Henri Richard explains why AMD failed to gain more marketshare

Page 26 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ginny,
Saying you are drunk is the kindest explanation one can come up with for why you just continually get things wrong.

Here I am talking about a discussion of ATI's recent cards and current cards, mentioned that I probably won't be able to get hold of a 4890 because ATI have stopped supplying them, and mentioned current pricing that I was looking at, and from this you tried to spin it around and suggest that I must have been talking about the 4890's price when it was first launched a year ago.

If your multiple misinterpretations weren't due to you being drunk, then the only other explanation must be that you have an IQ in single figures.

Why don't you tell us which of those two options it is.
 


You're goddam right it is, when you say I cant control my anger after this tosser Bogus has accused me multiple times of being drunk?

Lol, I wish I was drunk so some of the bullshit you are saying might make sense. :lol:
 

Every store in my city no longer has any in stock.

I have placed an order online with a local retailer last Tuesday for a 4890 and I still haven't heard back from them.

When I do here back from them, I suspect they will tell me that they weren't able to get one, but I am hoping a distributor or two might have the odd one around.

 
Whats ironic here is, all nvidia cards are past ense, and priced higher as well, and tho Fermi isnt here yet, we will see just how cheap theyll be.
Maybe ATI should have taken on the old style pricing, and charged 500+$ US for the 5870, then wed be where we were, not like where ATI reset the makret prices, and has held them low still.
People complaining about ATIs cards prices, while nVidias are older, cost more, have less features, run hotter, use more power etc?
@ jimmy, Ive said all along, AMDs pricing will go up overall, but Im thinking highend only may change, where Intel may lose out, a good way of dampening their halo product, just like we see now in gfx.
The same people expecting ATI to drops its prices when nVidia finally gets Fermi going, also think Fermi will be expensive, which then allows for ATIs current pricing, which is sorta mixed up thinking.
I dont expect much for price drops on ATI products, and I do expect high prices from nVidia.
If you want to just get your product out, and arent concerned with peoples perception, this will work. Over time, it wins, you gain momentum, and the next iteration then can be priced higher, and shows its "worth it", as many people think if its priced too low, theres something wrong with it, and maybe is what Chad is saying?
 
I just think it's incredible that ATI are asking too much for graphics cards even though they've made what, 2 quarters of profit since the takeover?

Seriously now, what kind of messed up logic brings anyone to that conclusion? I really do think that's worth pointing out.

1) Tech leadership
2) Many unique features
3) Faster and cheaper cards than the competition offers
4) AMD making a loss

Yet ATI are charging too much for them? You couldn't make this up, it's pure farce.
 

The only thing I have said in this thread in respect of ATI's pricing is that I don't think it is valid to look at what they are doing/did before with video cards, and then try to extrapolate from that, a likely pattern AMD would pursue with Bulldozer if it is all that AMD are hoping it will be.

ATI priced their 48xx series of cards relatively cheaply, but have priced their 58xx series of cards much higher, in terms of price/performance to the just superseded range.

The 48xx series was massively faster than the 38xx series, the 58xx series isn't faster over the 48xx series to anywhere near the same degree, yet prices are higher.

 
You know how much money ATI made with the 4800's last year Chad? In one quarter they made $1 million.

The other three quarters, they lost money. Is it only intel that is allowed to charge stupid prices and make a profit or what?
 

Ginny,
Your alcohol induced rage is causing you to misinterpret the conversation, again.

I have said that unlike the 48xx series in its day, the 58xx series does not represent the same bargain and thus the idea of using ATI's pricing of their cards as a pointer to possible Bulldozer pricing is pointless.

 


Ginny,
Lay off the booze, you haven't understood a single word in this thread.

ATI can charge whatever they like, but when they do, Jaydeejohn's fanciful notions of using ATI pricing to postulate that Bulldozer could become some kind of price performance champion, fails to be very convincing.

 
And youre disregarding the efforts and the profits and the direction being seen.
I said this creates momentum in the market, which it has.
I said the pricing was a 1 time deal, and all you have to do is look at nVidias bottom line.
Its effective, as long as you have leadership going in next time, which they do.
The pricing is still cheaper than last gen of the competition, thus also the highend for cpus, if they adopt it there as well.
Theyve played well on their ocing friendly ways, their openess to deliver a BE part at a low price, like the 4xxx series, next could very well be the 5xxx series scenario, higher pricing overall, but with lower highend pricing, ala the 5xxx series.
Its not that the 4xxx series was the best IN ITS DAY, but was priced to sell. People knowing how well AMDs cpus oc, run, their perf etc, has left an impact. Enough of one for people to consider next time around, and IF BD comes in well, a repeat of the 4 to 5 series isnt out of the question. Because, we know that even if Fermi is better than the 5870, which it should be, its costs will be high, and many people will opt for the 5870, or more to its revision part.
Fermi wont be cheap, but lets say, AMD has BD priced slightly higher than a 920 now, and its halo part 100$ over is a massive profit venture for AMD, as theyve been operating close to break even at current pricing, and blows away Intels approach as well, and if its decent, no one will buy Intels halo, as cpus are different, and dont offer the differences when things are so close as do gfx cards.
 
