News AMD's discrete desktop GPU market share hits all-time low as Nvidia extends its lead

[TerryLaze]

Right....

It's not a point of view ... it's how capital markets work...

Your response tells me all I need to know.

Right...
the whole financial world is wrong on this and you are right.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ty-financing-affect-existing-shareholders.asp

 

[spongiemaster]

No, amd just doesn't have the money to convince tsmc to make stuff for them instead of for nvidia.
Nvidia buys up everything they can and the fact that amd was able to make any gpus at all is probably down to the fact that they have a contract with tsmc that they made years ago.

AMD has been a bigger revenue source for TSMC than Nvidia has. It's not that AMD can't get the capacity, it's the same issue as NVidia, they have their priorities else where. A wafer of Epyc CPU's is magnitudes more profitable than a wafer of any GPU's, especially gaming GPU's. AMD, rightfully so, has far more interest in gaining CPU server market share than gaming GPU market share. A significant portion of AMD's wafer allocation also goes to gaming consoles by contract. PC gamers need to come to grips with the fact they are the least important customers at the table for the big 3. They all care about other markets significantly more and that is unlikely to change.

 

[palladin9479]

Right...
the whole financial world is wrong on this and you are right.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ty-financing-affect-existing-shareholders.asp

This is what I meant by bad faith. You already have the answer in your head and have zero interest in learning anything more.

The raising of capital through selling of shares is called Equity Financing and the first time it's done is through an IPO when a company goes public. Every additional time is known as Additional Equity Financing and has to be approved by the elected Board of Directors. In theory corporations can create an infinite amount of shares, as all they are doing is slicing the pie thinner, in effect diluting existing shareholders. Because this action can have a major impact on shareholders it must be approved by the shareholder representatives, aka the Board of Directors. The other way is through borrowing money, but then you have to pay that back with interest. CFO's and senior leaders evaluate these options and make proposals to the BOD who then approves and then it must be published to the SEC.

 

[thestryker]

AMD has been a bigger revenue source for TSMC than Nvidia has.

Outside of the Ampere production split this is not accurate.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

>If you say you are going for significant marketshare...then you produce the hell out of your product to meet the demand levels that meet your goal. AMD did NOT do that

Frank Azor is marketing director. It is literally his job to put his company's products and actions in the best possible light. Yes, to put a positive spin. But this goes beyond job titles. Any company's personnel would likely do the same thing, defending their company's actions.

>I am an adamant AMD supporter...I want AMD to become a real competitor to Nvidia

Your disappointment stems from here. You see this as a AMD vs Nvidia fight. You want AMD to "win" by taking share from Nvidia, so you believed the spin. You believed it because you want to believe it.

If you weren't a fan, the spin never made much sense in the first place. The high end is the halo product. It's what moves the lower tiers. You don't forsake it to increase market share.

A company's goal isn't to beat the competition. Beating the competition is a means to an end, but it's not the end, not the goal. The goal is to increase the company's value, reflected in its share price.

All chipmakers are focused on AI. That's where the big money is at. Most of these companies' resources--wafer supply, R&D, marketing, etc--are now devoted to AI products. AMD share price has been in the doldrums in the past year not because it isn't competitive in consumer GPUs, but because it's not competitive in AI GPUs. That's where it needs to compete, and win market share, in AI products. Not consumer products.

Ditto for Intel. To get back in the black, it will have to put out competitive AI products first. It'll need to focus on areas with good ROI, which is not consumer GPUs.

>…because it was just a last minute marketing platitude to explain away the dumping of the 9000 series’ high end.

You see, you already knew the truth. You just didn't want to believe it because it didn't fit your AMD-vs-Nvidia framing.

The solution to your disappointment is straightforward: Stop being a fan--of any company. There is no big bully or underdog to root for here. All companies want to increase their value--make more money--just as all people want make more pay from their jobs.

Secondly, and more important, try to see things from the companies' perspective, not just yours. Put yourself in their shoes. That's the only way to understand their motivations and actions, and not be disappointed or mislead.

All due respect, but I believe you are also missing the point. I am not a “believer” or an “fan”, and I didn’t “believe the spin” or was “misled” at all. I do not understand the level of assumption you had to apply in order to formulate your reply.

Thus I will lay my point out as clear as possible.
This is a very simple Business Ethics problem. I’ll tell you right now, if Frank Azor was my marketing director, he would no longer have a job in my company. I have zero tolerance for disingenuous marketing schemes that have no bearing with the reality of the company’s internal strategy. This may not seem like a big deal to you, but this is an endemic part of post-modern corporate culture that has become commonplace in western publicly traded enterprises…something that I have had to exorcize out of my senior and mid-level management teams many times throughout my Executive career. Trust between consumer and corporate leadership is one of the main pillars of long term success. And no, I do not consider AMD being in a duopoly market a valid excuse to ignore this pillar, you may feel differently, but my leadership style is based on principles, and I have to stick to my guns concerning Frank’s actions.

 

[rambo919]

All the "thats how it works atm" arguments rather miss the points being raised don't they?

 

[anthony.lipke]

The charts go as far as Q1 '25. RDNA 4 became available to buy in the last month of that quarter.

We are now in the last month of the 2nd quarter. I'll be curious to see those charts again for 2nd quarter, when available.

Considering the availability differences at launch this does sound really suspect. Saying that I'm not accounting for prebuilt at all. Like you I wouldn't pull a conclusion about new generation products yet.