News AMD Posts Record Revenue on High Demand and Improved Supply

Status
Not open for further replies.
So matching nVidia and Intel's horrible pricing schemes does give profit, huh?

I am so shocked... Not.

Oh welp; you feed snakes and you get biten and eaten. Or so the saying goes, lol.

Anyway, the upside is AMD can get just a bit closer to Intel. They're still about 7 times smaller, so this helps them go up the food ladder, I guess. I hope they just bring competition and not shadow the others horrible pricing tactics.

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VforV
  • Like
Reactions: Soaptrail

ddcservices

Honorable
Oct 12, 2017
54
26
10,560
So matching nVidia and Intel's horrible pricing schemes does give profit, huh?

I am so shocked... Not.

Oh welp; you feed snakes and you get biten and eaten. Or so the saying goes, lol.

Anyway, the upside is AMD can get just a bit closer to Intel. They're still about 7 times smaller, so this helps them go up the food ladder, I guess. I hope they just bring competition and not shadow the others horrible pricing tactics.

Regards.

You don't seem to understand how these things work, so let me educate you a bit.

First, on the CPU front(AMD vs. Intel), AMD offering 8 cores in 2017 vs. Intel 4 cores, pricing wasn't a problem, right? Up to $500 for the top end consumer CPU(yes, the 1800X wasn't really much better than the 1700, but it was a bit better, and AMD skipped the 2800X from the next generation because of it).

The move from the 3700, 3700X, and 3800X to the 5800x seemed like there was a big price increase, because AMD didn't make multiple tiers of chips. 6 core, 8 core, 12 core, and 16 core...only a single version for the Zen3 generation, so 3800X to 5800X was a $50 increase, which isn't a big jump in price. You just look at 3700 to the 5800x as the jump from generation to generation. Just because there is no, "low end with lower clock speeds" version bothers you doesn't mean that the price increase was as big as you want it to seem(because you are cheap and want a low cost option that isn't really slower than the expensive one).

So, that's the CPU business, $50 more generation to generation was what happened, and shipping and such does cost a lot more these days than in pre-Covid times.

Then, you have video cards, the AMD vs. NVIDIA. The Radeon 5700XT was a $400 card in 2019, a 40CU(compute unit) GPU. For the 6000 series, the 40CU card is the 6700XT. Big Navi is 60CU for the 6800, 72CU for the 6800XT, and 80CU for the 6900XT. So, the 6800 costing 50% more would bring it to $600 with 8GB of VRAM...AMD gave it 16GB of VRAM. Not really terrible, and if you look at the MSRP, prices were right on the money for the most part for what would be fair compared to the previous generation.

Now, what you probably missed is that MSRP for the REFERENCE design is what AMD suggests the prices should be. AMD only makes the GPU, not the cards themselves(except the versions you can buy at amd.com). So, who do you think actually makes the video cards? Yea, those video card makers, MSI, Asus, PowerColor, Sapphire, XFX, etc. Just because AMD suggests prices does not mean those card makers are going to listen. AMD can't really do anything if Sapphire makes even the reference design for $100 more than the MSRP, because AMD just supplies the GPUs. Now, can you buy direct from Asus, Sapphire, or the others, or do they sell to distributors, who in turn sell to others? Even if the video card maker sells to distributors for 40 percent below MSRP, if the distributor then turns around and sells the cards for MSRP to the retailers, those retailers WILL mark the price up so they make a profit. The real source of the problem is the video card makers and the distributors jacking up the prices. For all we know, AMD is selling the 6900XT GPU for $150 each to the video card makers who are selling the completed cards for $1000. That price increase isn't really increasing profits to AMD and NVIDIA. Generation to generation will see a price increase, but if you go from 40CU to 60CU, you should expect a 50 percent boost to prices, because the GPU is that much larger. Top end golden samples will always have an extra price premium though, so the 6900XT is going to be more expensive than double the 6700XT.
 
You don't seem to understand how these things work, so let me educate you a bit.

First, on the CPU front(AMD vs. Intel), AMD offering 8 cores in 2017 vs. Intel 4 cores, pricing wasn't a problem, right? Up to $500 for the top end consumer CPU(yes, the 1800X wasn't really much better than the 1700, but it was a bit better, and AMD skipped the 2800X from the next generation because of it).

