News Jacketless Jensen Promised "Inexpensive" GPUs Back in 2011

[Admin]

Nvidia CEO idealistically talks about affordable GPUs at Stanford, back in 2011. Have Nvidia's priorities changed or do we need to look at the bigger picture?

Jacketless Jensen Promised "Inexpensive" GPUs Back in 2011 : Read more

 

[vanadiel007]

And that is why I never listen to anything these CEO's have to say...

 

[JamesJones44]

That was likely before wall st goons started pumping him with the idea that he could by one of the Hawaiian islands from Larry Ellison. Once wall st. starts talking hookies and blow to a CEO all bets are off.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

“We are going to take technology that is only available only in the most expensive workstations. We’re going… to try and reinvent the technology and make it inexpensive.”
Kudos to Jensen for doing exactly that!

 

[edzieba]

In 1995 when Nvidia was founded, what did workstation graphics cards cost? A Sun Ultra 1 Creator3D Model 170E was listed for $28k in 1995 (around $50k in today's money), though that's for the whole system rather than just the GPU (which does not appear to have been something listed separately). Then there's the SGI Onyx, which were in the quarter million dollar range (in 1995 money!).
So yeah, even today we're definitely not paying workstation card prices.

 

[hotaru251]

he was "poor" then as gpu werent as in demand as now.

but yes we all know why gpu are so $$$...its pure jensen greed (he wants to be apple and the apple tax)

 

[jkflipflop98]

He did exactly what he said. The amount of compute power you're getting for under $1000 is absolutely insane. You would have had to pay over $50k for a GPU accelerator way back when.

 

[DavidLejdar]

Not sure if it is fair to depict Nvidia as some sort of sole pioneer, when it actually was 3dfx who had the first GPU with some usability outside of professional settings (while Nvidia was experimenting with NURBS). And e.g. IBM's Professional Graphics Controller (released in 1984) was already quite cheaper than CAD-Workstations. But sure, Nvidia exists, and their GPUs get a job done, and not that expensive when one doesn't expect a skyscraper in 4K at 60 FPS...

 

[thisisaname]

Disrupt the market with something new and oust the old, when that is done. Rasie prices and make loads of money before someone else comes along and does the same to you.
If you make enough any young pretender can be either be bought out or the price to enter that market so high no one can do it!.
Even Intel with all the money it has is having problems breaking into the market. While it has not made dGPU's for some time it has made iGPUs and this has not helped so how can someone else even have a chance.

 

[InvalidError]

Disrupt the market with something new and oust the old, when that is done. Rasie prices and make loads of money before someone else comes along and does the same to you.

In the post-Y2K world, you don't have to worry about anyone else rising to do the same to you because you patented the hell out of everything necessary to stand any chance of catching up with you or recycling old patent by filing new patents for "same old crap as 20 years ago, but now with strawberry-filled Gate-all-around fin-FETs."

 

[RandomWan]

Jensen used to be all for inexpensive GPUs, until he took an arrow to the hair line.

 

[JamesJones44]

He did exactly what he said. The amount of compute power you're getting for under $1000 is absolutely insane. You would have had to pay over $50k for a GPU accelerator way back when.

The 3Dfx disagrees

 

[JamesJones44]

In 1995 when Nvidia was founded, what did workstation graphics cards cost? A Sun Ultra 1 Creator3D Model 170E was listed for $28k in 1995 (around $50k in today's money), though that's for the whole system rather than just the GPU (which does not appear to have been something listed separately). Then there's the SGI Onyx, which were in the quarter million dollar range (in 1995 money!).
So yeah, even today we're definitely not paying workstation card prices.

This is ignoring the fact that Nvidia wasn't the first one to bring consumer GPU accelerators to consumers. In 1995 the 3Dfx Voodoo was $299...

 

[Metteec]

Nobody wants to pay $1600+ for a graphics card. However, Nvidia is not taking advantage of customers, but is the scape goat for global demand increases, supply shortages, and further government regulation. Its margins are not as deep as you think; in Nvidia's latest earnings report, its profit margin was around 20%. So every $1,600 card that you buy, Nvidia earns $320. Even if NVidia sold the cards sans profit ($1,280), people would still say they are too expensive. The cards themselves are more expensive to make and the technology requires more expensive talent. A better target to blame is TSMC with its 50% profit margin. Thankfully, the United States and other countries are investing in chip making alternatives to increase competition and reverse market hegemony. Everyone would like to revisit the halcyon days of paying $300 for the best graphics card, but then we'd be playing Hogwart's Legacy at 10 fps. Tom's Best Graphics Card list shows you can still purchase a great graphics card at $300, just not the best out there, and unfortunately, most seem to only want the best.

