Wowser 512mb on the RV730?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
Printable View
Wowser 512mb on the RV730?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
R870 is 40nm with 2000sp?
http://www.pczilla.net/en/post/16.html
:yepp:
256-bit is a giveaway...Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
//Andreas
so andreas any idea why they went with 256 bit with the midrange last generation but are giving 256 to even the lower end this generation?
"We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA."
http://www.pczilla.net/en/post/12.html
Any input on this? BS?
If they are relasing R700 in few months and not now, I'd suppose it has some problems. Drivers, design problems or anything else. Though I am not surprised at all if GT200 beats R700.
Economics and GDDR5.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
Last gfx card based off R600 architecture, Then I'll wait for R900, which will again bring the glory of ATI premium graphics:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by mao5
Afraid that ATI will be dead and gone if they don't come up with something really good very soon. If the Nvidia 280/260 is as powerful as rumoured, ATI is in big trouble. Only thing make them stay in business now is fanboyism and the fact that ATI got a free ride with Intel - Intel chipsets rock (and have CF support) and Nvidia chipsets (680/780/790) suck donkey balls...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
ps. apart from that ATI graphics is a lot better in BF2 which is the one and only game I play...
InfernolQuote:
Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown
Rob Halford,
Actually...
Performance of high-end parts means absolutely nothing for the GPU-companies for what comes to economics.
Attachment 79044
Revenue != Profit. A 8800GT and a 9800GTX basicly cost the same to make. Yet nVidia is scoring quite alot more money on the later in profit. If it wasnt worth it X2 and GX2 and GTX was dead now.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
OH NOES!!!!
HD 4000 series will get GDDR5 Qimonda memory :shocked::down:
Source
Shintai,
Dunno what you're going on about - ofcourse the profit from single 9800GTX is greater than of a 8800GT. But you can be sure that the sales volume of 9800GTX (~$300) is totally insignificant compared to 8800GT/S ($175-200) thus the latter brings more profit in the end of the day. Unless you can post some numbers...
Selling G200s @ $500 (or w/e) will be very, very bad business for nV... On the other hand, HD4870 will retail at much lower price thus more people will buy it. Volume is what matters.
So you think that the one who holds the PERFORMANCE crown is the winner? You think that the one who has the FASTEST card will win? Not at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Halford
Actually, again, ATI vs. Nvidia isn't same as AMD vs. Intel. ATI can actually deliver competitive products in the same price range. They might not hold the FASTEST card, but hey, how many people actually BOUGHT the GX2/X2 SLI/CF system? Aye, 10. How many bought 8800 GT/HD3850? Aye, 10,000. :rolleyes:
There is a crossover point. The issue is not mainstream would generate more. But to say enthutiast aint highly profitable is wrong. AMD would want to be there aswell, but they cant really.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
A 8800GT is more like 150-180$ and the 9800GTX 290$.
Asume the production price is about equal. Maybe add 10$. Then it depends what nVidia earns on a 8800GT. If the GT gives 10$ profit and the GTX 120$ profit you would quickly need a alot higher revenue. For Intel the 1499$ chip cost the exact same to make as the 266$ chip. Enthutiast part of the game is basicly like milking a golden cow. Its free more or less with extremely high profit.
Oh, and the ATI part still doesnt make any profit.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&d=1211372607
$150-249 :up:
QFT :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
And to repeat some old info. nVidia didn't make much profit per card on the 8800gt. They tried to sell those card @ ATI price levels while RV670 cards where so much less expensive to produce (almost 50% smaller die size).
They sell more cards than AMD. And nVidias financial figures shows otherwise :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Another example btw. 9800GX2. Now thats a heavy profit card. Maybe as much as 250$ or more profit per card.
Ok, i'm a bit confused now :p: What do you mean? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
what figures?Quote:
And nVidias financial figures shows otherwise
where?Quote:
shows
AMD(ATI) losing money and nVidia is basicly shovelling in truckloads of money in profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
must be all those gx2's they selling :p:;Quote:
AMD(ATI) losing money and nVidia is basicly shovelling in truckloads of money in profit.
no, but i think it's because nvidia trumps 3xxx series. in mainstream & performance segments mainly.
and 4xxx will probly be trumped by nv also, boring as that is. spose ati will cash in on 4xxx for a while.
but amd making a loss could be good for that company as they can right off losses against tax :lol: - it's actually a machiavellian plot to avoid paying taxes :nuts: amd makes heaps of revenue, and mysteriously their running costs still show large losses. AMD is actually a non-profit organisation and im sure there are plenty of tax exemptions that way :rolleyes:
im not trolling, but the amd financial situation is rather bizarre to me :confused: pardon me if this has been explained before :shrug:
there is profit sure, but there is bread and butter revenue from a customer base. no customers = no revenue OR profit. AMD has a lot of revenue, but the profit loss situation is ..............? in the fickle hands of the customers ultimately.
i spose amd want to turn a profit, but somehow i think it will be in the mainstream and performance segments rather than the high end, that can achieve this. the fact that nv invariably trumps any high end offering that amd brings forth doesnt help amdati
i havent seen discrete gcard sales figures from amd or nvidia, so i dont know what im talking about really :p
Well in short. After all investment etc. nVidia makes about 500million in cash profit a year. ATI makes about 30million in loss. nVidia is even having a bigger quarter revenue than ATIs yearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
nVidia uses 1billion in R&D. Thats almost ATIs entire revenue.
but total revenues for each company in the discrete gcard market is...?
i'll take a guess then that nvidia's revenues/turnover of units is much higher than amdati's, but i havent seen any figures of total revenues for nvidia , but how does it break down ...like there are chipsets, discrete gcards, the cpu side of amd, etc.Quote:
nVidia uses 1billion in R&D. Thats almost ATIs entire revenue.
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:NVDA
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
AMD:
2007 total revenue: 6.013billionQuote:
Total Revenue 1,505.00 6,013.00 5,649.00
Gross Profit 628.00 2,262.00 2,793.00
Operating Income -264.00 -2,865.00 -47.00
Net Income -358.00 -3,379.00 -166.00
2007 net income: -3.379billion :lol::confused:
NVIDIA:
2007 total revenue: 3.068billionQuote:
Total Revenue 1,153.39 4,097.86 3,068.77
Gross Profit 514.84 1,869.28 1,300.45
Operating Income 202.98 836.35 453.45
Net Income 176.81 797.64 448.83
2007 net income: 0.448billion :lol::confused:
wtf?
do amd losses go into gold plated rolls royces for all empoyees or something? wtf?
and yet the figures show that amd had twice the total revenues vs amd in 2007:rolleyes: