JPR: Discrete GPU shipments down 15.2%, Nvidia still leads

By on August 23, 2011, 2:00 PM

The second quarter of the year saw some 16.1 million discrete graphics cards shipped worldwide, according to the latest numbers from Jon Peddie Research. This figure represents a 15.2% drop from the 19.03 million recorded in the previous quarter, which is in line with the typical seasonal drop for the period.

In terms of market share, the drop in shipments didn't affect the position of main players Nvidia and AMD, who saw only a slight change in their respective share. The former still has a sizable lead over AMD, with a drop of 0.1% from Q1 to 59%, while the red team is holding on to a 40.6% market share after gaining 0.1% sequentially. Other smaller manufacturers, like Matrox and S3, grabbed the remaining 0.4% of the pie.

Vendor Q2 2011 Share Q1 2011 Share Qtr-Qtr Growth Q2 2010 Share Yr-Yr Growth
AMD 40.6% 40.5% 0.1% 41.4% -0.8%
Nvidia 59.0% 59.1% -0.1% 57.9% 1.1%
Others 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% 0.7% -0.3%

JPR expects total revenue from discrete graphics to be a whopping 33% lower this year than the last, largely due to the increasingly speedy integrated graphics built into AMD's and Intel's latest mainstream processors.

Note that these numbers only concern discrete graphics card shipments, which is why you don't see Intel listed in the chart above. JPR published results for combined discrete and integrated graphics shipments earlier this month, showing an above-average increase in second quarter shipments of 6.3% sequentially. Unsurprisingly, Intel maintaines its dominant position here with 54.7% market share, AMD followed at 24.7% and Nvidia at 19.9%.

User Comments: 9

Got something to say? Post a comment
Xero07 said:

In the last sentence, 2nd Intel should be Nvidia

Jos Jos said:

@Xerox07 Thanks, it's been fixed

Guest said:

I'm sure it's only gonna get worse. Paying 500 $ every 2 or 3 years for a top of the line discrete card to play the five worthy titles released every two years or so is beyond ridiculous.

And yes, I've read the article, I just needed to vent.

Guest said:

For gaming, the last "generation" of cards have offered little to no increase in performance as they are still sat on 40nm tech. My 5850 still tears the **** off any game I throw at it at normal sensible resolutions (1080p or 1200p). 28nm is where its at now, and most people I speak to say the same, there really is no point in the current gen.

For web surfing etc, my SO has no problem on her laptop playing 1080p flash videos on an ancient Nvidia Mobile graphics card that is a few years old, which is probably the most intensive thing a web surfing machine will ever do at this current time. So no reason for these guys to upgrade either.

Sandybridge and Lano must have taken a chunk of these sales as well.

Guest said:

It is interesting how nvidia stay so well in the bussiness agains a company as AMD. Nvidia should be a very good company.

mosu said:

Like Apple prove it, there are lots of stupid people out there, and they got money to spend on Nvidia over rated products(this is also good for some Intel products as well)One can only hope things will change overtime.

Guest said:

Yeah I think its a problem of not having enough games that push hardware

okrings said:

I buy a new graphics card with every new generation as soon as they're out. I wait for both Nvidia and ATI/AMD's launch. I look at the reviews and the performance/heat/hoise and make my decition based on that. I always go for the top single-gpu cards.

When Nvidia's top card was the GTX 480 and AMD's was the 5870, I went for the 5870. That was the first time I've had a ATI card since Rage II Pro or something like that (way back in the hizzy). So I had that 5870 for about a year before the GTX 580 and Radeon HD 6970 came out. During that year, I didn't really understand how much I was missing PhysX. So many games I was playing had PhysX support, and you only get that with Nvidia. For the current generation, I went for the GTX 580 because it runs much cooler than the AMD 6000 series. Many of my games look very different (better) now.

PhysX/CUDA gives Nvidia a leg up on the competition, and I use both. So even if AMD makes a single gpu card that beats Nvidia's offering in some future generation, I might still go for Nvidia simply because of the PhysX and CUDA. I think that's a shame, because I really like the Eyefinity on the AMD cards.

Game developers should to start using open source physics engines more, but I guess Nvidia bribes them into using their PhysX. I honestly don't know, I'm just guessing here.

fpsgamerJR62 said:

I think that if AMD's Llano APUs and next generation Trinity APUs really take off in the desktop and notebook markets, that could substantially reduce sales of entry level and lower mid-range discrete cards from both AMD and Nvidia. Having said that, my next graphics card will likely be an Nvidia card as I have been an Nvidia user since the days of the Riva 128.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.