Nvidia reaches historic 92% GPU market share, leaves AMD and Intel far behind

[godrilla]

In terms of rasterization AMD's best card is the equivalent of a 5070TI. Which is fine for most people playing on 1080/1440p at 60fps minimum.

But if you want highest settings at higher resolution it simply lags behind quite a bit.

Intels best card is about the same level as a 4060,which isn't necessarily bad but it's not really competitive either.

In terms of AI generation the best AMD card has the 4070 Super and a bunch of other Nvidia cards in front of it.

AMD and Intel really need to step up their game to be somewhat competitive in both these fields. In terms of gaming 1440p is slowly replacing 1080p as the typical resolution.

I have been saying this since they took the cpu gaming crown with 7800X3D and now 9800x3d. They literally have free marketing opportunity to show off a flagship GPU for the high end for every CPU review. They decided to compete in the upper mid-range. This only backfired due to Nvidia using that as opportunity to further increase prices. For every CPU review AMD gave Nvidia 2 generations of free marketing 7800X3D/4090 and now 9800x3d/5090.

 

[candle86]

Nvidia’s partners are desperately trying to diversify their portfolio to stay afloat.

Zotac launches a new fragrance line just for gamers — the company’s April Fool’s joke turned to reality

Smelling good is as important as getting that kill streak.

www.tomshardware.com

Zotac fragrance anyone?

Well I've Nvidia keeps upsetting their partners they're going to go the way 3D effects that's what did them in.

History should be a teacher but 3DFX bought STB systems and alienated their board partners who didn't want to work with them anymore. Nvidia so far as walking a tight rope, but if they really anger the board partners the board partners will swap to AMD and drop them like a rock and Nvidia doesn't have the board manufacturing capability to keep up. That's what the watch is how poorly Nvidia is treating its board partners because they do have another option they have two of them.

 

[Megalomaniac]

I also capitalized on the Nvidia boom but I got in right before the recent boom and got out after my investment tripled. Now that Nvidia is the most valuable company in the world and every more or less undstanda that AI is a huge factor in the stock market now, I expect future gains to be slow and steady. Nothing like the booms we've seen.

What we should be looking for now is anything from AMD or Intel thst can take chunks of AI market from Nvidia and maybe AMD or Intel can have a similar boom.

Microsoft, Apple, AMD, Nvidia, Google, Amazon, Meta, Micron, Intel, TSM, SCMI...Tesla...

The entire AI trade is being pulled by Nvidia (the Locomotive). I bought shares in all these companies and HODL those with dividends. You can't lose. They have control over everything.

 

[LimyG]

A similar article in 3 months time would be more relevant due to release dates.

Never the less:
1. Those NV numbers are incredible, not representitive of enthusiasts though.

2. AMD were supposed to have had lots of cards ready at launch. But as AMD is prone
to do, they greatly underestimated demand (according to this article). Silly, but that's AMD.

Edit: It doesn't help that AMD have not released a high end card this time round.
Something between RTX 5080 and 5090 with at very least 24 GB vram 7
and performance which beats the 5080 without hopeless drivers, missing ROPs
and awful power distribution draw (melting cables) Would be something I bet everyone
here would at least like to see. But are AMD capable of such high performance hardware.
With CPU, absolutely. With GPU - Well, it's impossible to say.

Be interesting to hear what others think, agree or disagree with my comments above.

 

[Megalomaniac]

A similar article in 3 months time would be more relevant due to release dates.

Never the less:
1. Those NV numbers are incredible, not representitive of enthusiasts though.

2. AMD were supposed to have had lots of cards ready at launch. But as AMD is prone
to do, they greatly underestimated demand (according to this article). Silly, but that's AMD.

Edit: It doesn't help that AMD have not released a high end card this time round.
Something between RTX 5080 and 5090 with at very least 24 GB vram 7
and performance which beats the 5080 without hopeless drivers, missing ROPs
and awful power distribution draw (melting cables) Would be something I bet everyone
here would at least like to see. But are AMD capable of such high performance hardware.
With CPU, absolutely. With GPU - Well, it's impossible to say.

Be interesting to hear what others think, agree or disagree with my comments above.

No matter what AMD releases, they will continue to be seen as #2 to Nvidia. The XX80 and XX90 continue to represent the forefront of the technology and AMD is woefully unprepared to take on either. Then there's the advertisement. Most people understand Nvidia's advertisement. It's simple. Many people do not understand AMD's advertisement. They seriously have a marketing problem.

