Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
Tesla and cuda are part of the gpu research and design so they are related since they involve making the Gpu more powerful. Its obvious those from those numbers NV should be spending substantially more if the ratio's mean anything from the 2006 numbers of AMD + ATI.

If we look at those numbers AMD spent 2006-2007 spent 11% more and between 2007-2008 they didn't increase spending at all. Compare this to NV who spent 2006-2007 spent 25 percent more and 23.7% more

Not to mention AMD likely spent alot of money getting to 55nm and 40nm to first plus all the money they spent on DDR5 and DDR4 research. NV waited for all this to happen so they didn't have to spent much on research and getting there as much.

I can imagine since its AMD was running the show for the most part, I can see alot more money spent on their CPU then their GPU side, especially considering how behind they were during the conroe years, and looking at simple economics, getting that side on the better side of profitable was alot more important than getting it gpu side going.
You like speculation a lot more that me!
Tesla and Cuda are part of gpu research but they have a cost. A cost in time or developpers and one or another cost money.

You take percentage because it suits your purpose more but in term of brute numbers AMD 2006 to 2007 its +184 Millions$ and Nvidia 2006 to 2007 its +138 Millions$.

What the cost going to 55nm? You don't know. Going to 40nm? You don't know? GDDR4 research? 2900XT launch six months late in 2007 but due in 2006 so no impact. GDDR4 basically the same as GDDR4 so not a great deal.

For the AMD part you play guessing game. But AMD, graphic division was the first thing who manage too have success of RV670 and RV770. So It may indicate something.