The move from the 3700, 3700X, and 3800X to the 5800x seemed like there was a big price increase, because AMD didn't make multiple tiers of chips. 6 core, 8 core, 12 core, and 16 core...only a single version for the Zen3 generation, so 3800X to 5800X was a $50 increase, which isn't a big jump in price. You just look at 3700 to the 5800x as the jump from generation to generation. Just because there is no, "low end with lower clock speeds" version bothers you doesn't mean that the price increase was as big as you want it to seem(because you are cheap and want a low cost option that isn't really slower than the expensive one).

So, that's the CPU business, $50 more generation to generation was what happened, and shipping and such does cost a lot more these days than in pre-Covid times.

Then, you have video cards, the AMD vs. NVIDIA. The Radeon 5700XT was a $400 card in 2019, a 40CU(compute unit) GPU. For the 6000 series, the 40CU card is the 6700XT. Big Navi is 60CU for the 6800, 72CU for the 6800XT, and 80CU for the 6900XT. So, the 6800 costing 50% more would bring it to $600 with 8GB of VRAM...AMD gave it 16GB of VRAM. Not really terrible, and if you look at the MSRP, prices were right on the money for the most part for what would be fair compared to the previous generation.

Now, what you probably missed is that MSRP for the REFERENCE design is what AMD suggests the prices should be. AMD only makes the GPU, not the cards themselves(except the versions you can buy at amd.com). So, who do you think actually makes the video cards? Yea, those video card makers, MSI, Asus, PowerColor, Sapphire, XFX, etc. Just because AMD suggests prices does not mean those card makers are going to listen. AMD can't really do anything if Sapphire makes even the reference design for $100 more than the MSRP, because AMD just supplies the GPUs. Now, can you buy direct from Asus, Sapphire, or the others, or do they sell to distributors, who in turn sell to others? Even if the video card maker sells to distributors for 40 percent below MSRP, if the distributor then turns around and sells the cards for MSRP to the retailers, those retailers WILL mark the price up so they make a profit. The real source of the problem is the video card makers and the distributors jacking up the prices. For all we know, AMD is selling the 6900XT GPU for $150 each to the video card makers who are selling the completed cards for $1000. That price increase isn't really increasing profits to AMD and NVIDIA. Generation to generation will see a price increase, but if you go from 40CU to 60CU, you should expect a 50 percent boost to prices, because the GPU is that much larger. Top end golden samples will always have an extra price premium though, so the 6900XT is going to be more expensive than double the 6700XT.
Cool story. Apologies I didn't read it though.

Regards.
 

ottonis

Reputable
Jun 10, 2020
166
133
4,760
Well deserved, AMD, well deserved!

It's important to note that AMD's earnings right now will be a decisive factor how much R&D they will be able to put into their next generations of CPUs, APUs and GPUs.

Right know, we are at the verge of a paradigm shift, at the forefront of which Apple Silicon is paving the way for a fundamentally improved performance per watt ratio.
So, AMD knows that it will have to significantly rebuild its microarchitecture in the long run in order stay relevant.
Same applies for Intel, of course.
 
So matching nVidia and Intel's horrible pricing schemes does give profit, huh?

I am so shocked... Not.

Oh welp; you feed snakes and you get biten and eaten. Or so the saying goes, lol.

Anyway, the upside is AMD can get just a bit closer to Intel. They're still about 7 times smaller, so this helps them go up the food ladder, I guess. I hope they just bring competition and not shadow the others horrible pricing tactics.

Regards.

These companies have a legal obligation to protect shareholders investments and maximise shareholder returns. It is no wonder that when they have similar products that they end up with similar pricing models that are determined by what the market is will to accept. AMD’s results indicate their pricing model works for this market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ottonis
These companies have a legal obligation to protect shareholders investments and maximise shareholder returns. It is no wonder that when they have similar products that they end up with similar pricing models that are determined by what the market is will to accept. AMD’s results indicate their pricing model works for this market.
Hence: "you feed snakes and you get bitten and eaten".

Part of the blame for current prices is people buying them at those price points. That much is clear.

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ottonis

dalek1234

Reputable
Sep 27, 2019
171
65
4,660
For those of you complaining about AMD pricing, the solution is simple. Buy AMD stock. It will continue to climb for the next 3 years at least. The $ you will make on it will offset the higher price of AMD hardware, and you'll have plenty of cash left to spare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.