Chad I'm beginning to think you are on really low quality crack, nevermind booze.

I couldn't give a whit about your argument with JDJ, I am talking about your laughable remark of...

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

Very high? What a joke, and don't bother trying to twist it by talking garbage about comparisons to 4800's. The facts are plain to see that charging what they are doing now, ATI are making a very small profit with the tech leading card.

In short, you are so full of it you are just plain offensive to any right minded individual.
 

Your initial point on Bulldozer was that there was a good chance it would be priced like the 48xx series and help AMD gain marketshare like the 48xx series did for ATI.

If you have changed/updated your predictions for Bulldozer to be more akin to the 58xx series, that is quite a different argument, especially as the 58xx has yield problems and the current asking price isn't helping it any either.

Considering you were complaining about Intel "harming the consumer" by not bring forth 32nm quads earlier, do you similarly feel that ATI/AMD have harmed the consumer by deleting the 4890, because its price/performance made the 58xx series look a poor buy?
 


Ginny,
You should care about my argument with JDJ, because it puts my comments into the right context.


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

Very high? What a joke, and don't bother trying to twist it by talking garbage about comparisons to 4800's. The facts are plain to see that charging what they are doing now, ATI are making a very small profit with the tech leading card.
Click to expand...

Ginny,
When you sober up, you might wake up to the fact that the 4890 was an incredible value for money card that ATI have deleted so that they could harm the consumer(I have used your "logic" here), and force consumers to buy a modestly better performing card in the 5850, but with a ridiculous price premium over the 4890. Thus ATI's cards are priced very high at the moment compared to the options that were readily available to consumers just a month or two ago.

In short, you are so full of it you are just plain offensive to any right minded individual.
Click to expand...
Ginny,
I have just exposed you for what you are.

When Intel brought out the i7, they didn't charge more for the i7-920 or i7-860 or i5-750 than they were doing for the previous generation in the Q9650/Q9550(i5-750), yet you have the hide to attack Intel's pricing policy when they offer plenty of options in various price ranges.

Yet when ATI delete the 4890 and leave consumers with the execrable 5770 and overpriced 5850, you actually will defend ATI/AMD to the death.

Even in your drunken stupor, do you have no shame or regard for what little credibility you have left?
 
Chad, I responded to jimmy, remember? I agreed with him? He said that he foresaw AMD cpus pricing as going up? And then, I pointed out this possibility that the halo highend part may be priced lower, instead of the old 1000$ a chip thing.
I predicted waaay back before P2 that if AMD got their chips competitivem their prices would go up, but at the same time, Im saying what Im saying again now, about the halo part.
Not sure I follow you on the 4890 part, as theres a part coming, and its only mybe a month without them in the market, whereas weve already passed that mark without 32nm quads, going by the tic tock. And this is a replacement part, the 5830, but lets just say, maybe they shouldnt make that part, and only sell the 4890? Yes, then Id consider that wrong, as Im sure people want the 5830
 

In performance terms, between the 5770 and the 5850 was the 4890(and the 4870 and 4850-1gig), and using my local prices in Aussie dollars, we had approximately the following

5770 - $200
4850 - $155
4870 - $190
4890 - $225
5850 - $420

Now we are going to have

5770 - $200
5830 - $??? I'll guess $300
5850 - $420

How is the consumer better off for having the 48xx series eliminated here at this point in time?

The 5770 reminds me of Nvidia's crappy 8600 series.

Now keep in mind, I know why ATI have done this and I am not going to lose sleep over it, but I am not going to let people who live in some kind of warped fantasy land where they think AMD/ATI is everybody's best friend, remain blissfully ignorant that AMD/ATI are just like any other company who seeks to maximise profits.

The only thing AMD/ATI have in their favour, is delusional fanboys who deny that this is what AMD/ATI will do, if and when they can get away with it.
 

$1AUD = $0.8884USD

That 5850 price has just come down a tad, last week the cheapest was $440.

We also have a 10% GST/VAT on such goods as computer equipment.

Some other prices in Aussie dollars

i5-750 = $229AUD
i7-860 = $339AUD

PhII965 = $219AUD
PhII955 = $192AUD
Athlon 620 = $115AUD
Athlon 630 = $137AUD

 
I'd like to know more about everything on this topic. I'd like to know why he would do such a thing to his company? I'm taking into consideration that this entire event took place during the peak of the real estate boom. Perhaps he was infatuated with Intel's pay grade and didn't realize that a global recession was about to start. Anyways, too bad for him; I'm sure he misses that vice-ceo salary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom