yhe ML quote is from dell and looks to be 'appropriately' dell priced at ~50% markup vs mass retail.. but yes $8-10k is still alot. That said, if you need this stuff and your super fast $5k workstation is basically an otherwise 'worthless' I/O pump to the GPU, it's still worth the price tag.
joe_the_user 8y ago
Yeah, I wish they'd just sell a high-power but essentially commodity card with, say, double the 1080's power. But it's in my interest to want maximum bang for my buck and it's in Nvidia's interest to extract maximum money from it's customers. The only escape would be if AMD comes up with an equivalently powerful card and I haven't seen an indication of this happening. But yeah, it's hard to see them at any risk unless they really mismanaged their capital investment, which is always a risk for companies like this.
- elif 8y ago
  They sell what you're asking for... it's 2 1080's in SLI. It takes twice the power and makes twice as much heat, but you'll save $200 over the 2080ti. If you want to double the framerate you are getting with a 1080 and be on one physical card, with reasonable power and heat, that is the 2080ti. If you ignore the ray tracing and machine learning features, this is still what you're asking for, is it not? Or do you mean, you want to pay the cost of a 1080, and get a card twice as good as a 1080? Because i would also love to trade my leaf for a tesla but pay nothing...
  - joe_the_user 8y ago
    What I meant was basically I wished they stuffed more cores where the ray tracing stuff is in the 2080 and sold it for the same price. Obviously, that may not be a decision particularly in their interests. The only way it would be would be if they had a competitor that would do that. Now, they add audience specific bells-and-whistles to each chip and sell the chips at price they calculate each audience will pay. They do have to recoup the truly vast expenses involved in developing this stuff. And sure, I want to Moore's Law pricing overall. Even if each generation is twice the power of the last generation, I still want each generation at the same price. But again, only with competition.
    - pas 8y ago
      is it that simple though? maybe raytracing is more power (so heat) efficient, and simply putting shader cores there wouldn't give the frame rate increase you want. or perhaps you're right and it's divide and conquer plain and simple.
Wowfunhappy 8y ago
As a gamer, I'm torn on the rtx line. On one hand, it really is super expensive for an entertainment product that will be outdated in a few years. On the other hand, the exceptionally large die justifies that cost on a technical level, and raytracing in real time games is legitimately cool—much more so, IMO, then just another resolution or fps bump. I certainly don't intend to upgrade, but I admire nVidia for the gutsy move, and I'm glad they're pushing the industry in this direction.
- benj111 8y ago
  >raytracing in real time games is legitimately cool I may be (read am) an old git, and ray tracing just makes me think Wolfenstein 3D. I assume this is a different raytracing? Is it the origin of the rays rather than coming from the 'eye', coming from the light source? Isn't that inefficient? Or something else???
  - michaelmrose 8y ago
    Ray tracing produces the best results for complex dynamic lighting. This is why it's used for example in movies. It's also normally done on the cpu which is slow rtx is supposed to do something with specialized hardware on chip which is much faster although games would have to build Nvidia specific features which doesn't bode well.
    - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
      > although games would have to build Nvidia specific features which doesn't bode well. Actually, nVidia's raytracing stuff is—somewhat-uncharacteristically for the company—all done in open APIs.
      - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
        I'm past the edit window, but tiny self-correction: I probably should have said "hardware agnostic APIs" instead than "open APIs". DirectX isn't "open" per se, although it depends on your definition.
derefr 8y ago
> They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000.[1] It's going to be purchased mainly by the cloud vendors to build more power-efficient (and vertically-scalable) instances. See also: the high-end of the NVMe market for the last five years (i.e. since its inception.)
berbec 8y ago
That card seems to "only" be $6,000 on Amazon. [1] Methinks Dell is adding a bit of markup? 1: https://amazon.com/dp/B076P84525 https://amazon.com/dp/B076P84525
ethbro 8y ago
> NVidia may have focused on the high end too much. They have a card for the machine learning crowd that costs $16,000. Here's the thing about gaming vs content creation vs ml pricing -- they're fundamentally different activities from a financial standpoint. Gaming (for the VAST majority) is a cost center. How much are you willing to spend on it? Content creation, and now ml, are profit centers. How much do you make from it? The latter question is directly related to your business. If you're running financial trading models and the card makes you 5% faster, that 5% may be worth USD$1M. If you're running a 1 acre farm, maybe it's worth $3. But by hardening and popularizing CUDA and GPGPU, Nvidia upscaled their most wealthy buyer from sfx studio to any company that makes predictions. It's a heck of a lot easier to deliver 1% improvement to a $100M company, than to deliver a 200% improvement to a $500k company.
ksec 8y ago
$1000 dollar card is an ~800mm2 Die with 8GB GDDR6. Yes the Die is only 90% enabled, but $1000. If you look at what Intel is selling you in terms of Die Size per dollar, and comes without High bandwidth GDDR6 Memory, the 2080 looks like a bargain. I would be happy if Intel sell me a ~700mm2 Die for $1000 without memory. I was initially thinking the same on Ray Tracing. But having seen more videos and more tuning so less performance loss when using RT, I am now fully convinced Ray Tracing is the future, and it is achievable. The next 5 years, 7nm, 5nm and 3nm from TSMC is going to make RT Gaming Everywhere.

