Henri Richard explains why AMD failed to gain more marketshare

[Chad Boga]

Compare single chip solutions, youll see the hugely overpriced 285 vs the much better 5850 beating it in price, feature set, temps, and power usage, as well as the 5870

I don't give a fig about the 285.

Currently the video card market sucks on the price performance scale more than it has for a long time.

It is like we are back to the days of the GTX8800 ruling the roost.

 

[Cryslayer80]

ATI's cards at the moment are priced very high.

I think ATI (AMD) is the only company that'd been fair to users with it's new products. 5850 beats the nVidia offering for the lower price, but ATI also has better cards that are and should be priced high since they have no competition.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I wouldnt go so far back as the G80, lets look at G200 where we saw pricing at 600+ for a single chip, and was devastated by ATIs pricing scheme, and which is to my point here, and tho those prices arent a given, the current ones are lower since the 1900xtx and the 7900GTX

 

[Chad Boga]

I think ATI (AMD) is the only company that's been fair to users with it's new products. 5850 beats the nVidia offering for the lower price, but ATI also has better cards that are and should be priced high since they have no competition.

What ATI is doing makes sense from a business perspective, that I don't dispute.

But drawing analogies between what they are doing and how that might mean that Bullduster will be priced to win the hearts of consumers is a very shaky proposition in my view.

Look at the ridiculous performance and price gap that exists in ATI's lineup between the 5850 and the 5770.

There used to be the 4890, but ATI are not supplying them any more I believe as it is nearly impossible for me to get one now.

So rather than being able to buy a 4890 for about $230AUD, I am faced with a prospect of $200AUD for a 5770 or $420AUD for a 5850.

I just have to hope that the last minute order I placed for a 4890 comes through(which I doubt), or I will sit it out on the sidelines and wait 3 to 6 months before some sanity returns to the graphics card market.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

The 5830 will be here in 2-3 weeks

 

[Chad Boga]

The 5830 will be here in 2-3 weeks

Has it overcome its validation problems?

And no doubt it will be about as fast as the 4890 and cost 33%+ more than the 4890 did.

 

[jimmysmitty]

II agree that ATIs pricing is right vs nVidia but as I said it wont be if they ever regain the pure performance crown as will AMDs CPUs.

Back when the 9800XT cam out, it still beat nVidia and started at $500. The 2900XT was near $500 as well and it greatly underperformed nVidias G80.

Its not a matter of "caring" for the customer. Its a matter of being able to compete on a equal price/performance level.

If you go outside of gaming with CPUs, Phenom II is no match for Core i3/i5/i7 at all and barely outpaces Core 2 Quad 45nm while stepping over C2Q 65nm nicely. Thats why AMDs pricing is low right now. I can give you a 100% gurantee that when AMD regains the pure performance corwn, their CPU prices will match that just like Intel does right now.

That just seems to be one thing AMD fans cannot grasp. They think AMD will be cheap no matter what. Its like MC. If MC outperforms Westmeres 6 core dual setup, it will be priced higher. But if Beckton out performs MC, AMD will lower the price to keep in a good price/performance ratio.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

No, what Im getting at is, gaining marketshare.
ATIs pricing on the 4xxx series was to do just that. They had tons of wiggle room with the G200s coming in at 600+$, but they chose to go low end first, gain some marketshare and momentum, which they obviously were ready to continue with the 5 series, and again, kept pricing decent, being low for a card with no competition, and of course, brand new with brand new features.
Now, the questions are, will AMD do so with BD? And also, if its for marketshare and pricing, a middle point vs a low point, as we currently have, and, will they have a follow up coming as well?
This is all market strategy, and many things needs be considered.

 

[jimmysmitty]

When Athlon 64 came out, AMD did not do the same thing. They priced it from low to high performance wise.

My guess is still that if BD creams Sandy Bridge, expect higher prices for a AMD system.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

As usual, there is a mid point which is normally closer to the truth. Of course it's easier to make smaller chips on a new process, of course intel *can* make quads.

Quads would be sub optimal, even if we - the public - want it, intel doesn't care because intel knows we are stupid enough to make do with old technology at the same old prices.

Personally I'll take Archi's word on the situation at the moment. Hopefully this summer as Intel has more 32nm capacity online, they'll rethink their offerings & roadmaps.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

You know it's actually quite amusing while sad. I dunno how many times I've read people say 'i wish they would make 32nm quads' recently.

Hmm, wouldn't that make a double-sized explosion when it goes off??

And to think some people argued that intel weren't hurting the consumer? Who's hurting now huh? You absolute fool of the highest magnitude. I hope you're content looking at that 'intel inside' sticker when intel post their next $2bn+ profit. After all, you made it for them, you get what you deserve, and you deserve the contempt intel treat you with

So where's AMD's 32nm anything, again?? Seems to me that AMD is equally guilty by your standards, since they aren't offering any either.. Maybe if they had spent that $5.4B on, I dunno, CPUs instead of ATI...

