AMD loses ground to Nvidia in Q2 2018

[LemmingOverlrd]

Why it matters: Despite increasing its lead over AMD, Nvidia is known to have had a bad quarter. Had it not been the crash of the cryptomining market, AMD might have been looking at a rout.

Jon Peddie Research has released its latest quarterly report on the add-in board market report (focusing exclusively on GPUs). Nvidia is increasing its lead over AMD, despite the latter still performing well.

The market, says JPR, slowed down during the second quarter as attach rates slipped with the cryptomining fever coming to an end. While PC shipments shrank by just 3.4 percent that quarter, the AIB share took a 28 percent nosedive quarter-on-quarter, a notoriously steep decline and greater than the 9.8 percent ten-year average shrink of the quarterly Q2 drop. Overall, year-on-year, the AIB market fell 5.7 percent.

Looking at the table, in the second quarter of 2018, the balance has once again tipped in Nvidia's favor, with the green team taking 4 points away from AMD and now sitting at a comfortable 69.1 percent share of the market. AMD slipped from 34.9 to 30.9 percent market share. Still, it isn't a fiasco for AMD, as it is still holding its own in the GPU arena, boasting a year-on-year increase in market share of 0.5 percent.

JPR also highlighted the fact that both AMD and Nvidia are now not only shipping GPUs to their AIB partners, but they are also building and selling their own cards.

Despite Nvidia taking market share from AMD, we are under the impression that Q2 was not, in fact, a good quarter for them. Its attempts in cryptomining were foiled when the market bottomed out, and it was left hanging with thousands of GPUs it is still trying to offload via AIB partners. On the other hand, this next quarter will most likely show Nvidia gaining a bit more ground as it had fire sales in its 10-series graphics cards. Unfortunately, AMD will only have a comeback for this, Navi, well into the first quarter of 2019, so consumers will have to grin and bear it.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/76324-amd-loses-ground-nvidia-q2-2018.html

 

[VitalyT]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

 

[oldikes]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

cant tell if serious

 

[VitalyT]

cant tell if serious

good, neither can I.

 

[Vulcanproject]

AMD just need to get 7nm consumer cards out about 6 months before Nvidia can. If they have bought enough wafers from TSMC then that should be very possible. Early 2019 would be a golden window for them.

Even if the Navi GPUs turn out only to be midrange Polaris replacements, on 7nm they could be very nice parts at very good prices compared to Nvidia's 12nm offerings. Inherent process advantage.

RX580 price point replacement. Maybe an RX680 somewhere around the the performance of a Vega 56/GTX1070ti, for under $300? Would sell like hot cakes.

 

[Misagt]

It's still a year over year increase. I don't think the execs are too worried about this. If they had a drop year over year yeah they would be worried.

 

[Evernessince]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

I'm pretty sure Intel's anti-competitive practices had a bigger impact. Buying ATI was only bad in hindsight because AMD didn't realize it would essentially be shut out from a major source of revenue. You are blaming the symptom, not the cause.

AMD just need to get 7nm consumer cards out about 6 months before Nvidia can. If they have bought enough wafers from TSMC then that should be very possible. Early 2019 would be a golden window for them.

Even if the Navi GPUs turn out only to be midrange Polaris replacements, on 7nm they could be very nice parts at very good prices compared to Nvidia's 12nm offerings. Inherent process advantage.

RX580 price point replacement. Maybe an RX680 somewhere around the the performance of a Vega 56/GTX1070ti, for under $300? Would sell like hot cakes.

That's very possible given that AMD is targeting the mid range. It will interesting to see pricing. Will we have competitive pricing up to the midrange cards and then Nvidia charges an arm and a leg for high end?

 

[Eric Klien]

"Will we have competitive pricing up to the midrange cards and then Nvidia charges an arm and a leg for high end?" If AMD is not competitive at the high end, then this is what Nvidia will do.

 

[GeforcerFX]

I would stick to midrange cards and support cfx across the entire lineup from $100 cards to the $250 cards, focus on improving cfx performance and then people can have a higher end offering from AMD or people that bought budget can run AMD cards. But trying to compete on the highend front has had two mediocre showings for AMD, not out right bad performance, but not great sales and those chips arn't cheap. Mid range is what they need for there console gpu markets and they can take the architecture and drop it into APU's which they hold a nice overall performance lead in over intel atm.

 

[hahahanoobs]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

I'm pretty sure Intel's anti-competitive practices had a bigger impact. Buying ATI was only bad in hindsight because AMD didn't realize it would essentially be shut out from a major source of revenue. You are blaming the symptom, not the cause.

AMD just need to get 7nm consumer cards out about 6 months before Nvidia can. If they have bought enough wafers from TSMC then that should be very possible. Early 2019 would be a golden window for them.

Even if the Navi GPUs turn out only to be midrange Polaris replacements, on 7nm they could be very nice parts at very good prices compared to Nvidia's 12nm offerings. Inherent process advantage.