 

[Squid Surprise]

But are AMD capable of such high performance hardware.
With CPU, absolutely. With GPU - Well, it's impossible to say.

Be interesting to hear what others think, agree or disagree with my comments above.

the answer is no… otherwise they’d have done it…

 

[Squid Surprise]

No matter what AMD releases, they will continue to be seen as #2 to Nvidia. The XX80 and XX90 continue to represent the forefront of the technology and AMD is woefully unprepared to take on either. Then there's the advertisement. Most people understand Nvidia's advertisement. It's simple. Many people do not understand AMD's advertisement. They seriously have a marketing problem.

They were seen as #2 to Intel for years until they proved otherwise. It took several generations - they were superior, arguably, since zen 3000, but now they are undisputed kings of x86 CPUs.

If they could actually release superior GPUs for a few generations (1-2 won’t cut it), then they will be seen as #1… nowadays, brand loyalty only goes so far - people won’t REPEATEDLY spend hundreds (or thousands) of dollars on an inferior product just cause it used to be good.

You can afford to sit on your laurels for a year or 2, but, as Intel found out, if you don’t keep up, you’ll be left in the dust.

 

[godrilla]

Well I've Nvidia keeps upsetting their partners they're going to go the way 3D effects that's what did them in.

History should be a teacher but 3DFX bought STB systems and alienated their board partners who didn't want to work with them anymore. Nvidia so far as walking a tight rope, but if they really anger the board partners the board partners will swap to AMD and drop them like a rock and Nvidia doesn't have the board manufacturing capability to keep up. That's what the watch is how poorly Nvidia is treating its board partners because they do have another option they have two of them.

EVGA 9090xt Kingpin would be sweet. Unfortunately I believe EVGA has anhedonia from dealing with Nvidia.

 

[Kirby1]

Microsoft, Apple, AMD, Nvidia, Google, Amazon, Meta, Micron, Intel, TSM, SCMI...Tesla...

The entire AI trade is being pulled by Nvidia (the Locomotive). I bought shares in all these companies and HODL those with dividends. You can't lose. They have control over everything.

You can lose. China could invade Taiwan...

But I agree that the AI tech sector is definitely on the rise, I just think Nvidia specifically isn't going to have another huge and fast increase anytime soon now that the market understands what's going on.

In the end, a rising tide raises all ships.

 

[Kirby1]

A similar article in 3 months time would be more relevant due to release dates.

Never the less:
1. Those NV numbers are incredible, not representitive of enthusiasts though.

2. AMD were supposed to have had lots of cards ready at launch. But as AMD is prone
to do, they greatly underestimated demand (according to this article). Silly, but that's AMD.

Edit: It doesn't help that AMD have not released a high end card this time round.
Something between RTX 5080 and 5090 with at very least 24 GB vram 7
and performance which beats the 5080 without hopeless drivers, missing ROPs
and awful power distribution draw (melting cables) Would be something I bet everyone
here would at least like to see. But are AMD capable of such high performance hardware.
With CPU, absolutely. With GPU - Well, it's impossible to say.

Be interesting to hear what others think, agree or disagree with my comments above.

I disagree with the other comments on this.

AMD doesn't need to have the most powerful hardware in the AI market to gain a strong presence. They just need to have hardware that is a better value at attractive price points.

AMD is doing very well as a whole. No one thought they could topple Intel, and now everyone who follows hardware knows AMD is winning the CPU race at this point. While Nvidia is a very aggressive contender and overall it's unlikely that AMD will have any huge wins over them in the foreseeable future, that doesn't mean it can't happen. AMD is a smart company that only has a few hurdles in its way to becoming even more successful.

Nvidia was the first to take AI/NPU style hardware seriously, and they did it way before anyone else. But now that they have proven the concept, others can catch up quickly.

 

[HardReset]

the answer is no… otherwise they’d have done it…

Answer is definitely yes. AMD just didn't see that would be profitable. Even if AMD had better GPU on everything (=raster, RT, features, power consumption, everything etc), people would still buy Nvidia. So why bother?

They were seen as #2 to Intel for years until they proved otherwise. It took several generations - they were superior, arguably, since zen 3000, but now they are undisputed kings of x86 CPUs.

And still Intel market share is around 70% vs AMDs 30%. Because Intel is Intel not AMD. Now think about why AMD doesn't bother to make high end GPU? Because Nvidia would still sell much better because Nvidia.