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Well, guess we will have to wait on this one.
Having APUs may prove to be moving past Intel in certain ways, where Intel may have to catch up. We dont know yet, as perf and practice arent here yet.
If the perf is decent, and its where were heading, then itd been foolish of AMD not to do what theyd done, especially if it lands them in the lead

 

[verndewd]

So where's AMD's 32nm anything, again??

rumor has it in their pants :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[bigwater]

rumor has it in their pants :lol: :lol: :lol:

😛

 

[jimmysmitty]

I would love to believe that AMD wouldn't price their CPUs like intel but history shows that whenever one company one ups the other, they start to charge a premium for that performance.

Plus I tend to look at a company as it is, a business out for money unlike some other people here

 

[jennyh]

ATI's cards at the moment are priced very high.

While you were ranting about AMD's Q4 performance, did you forget to actually see how much money ATI made?

ATI, shipping *millions* of graphic cards and making a tiny $50m profit. And you say their prices are too high? Jesus you are seriously retarded.

 

[jennyh]

Has it overcome its validation problems?

And no doubt it will be about as fast as the 4890 and cost 33%+ more than the 4890 did.

You think the 5830 will cost $345? Boy do you have issues.

 

[jennyh]

So where's AMD's 32nm anything, again?? Seems to me that AMD is equally guilty by your standards, since they aren't offering any either.. Maybe if they had spent that $5.4B on, I dunno, CPUs instead of ATI...

Then you'd be paying $600 for a gtx260.

 

[jennyh]

I would love to believe that AMD wouldn't price their CPUs like intel but history shows that whenever one company one ups the other, they start to charge a premium for that performance.

Plus I tend to look at a company as it is, a business out for money unlike some other people here

Just so long as you have a good grasp of what intel are doing. You can dress it up however you like but intel have made the deliberate choice to harm consumers while they rake in $billions more. As you understand that, I have no need to point out what that makes you look like Jimmy.

 

[Chad Boga]

While you were ranting about AMD's Q4 performance, did you forget to actually see how much money ATI made?

ATI, shipping *millions* of graphic cards and making a tiny $50m profit. And you say their prices are too high? Jesus you are seriously retarded.

Jenny,
How dumb are you to be unable to work out that ATI sold a heap of cheap cards no good for serious gaming, and priced their gaming cards sky high and sold fcuk all of them.

You think the 5830 will cost $345? Boy do you have issues.

And you are just plain stupid.

4890's don't sell for US$259.

Until recently, I could buy them in Oz for $225AUD

 

[jennyh]

Oh so now it's the current cost of the 4890 and not the launch cost. Jeez you sure do like to make it difficult for ATI don't you?

ATI sold a heap of cheap cards? What rock have you been hiding under Bogus? You do realise that the 5800's were sold out for almost 3 months yes? Maybe AMD were buying them all up to create the impression of good sales? 😀

 

[Chad Boga]

Oh so now it's the current cost of the 4890 and not the launch cost. Jeez you sure do like to make it difficult for ATI don't you?

Well Jenny if your reading comprehension wasn't in the toilet with your head, you would have seen I was complaining about current pricing of ATI cards.

But because you are thick as two short planks, you missed that.

ATI sold a heap of cheap cards? What rock have you been hiding under Bogus? You do realise that the 5800's were sold out for almost 3 months yes? Maybe AMD were buying them all up to create the impression of good sales? 😀

They were sold out because they had yield issues, not because they were widely available and considered good value.

The pricing on the 58xx series made no sense compared to the 4890, so ATI chose to kill this card off and harm the consumer. :lol:

 

[jimmysmitty]

Just so long as you have a good grasp of what intel are doing. You can dress it up however you like but intel have made the deliberate choice to harm consumers while they rake in $billions more. As you understand that, I have no need to point out what that makes you look like Jimmy.

Yet Intels launch cost of their Q9550 was near $200 unlike the launch cost of the Q6600 which was near $800. Not sure how launching next step CPUs at lower prices is harming consumers.

But by your logic, when AMD charged a pretty penny for their CPUs during the Athlon 64/X2 period, they also harmed consumers since they deliberatly charged more for a CPU that was only 100MHz faster each step. And it wasn't until a few months AFTER Core 2 came out that AMD lowered the prices of their CPUs to be better in price/performance.

My point is that you see AMD as some God send. I see AMD, Intel, nVidia and any other company all the same: a business. Thats how I know that if Phenom II out performed Core i7, the top end ones would be nearing $1K+.

 

[jennyh]

Well Jenny if your reading comprehension wasn't in the toilet with your head, you would have seen I was complaining about current pricing of ATI cards.

But because you are thick as two short planks, you missed that.

I do believe you said...and i quote...

And no doubt it will be about as fast as the 4890 and cost 33%+ more than the 4890 did.

Do you usually talk in past tense when discussing something current? If you meant current 4890 prices, you'd have said 'does' instead of 'did'.

In short, you're full of it.

 

[Chad Boga]

I do believe you said...and i quote...

And no doubt it will be about as fast as the 4890 and cost 33%+ more than the 4890 did.

Do you usually talk in past tense when discussing something current? If you meant current 4890 prices, you'd have said 'does' instead of 'did'.

In short, you're full of it.

The 4890 is now past tense coz ATI have stopped supplying them.

Ginny, it's best you stop drinking so you don't end up looking so stupid all the time.