RX580 price point replacement. Maybe an RX680 somewhere around the the performance of a Vega 56/GTX1070ti, for under $300? Would sell like hot cakes.

That's very possible given that AMD is targeting the mid range. It will interesting to see pricing. Will we have competitive pricing up to the midrange cards and then Nvidia charges an arm and a leg for high end?

AMD's problems extend far beyond what Intel did to them. If you don't know this you don't know AMD's history.

 

[Evernessince]

AMD's problems extend far beyond what Intel did to them. If you don't know this you don't know AMD's history.

That which is submitted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. This isn't adding to the conversation, you're trolling.

 

[Reehahs]

I would stick to midrange cards and support cfx across the entire lineup from $100 cards to the $250 cards, focus on improving cfx performance and then people can have a higher end offering from AMD or people that bought budget can run AMD cards. But trying to compete on the highend front has had two mediocre showings for AMD, not out right bad performance, but not great sales and those chips arn't cheap. Mid range is what they need for there console gpu markets and they can take the architecture and drop it into APU's which they hold a nice overall performance lead in over intel atm.

Bring out the X2 and X3 versions of the midrange cards with onboard CFX.

 

[Stark]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

cant tell if serious

I would add that binding term for production on Global foundries, and Llano inventory fiasco.

 

[emmzo]

I`m actually surprised their market share still stands at 30%. The lack of competition hurts consumers` wallet, I know, but facing facts, now with the new nVIDIA RT cards, I can`t see a future where AMD would catch up.

 

[yeeeeman]

That 30% marketshare is not a surprise. Not everyone buys Titan XPs or 1080Tis. Not everyone is very sensitive to FPS under 60. And not everyone needs to have every single quality preset maxed out. Most of people enjoy playing the actual game, not really caring about maxing every single knob. Also, most of people don't afford to spend or don't want to give more than 400-500$ on a graphics card. People that do, either are rich and don't know what to do with the money or just want to brag. But this is the minority.
And when you look at the market, AMD has quite nice offerings at all price points until the 500$ mark.
You have the RX580 which is ~ equal to GTX1060 in performance and a bit worse in efficiency, but not many care about this. Then you have Vega 56 which is a bit better compared to GTX1070 and with undervolting it is as efficient. Vega 64 is trading blows with GTX1080, but its efficiency is a bit off. Graphics drivers have improved a lot in recent years and they can be put on par with what the competition offers. With AMD you also get freesync which is quite a nice tech.
So, all in all, they are competitive right now and they will still be in the future months since a GTX2070 is 500$ with GTX1080 performance.

They NEED to get out Vega 20 on 7nm as fast as possible. If that card can match 1080TI (aka GTX2080) with the same power consumption, at 450-500$ they are covered in my view.

 

[pcnthuziast]

Always second place. Always.

 

[fadingfool]

If AMD was only in the standalone GPU market then this would be grim reading knowing the next release was 6 months away. Given the console market is predominantly AMD based then this isn't too bad - heck AMD have sold every GPU they can produce to the crypto miners over the last 2 years - supply has been the problem. 1080p is the mainstream now - aiming at the nascent 4K market might be good for the benchmarks but isn't the bread and butter of the market and whilst as an enthusiast I would love to see a 2080TI beating AMD GPU it may not be in AMD's road map strategy at this time.

 

[Abraka]

It could be surmised to just AMD loses ground, period. Generally, it is a bad thing, but AMD has been in this state for many years now, it is a miracle it is still around.

For those who is not familiar with the history, once a prosperous and progressive company, AMD started sinking ever since the disastrous purchase of ATI in 2006, which was incredibly over-valued. And it never fully recovered after that fiasco, which put it on a limb for all times. Everything it does ever since is a catch-up game.

That's one of the best analysis I've heard so far. AMD CPUs were a lot faster and better than Intel at that time. AMD CPU running at 1.8 GHz was 30% faster than Intel CPU running at 3.2 GHz. That's how much Intel sucked at that time.

ATI was also much better then, with its ATI 9800 monster hammering the competition. Nvidia had nothing good to compete against ATI at that time. However, since AMD bought ATI, things went downhill for both of them. Let's see if AMD can recover and beat Intel and Nvidia, like it did in not-so-far past.

 

[Eric Klien]

They NEED to get out Vega 20 on 7nm as fast as possible.

While 7nm will be cool, remember that Nvidia will release on 7nm right around when AMD does so this will not be to AMD's advantage.

 

[yeeeeman]

While 7nm will be cool, remember that Nvidia will release on 7nm right around when AMD does so this will not be to AMD's advantage.

Not sure that is entirely the case. Nvidia won't release any new gfx card for 1 year at least from now and AMD could have some 7nm card in the pipeline for next year. In any case, RTX 2080Ti is almost twice as fast as Vega 64 in some scenarios so they have a LOT to do to catch-up. But they could use their usual formula, release a medium sized GPU and then slap two of them onto a single board. nvidia could put at most two RTX 2070 on one card so that is 2x GTX1080+10% performance. Which is doable for AMD