 

[Kirby1]

Answer is definitely yes. AMD just didn't see that would be profitable. Even if AMD had better GPU on everything (=raster, RT, features, power consumption, everything etc), people would still buy Nvidia. So why bother?

And still Intel market share is around 70% vs AMDs 30%. Because Intel is Intel not AMD. Now think about why AMD doesn't bother to make high end GPU? Because Nvidia would still sell much better because Nvidia.

And also because the power consumption from an AMD card that performed at 4090 levels would have been 600w+. That's the main reason. Because of that, they looked at how many units they thought they would sell with a 600w GPU in that price range and decided to just skip it. I'm sure if their power consumption were on part, they would do it.

Perception and preference can shift quickly in the tech world. Intel is steadily losing market to AMD. The layman may not get it, but the companies choosing which CPUs to put in their servers and future hardware designs definitely do.

If marketing is on of AMDs biggest issues, that's easy to fix and doesn't take a technological breakthrough.

 

[HardReset]

And also because the power consumption from an AMD card that performed at 4090 levels would have been 600w+. That's the main reason. Because of that, they looked at how many units they thought they would sell with a 600w GPU in that price range and decided to just skip it. I'm sure if their power consumption were on part, they would do it.

Yeah right. AMD abandoned high end GPUs around 2010 when buyers made clear they prefer Nvidia despite AMD being much better. So why situation would be different at this time? Basically AMD decided that CPU buyers are much more intelligent than GPU buyers and decided to bet on CPUs. In other words, if AMD has better CPU than Intel has, sales will be up. However having better GPU than Nvidia has means basically nothing.

 

[ChipBoundary]

AMD shipped many 9000 series cards last year, that's why there is much less 9000 series cards shipped Q1/2025.

This article also totally forgets that most of those GPUs sold are in fact mobile GPUs. AMD have mostly integrated solutions whereas Nvidia have only discrete ones. So this is NOT about desktop discrete card sales at all, it's all discrete chips including mobile.

@Daniel Sims : Topic is totally wrong, Intel still owns majority of GPU market. This is discrete only.

What? Nvidia makes mobile cards...what are you smoking? Also, AMD's APU's are an ENTIRELY different beast than their discreet cards. Their APU's are also trash compared to Intel's. AMD is literally doing EVERYTHING wrong, as they always have.

They should just spin off their graphics cards into a separate company and divest it from their infrastructure. Let ATI exist again so we can get some real GPU competition again.

 

[Kirby1]

Yeah right. AMD abandoned high end GPUs around 2010 when buyers made clear they prefer Nvidia despite AMD being much better. So why situation would be different at this time? Basically AMD decided that CPU buyers are much more intelligent than GPU buyers and decided to bet on CPUs. In other words, if AMD has better CPU than Intel has, sales will be up. However having better GPU than Nvidia has means basically nothing.

Your timeline is way off. There have been times when AMD had more market share than Nvidia, and many times when they have been ahead on performance and/or efficiency.

Things only started to get weird when Mores Law came to an end and certain parts of chips can no longer be shrunken down, while the remaining parts get closer and closer to the atomic limit.

Now a huge factor in which chips are better isn't about which design is better but who get priority access to TSMCs best nodes. That's a big part of why Apple and Nvidia hardware stays ahead, they have deeper pockets to get priority access.

 

[godrilla]

Your timeline is way off. There have been times when AMD had more market share than Nvidia, and many times when they have been ahead on performance and/or efficiency.

Things only started to get weird when Mores Law came to an end and certain parts of chips can no longer be shrunken down, while the remaining parts get closer and closer to the atomic limit.

Now a huge factor in which chips are better isn't about which design is better but who get priority access to TSMCs best nodes. That's a big part of why Apple and Nvidia hardware stays ahead, they have deeper pockets to get priority access.

AMD started to lose market share wait for it when the relative became CEO and had a conflict of interest. Now they are at 8% market share.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Answer is definitely yes. AMD just didn't see that would be profitable. Even if AMD had better GPU on everything (=raster, RT, features, power consumption, everything etc), people would still buy Nvidia. So why bother?

lol - I know you wear red-tinted glasses, but try and come back to reality a bit. If AMD could match Nvidia’s high-end GPU, they’d sell out in minutes… people are desperate for high-end GPUs and they sell out instantly.

Even AMD isn’t so dumb as to say, “we don’t want any of that money”… the reason they don’t sell in the high end is that they can’t make one. And no, one with a 600w power envelope doesn’t count.

