3 ms·

And anyway who is talking about the bottom end? The question is why they don't produce more of e.g. the RTX 3070, which is on the old Samsung 8LPP process, has

And anyway who is talking about the bottom end? The question is why they don't produce more of e.g. the RTX 3070, which is on the old Samsung 8LPP process, has fewer transistors than the RTX 4060, is faster, and is still selling for a higher price. What do you think? I gave you my reasons. Why don't you take a crack at your own question? There has to be a logical business reason right? Customers who want petroleum are price sensitive. Therefore, petroleum exporting is a low margin business. This is why the Saudis make the profit margins they do. Wait, something's not right here. One is a commodity. The other is about as high tech as it gets. Completely different economic rules that govern these products. You're comparing the high end CPU to the mid-range GPU. The AMD 8500G has more transistors than the RTX 4060 and costs less. The 8500G comes with a heatsink and fan. The 8GB of GDDR6 on the 4060 costs $27 but the 4060 it costs $120 more. A printed circuit board doesn't cost $93. One has an entire board that needs soldering, assembled by a manufacturing line, tested with many parts, and a team of dedicated engineers optimizing drivers constantly. The other is a CPU that is machine tested, and shipped with a heatsink fan unattached. Come on now. That's not because people stopped buying them, it's because they shifted production capacity to servers. That's not true. The discrete GPU market has been shrinking for 14 years straight with some crypto boom years here and there. See the chart I posted previously. Fewer and fewer people are buying discrete GPUs But they do though. You can find lower end AMD GPUs from the last two years for $125 (e.g. RX 6400) whereas the cheapest RTX 3000 or 4000 series is around twice that. AMD cards do not "feast" on low-end and midrange. According to Steam charts, Nvidia still dominates midrange cards.[0] Furthermore, when I said "feast", I meant making profits. AMD does not make much profit from midrange or low end cards. The bottom line is, you keep wondering why no one is offering compelling value in the midrange area but there's a very obvious reason why: profit is not there. [0]https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/ https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> Why don't you take a crack at your own question? There has to be a logical business reason right? Selling 30M GPUs with a huge margin is more profitable than selling 60M GPUs with a modest margin, and they can point to Bitcoin or AI as an excuse. But also, we're talking about them crippling the cards "for gamers" so there will be cards "for gamers" -- the premise of this has to be that they're supply constrained (artificially or otherwise) because otherwise they would just make more at the evidently profitable price gamers are already paying. It can't be a lack of demand because the purpose of removing the feature is to suppress demand (and shift it to more expensive cards). > One is a commodity. The other is about as high tech as it gets. Completely different economic rules that govern these products. So you're saying that if a high tech product only has a limited number of suppliers then they could charge high margins even if customers are price sensitive. > One has an entire board that needs soldering, assembled by a manufacturing line, tested, with many parts, and a team of dedicated engineers optimizing drivers constantly. The other is a CPU that is machine tested, and shipped with a heatsink fan unattached. Come on now. GPU manufacturing is automated. The CPU heatsink isn't attached because it mounts to the system board, not because attaching it would meaningfully affect the unit price. Driver development isn't part of the unit cost, its contribution per unit goes down when you ship more units. You can buy an entire GPU for the price difference between the 8500G and the RTX 4060. > That's not true. The discrete GPU market has been shrinking for 14 years straight with some crypto boom years here and there. See the chart I posted previously. That's only because you're limiting things to discrete GPUs and customers have increasingly been purchasing GPUs in other form factors (consoles, laptops, iGPUs) which have different attachment methods but are based on the same technology. > According to Steam charts, Nvidia still dominates midrange cards. Steam is measuring installed base. That changes slowly, especially when prices are high. > Furthermore, when I said "feast", I meant making profits. AMD does not make much profit from midrange or low end cards. They make a non-zero amount of profit, which is why they do it.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  I think you answered your own question, really. Although I would modify your statement slightly: Original: Selling 30M GPUs with a huge margin is more profitable than selling 60M GPUs with a modest margin. Modified: Nvidia and AMD must sell at a higher ASP because the market for discrete GPUs has shrunk from 60m to 30m/year. That's your answer! It's what I've been arguing for since my very first post. It isn't Nvidia and AMD's choice to have the market shrink in terms of raw volume. It's because many midrange gamers have largely moved onto laptops, phones, and consoles for gaming since 2010. The remaining PC gamers are willing to pay more for discrete GPUs. Hence, both Nvidia and AMD don't bother making compelling midrange GPUs. I remember midrange GPUs that have great value such as the AMD HD 4850. I don't think those days are ever coming back.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > Modified: Nvidia and AMD must sell at a higher ASP because the market for discrete GPUs has shrunk from 60m to 30m/year. That makes no sense as a reason not to sell more. It also makes no sense in general because discrete GPUs aren't a distinct technology. The H100 isn't literally a bunch of RTX cards glued together, but it's approximately that and the same R&D goes into both, implying that the higher demand for this technology should allow for lower ASPs as you now have a new source of demand to spread the R&D costs into. And the same is true for consoles and laptops. It's the same technology, it's just soldered to something instead of being in a PCIe card. Discrete GPUs aren't expensive because they can't justify the cost of the printed circuit board without selling more units, they're expensive because the market is consolidated and in the absence of more competition, Nvidia charges what they can get away with even when that is far in excess of what they would need to charge simply to remain a viable business. > I remember midrange GPUs that have great value such as the AMD HD 4850. I don't think those days are ever coming back. The way you get those days back is to get more competition. Support AMD and Intel and anyone else who might present a viable challenge to Nvidia so that Nvidia has to provide better value for money to keep you from switching.
    - aurareturn 3y ago

