News Nvidia says it shipped twice as many 50-series GPUs as 40-Series at launch, but it's a misleading comparison

[ThisOrThat]

Going forward, just assume all Nvidia charts have at least one axis labeled "BS." Sometimes it's all of them.

 

[JTWrenn]

Well, the thing is that Nvidia generally sells more (twice as many?) 5080/4080 than 5090/4090. So by launching 5080 and 5090 at the same time, purportedly (according to Micro Center stats) with 10X as many 5080 cards, that right there makes sure that the numbers look better.

If the stats had been for the first six weeks, how would that have changed things? Because then we'd have 4080 in the mix for sure. Right now, from Oct 12 to Nov 16 is 50 days... which means the 4080 launch supply likely wasn't counted.

It's going to be very interesting to see when and how RTX 50-series cards turn up on the Steam survey!

I guess that's the point. if you did line up the 4080 and 4090 line and compared it to the current launch...which one shipped more first? Probably a little hard to do but that is the real question.

I also wish we had solid numbers on sales vs actual usage so I guess we will need to see when those steam surveys come up.

 

[renz496]

Nvidia can cherry-pick the statistics all they want, but I don’t think that slide is going to make anyone standing in front of an empty shelf of $940 RTX 5070TIs feel more fondly towards them.

We can see with our own eyes that the launch was bad and general sentiment towards the 50-series is bad.

When it comes to nvidia every generation the launch is bad. I still remember with 40 series people said no one wants those card they are collecting dust on store shelves. 30 series was bad because nvidia only cater to miners and do nothing so gamer can get their GPU at MSRP. 20 series is bad because of it's pricing. The 10 series was bad because nvidia was so lazy with it they just shrink maxwell to 16nm.

 

[renz496]

Currently they are still making the most powerful gaming cards out there. The thing is, think how much more powerful they would be in gaming if all that silicon was dedicated to graphics performance instead of AI and other stuff. Until someone does that there won’t be any other options. AMD and Intel are both pursuing the same AI and Data center usage, that’s the golden cash cow so I wouldn’t put much faith in them either. As long as that market is so dominant I think gamers will be left with whatever can be adapted to work in gaming.

That's why AMD decided to ditch RDNA for UDNA. just look at AMD gaming revenue for the last 4 quarters or so.

 

[renz496]

I'm not sure, I haven't looked into it. But even before launch day it was rumoured that there was a supply issue. Thing is, NVidia does this every generation; it just seems that people forget about it. Several months before a launch, the cut supply, even to the AIB partners, causing problems with warranty supply. They release their new GPU, but not have enough stock, creating a whole lot of 'supply and demand', and media attention. "Look at how great our cards are, no one can keep them in stock". Meanwhile it's them that's causing the stock issue.

That is standars practice called EoL. It is not ideal to keep making the old gen stuff while new gen start coming out. Just look what AMD did with RX7000 series. After launching 7900 series AMD did not launch anything new for 9 months! Where as in the past top to bottom launch can happen in 1 or 2 quarter. AMD did that so they can clear those oversupply of RX6000 first. And then AMD end up delaying 7600XT 16GB launch in china so partner and retailer can clear those 6700 GRE first.