And still Intel market share is around 70% vs AMDs 30%. Because Intel is Intel not AMD. Now think about why AMD doesn't bother to make high end GPU? Because Nvidia would still sell much better because Nvidia.

That’s overall - cause AMD fails so spectacularly selling laptop CPUs… in the desktop market, they are much higher.

 

[Kirby1]

AMD started to lose market share wait for it when the relative became CEO and had a conflict of interest. Now they are at 8% market share.

If you're going to just spout nonsense, don't bother quoting me. I'm sorry you don't understand the many factors at play and have to simplify it into a Dunning-Kruger friendly alternative explanation for what is going on.

 

[godrilla]

If you're going to just spout nonsense, don't bother quoting me. I'm sorry you don't understand the many factors at play and have to simplify it into a Dunning-Kruger friendly alternative explanation for what is going on.

I hope you are right and it is nonsense. Hopefully the rumors are true and they'll have a 5080 super competitor at a decent price. The gpu market definitely needs it.

 

[DrSuess]

GTX 5000 millions sold? How many of them are actually in use by actual gamers. Graphic renders or engineers/scientist? And how many are in use in crypto or AI farms?

 

[Hassanabi]

Yeah right. AMD abandoned high end GPUs around 2010 when buyers made clear they prefer Nvidia despite AMD being much better. So why situation would be different at this time? Basically AMD decided that CPU buyers are much more intelligent than GPU buyers and decided to bet on CPUs. In other words, if AMD has better CPU than Intel has, sales will be up. However having better GPU than Nvidia has means basically nothing.

This seems more like a fanboy-coping mechanism than actual facts.

I have had Intel CPU's for most of my life, not because of "brand loyalty", because the name or the color "blue"... Every 3-4 years I bought a new PC, Intel CPU simply beat AMD in terms of gaming performance based on a multitude of benchmarks from various sources. The only time I made a bad choice was when I got a first generation i5 CPU that people said would be perfectly fine for multitasking, but the machine simply wasn't performant enough, when I switched to an i7 I had zero issues.

My new computer is coming in a few weeks, and for the first time in about 10-15 years I'll have an AMD CPU inside. Why? Because it's the most performant in gaming currently speaking.

People that stubbornly remain loyal to some company that cares not a single bit about you are pathetic in my opinion. The only thing I'm loyal to is performance, and for that matter I couldn't care what logo is on it, I would sport a CPU or GPU with a swastika on it if it was the most performant for gaming.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Yeah right. AMD abandoned high end GPUs around 2010 when buyers made clear they prefer Nvidia despite AMD being much better. So why situation would be different at this time? Basically AMD decided that CPU buyers are much more intelligent than GPU buyers and decided to bet on CPUs. In other words, if AMD has better CPU than Intel has, sales will be up. However having better GPU than Nvidia has means basically nothing.

This is a MASSIVE cope and seethe, also it's hilariously wrong. Evergreen in 2010 hit a 49 percent market share, the Highest AMD ever hit. Both succeeding generations had flagships, and we got the fury x after that.

 

[trieste1s]

I said it before in the other article that was basically this same info, the amazing RTX 50 sales numbers are not to gamers. They are from AI startups and companies buying them as cheap alternatives to the server/AI grade cards. The AI boom/bubble is possibly worse than the crypto bubble. The AI bubble still has a few years to go and is pretty much holding up the entire stock market right now. Love or hate Nvidia, they happen to be the company with the product everyone wants. It just really sucks that AMD and Intel can't get the s**t together and make a real difference in the gaming GPU market.

But you can't force AMD to engage in dishonest GPU marketing by paid influencers and bots that's being done using AI videos, AI articles, and with people parroting ancient stuff like how all AMD CPUs are hot and slow and burn themselves up. Nvidia is much better at this on top of excellent first movers in gaming tech like Reflex, RT, DLSS.

 

[BadThad]

Another lucky burst in demand again, only not from crypto crunchers this time, but from AI dreamers. I have not read-up, but I'm assuming that nvidia outperforms AMD in AI tasks?

 

[Beerfloat]

So, to summarize the comments, as usual it's all circumstantial, has nothing at all to do with the poor Radeon user experience vs Geforce, it's just AI/crypto/whatever fad and not GAMErZ anyway, we just need to have faith in the opinion pieces of the Techtubers and Mindfactory instead.

Brace for more crushing disappointment.