Edit: While 3dfx Voodoo was $299 back in 1995, it was a graphics accelerator not a graphics card. It required a separate graphics card to operate and was not standalone. Nvidia might not be the inventor but they have significantly contributed to creating standalone graphics cards to power consumer gaming needs. For full disclaimer, I am an Nvidia shareholder.

 

[Endymio]

This is ignoring the fact that Nvidia wasn't the first one to bring consumer GPU accelerators to consumers. In 1995 the 3Dfx Voodoo was $299...

In today's dollars, that's $600-- and yet today, $600 will buy you a GPU about 250 times as powerful as that 3Dfx Voodoo. Thank you, Dr. Huang.

 

[Endymio]

Nvidia is not taking advantage of customers, but is the scape goat for global demand increases, supply shortages, and further government regulation. Its margins are not as deep as you think; in Nvidia's latest earnings report, its profit margin was around 20%. So every $1,600 card that you buy, Nvidia earns $320.

Much less than that. The GPU isn't the only component on an AIB card. NVidia's probably earning about $160 on that $1600 card.

 

[LOUTZ!]

In 1995 when Nvidia was founded, what did workstation graphics cards cost? A Sun Ultra 1 Creator3D Model 170E was listed for $28k in 1995 (around $50k in today's money), though that's for the whole system rather than just the GPU (which does not appear to have been something listed separately). Then there's the SGI Onyx, which were in the quarter million dollar range (in 1995 money!).
So yeah, even today we're definitely not paying workstation card prices.

??

 

[jkflipflop98]

The 3Dfx disagrees

3Dfx agrees with whatever Jensen says. He literally owns them.

 

[Giroro]

"Inexpensive" to produce, not inexpensive for a customer to buy and own.

Jensen is behind the times though. His peers in the tech industry are leading the way into software services, which are literally free to produce, cost a micro-cent to distribute, have indefinitely high prices, and can never be bought/owned/resold by any customer ever.

 

[Giroro]

Much less than that. The GPU isn't the only component on an AIB card. NVidia's probably earning about $160 on that $1600 card.

Nvidia recently had nearly 70% average profit margins. Meaning $2,000 worth of product cost them about $600 to develop, produce, ship, market, etc.
That would include the whole product stack, so the margins are probably higher on their super-halo products like the 4090. Also, this was last gen before the offensively massive price hikes.

 

[InvalidError]

However, Nvidia is not taking advantage of customers, but is the scape goat for global demand increases, supply shortages, and further government regulation. Its margins are not as deep as you think; in Nvidia's latest earnings report, its profit margin was around 20%. So every $1,600 card that you buy, Nvidia earns $320.

Demand for GPUs is at a 20 years low, TSMC is cutting its wafer prices because its customers are cutting orders. There are no shortages or demand increases at the moment, that died with crypto last year. As for Nvidia's net margin, that 20% is after marketing and other expenses that have nothing to do with designing or manufacturing GPUs.

 

[JamesJones44]

Edit: While 3dfx Voodoo was $299 back in 1995, it was a graphics accelerator not a graphics card. It required a separate graphics card to operate and was not standalone. Nvidia might not be the inventor but they have significantly contributed to creating standalone graphics cards to power consumer gaming needs. For full disclaimer, I am an Nvidia shareholder.

I don't think anyone is disputing what Nvidia has accomplished, just the ridiculous cost comments the bots seem to be quoting for accelerators back in the 1995.

 

[JamesJones44]

3Dfx agrees with whatever Jensen says. He literally owns them.

They own them now, but not back in 1995 when they were one of the FIRST to bring low cost workstation accelerators to consumers, not Nvidia. The $299 for the Voodoo accelerator wasn't anywhere close to the $50k number you quoted.

 

[digitalgriffin]

Nvidia CEO idealistically talks about affordable GPUs at Stanford, back in 2011. Have Nvidia's priorities changed or do we need to look at the bigger picture?

Jacketless Jensen Promised "Inexpensive" GPUs Back in 2011 : Read more

Pre leather jacket addiction.

 

[Endymio]

Nvidia recently had nearly 70% average profit margins.

No. Nowhere near. I think you're confusing gross margins with net margins-- but chips don't design themselves, you know. Until around late 2016 (when GPUs began to be so popular for AI tasks), NVidia had net margins in the 10-15% range .... sometimes even negative. They're now at 21% margins ...but this year is, by all accounts, going to be far worse than last.