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> Why don't you take a crack at your own question? There has to be a logical business reason right? Selling 30M GPUs with a huge margin is more profitable than selling 60M GPUs with a modest margin, and they can point to Bitcoin or AI as an excuse. But also, we're talking about them crippling the cards "for gamers" so there will be cards "for gamers" -- the premise of this has to be that they're supply constrained (artificially or otherwise) because otherwise they would just make more at the evidently profitable price gamers are already paying. It can't be a lack of demand because the purpose of removing the feature is to suppress demand (and shift it to more expensive cards). > One is a commodity. The other is about as high tech as it gets. Completely different economic rules that govern these products. So you're saying that if a high tech product only has a limited number of suppliers then they could charge high margins even if customers are price sensitive. > One has an entire board that needs soldering, assembled by a manufacturing line, tested, with many parts, and a team of dedicated engineers optimizing drivers constantly. The other is a CPU that is machine tested, and shipped with a heatsink fan unattached. Come on now. GPU manufacturing is automated. The CPU heatsink isn't attached because it mounts to the system board, not because attaching it would meaningfully affect the unit price. Driver development isn't part of the unit cost, its contribution per unit goes down when you ship more units. You can buy an entire GPU for the price difference between the 8500G and the RTX 4060. > That's not true. The discrete GPU market has been shrinking for 14 years straight with some crypto boom years here and there. See the chart I posted previously. That's only because you're limiting things to discrete GPUs and customers have increasingly been purchasing GPUs in other form factors (consoles, laptops, iGPUs) which have different attachment methods but are based on the same technology. > According to Steam charts, Nvidia still dominates midrange cards. Steam is measuring installed base. That changes slowly, especially when prices are high. > Furthermore, when I said "feast", I meant making profits. AMD does not make much profit from midrange or low end cards. They make a non-zero amount of profit, which is why they do it.

aurareturn 3y ago
I think you answered your own question, really. Although I would modify your statement slightly: Original: Selling 30M GPUs with a huge margin is more profitable than selling 60M GPUs with a modest margin. Modified: Nvidia and AMD must sell at a higher ASP because the market for discrete GPUs has shrunk from 60m to 30m/year. That's your answer! It's what I've been arguing for since my very first post. It isn't Nvidia and AMD's choice to have the market shrink in terms of raw volume. It's because many midrange gamers have largely moved onto laptops, phones, and consoles for gaming since 2010. The remaining PC gamers are willing to pay more for discrete GPUs. Hence, both Nvidia and AMD don't bother making compelling midrange GPUs. I remember midrange GPUs that have great value such as the AMD HD 4850. I don't think those days are ever coming back.
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > Modified: Nvidia and AMD must sell at a higher ASP because the market for discrete GPUs has shrunk from 60m to 30m/year. That makes no sense as a reason not to sell more. It also makes no sense in general because discrete GPUs aren't a distinct technology. The H100 isn't literally a bunch of RTX cards glued together, but it's approximately that and the same R&D goes into both, implying that the higher demand for this technology should allow for lower ASPs as you now have a new source of demand to spread the R&D costs into. And the same is true for consoles and laptops. It's the same technology, it's just soldered to something instead of being in a PCIe card. Discrete GPUs aren't expensive because they can't justify the cost of the printed circuit board without selling more units, they're expensive because the market is consolidated and in the absence of more competition, Nvidia charges what they can get away with even when that is far in excess of what they would need to charge simply to remain a viable business. > I remember midrange GPUs that have great value such as the AMD HD 4850. I don't think those days are ever coming back. The way you get those days back is to get more competition. Support AMD and Intel and anyone else who might present a viable challenge to Nvidia so that Nvidia has to provide better value for money to keep you from switching.
  - aurareturn 3y ago