gammateam 8y ago

> Ignore the crypto bubble/pump > It's up 50% over 2 years and 400% over 3. Idiot article. It's funny because that applies to all crypto articles too. Fauxbituary I should buy that domain

jandrese 8y ago
Yeah, all of those cryptocoins can fall back on their primary business of, um, rendering 3D games?
- cultofmetatron 8y ago
  deep learning is also heavily based on gpus
- gammateam 8y ago
  If there is a company behind the "cryptocoin", they can fall back on their primary business of releasing another “cryptocoin”. The sells are revenue. They haven't sold any equity yet, and if they did it would still be a growth story and nobody would care about how they actually made money. They have no debt, have sold no equity, and they have revenue from their zero cost basis crypto. They experience a slowdown from sales but are immune from the "bear market". The "cryptocoin" itself functions more like a commodity, a market which was never for the passive retail trader because there is no expectation for commodities to increase in value indefinitely, only in ebbs and flows based on supply and demand. So the prevalance of the retail trader in the cryptocoin market explains the misaligned value ideas, which are mostly analogies to a stock market. Oops. Although stocks are the only capital market prevalent amongst retail, try not to get the asset classes confused. "Cryptocoins" typically have a more transparent supply than non-digital commodities, and upgrades to their utility are also typically in open source projects which means these provides advantages in determining price targets in the future value and the scale of the addressable market participants. As in, how much any future market participant will want to own to access a provision provided by the network. As open source projects, and freely fungible, you can create utility for a new market until your positions are profitable, with near zero overhead costs.

cat199 8y ago

.. and ~10-20% of the px difference is general wall street sell-off of late.. see also: QQQ, XLK, etc.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ckastner 8y ago

> It's up 50% over 2 years and 400% over 3 So they've had an upwards trend in the past. That's no guarantee for future performance. > Ignore the crypto bubble/pump and NVDA is growing quickly Quoting the article: That bust is obvious in Nvidia’s revenues this year: they are essentially flat for three quarters now, hovering between $3.1 and $3.2 billion.

aqme28 8y ago
> That's no guarantee for future performance. Is anything a guarantee of future performance?
- qubex 8y ago
  Clearly any stock that does not price into it the eventual heat death of the universe (and hence zero residual economic utility) is the product of irrational euphoria in the market...
KaoruAoiShiho 8y ago
No the uptrend is not just in the past, it's still continuing today. Just in the past year went too euphoric. We need to be able to distinguish between the 2 tailwinds. AI and crypto. Crypto turned out to be more of a factor than analysts anticipated, leading to the huge runup and then fall. Consider that done and dusted. However the AI story is consistent and strong. Now that the stock price has come back down to earth we're still looking at amazing returns, there's nothing to be displeased with here. The Q/Q performance is not concerning because of the product cycles. Every generational change there was a big drop in sales of the previous generation. Look at the first quarter of Pascal and first quarter of Maxwell's introduction and you'll see the same pattern. A flat quarter is actually an amazing improvement over the straight up declines of the previous generations. Major growth will return soon as new products get ramped.
- mr_toad 8y ago
  The AI market could also falter if the use of TPUs becomes more common and other players, like AWS get in on it.