AMD can't win against NVidia in the PC space, so they should stop making discrete GPU's

[Bryank75]

As you can see above, semi-custom is already AMD's biggest income, they have no chance at beating NVidia head to head in the discrete GPU area, so what I suggest is leaving or limiting PC GPU manufacture to leave NVidia charge whatever they want, even drive up prices by charging more for their own fewer GPU's increasing margins.

Then put their full force behind console GPU production, creating more efficient economies of scale and pushing more gamers to purchase consoles due to the sole reason of affordability.

This defeats NVidia on a higher level and benefits both AMD and Sony massively.

 

[Nhomnhom]

If they used that same line of thinking they would've quit the CPU market long ago, before they were able to turn the table on Intel.

AMD GPUs are extremely competitive as they are in most segments, it's just that NVidia has extremely strong brand name and market share.

With that said, it has been obvious for many years that APUs were the best thing AMD had going on for them but they somehow refused to go around the limitation of regular computer memory to provide better products. They are still moving at a glacial pace on a segment that NVidia has pretty much no answer for and allowed Intel to attempt to catch up.

What AMD should do for sure, is to focus a lot less in the high end market and more on the segments where they are competitive. They should also have worked on a deeper partnership with PlayStation for their software solutions (they seem to have bet on Xbox and DirectX Ultimate and now they are left hanging since MS seems awful at this stuff and half-assess everything they do).

 

[ToTTenTranz]

The question is whether AMD's PC GPU business is a money-loser or not.
If they were only selling discrete GPUs, the answer could be yes.

But the thing is their APUs are increasingly successful in the PC market, and both the Deck's Van Gogh and the Z1 Extreme / 7840U are now a staple for the first "serious" generation of PC handheld consoles.
And for that to work, they need to develop windows drivers and maintain game developer relations. It looks like doing that is like half the work needed for selling PC GPUs.

So launching new discrete GPUs for PC have their costs diluted with other products, and (unlike Nvidia who does the opposite) AMD tends to use their gaming GPUs to clean the pipes on new architectures and process nodes for their AI SKUs and for consoles.


So in the end, completely cutting down the development of discrete GPUs would indirectly increase the development cost for their console semicustoms, their APUs and their AI solutions.


That's not to say AMD doesn't need to get their act together in discrete PC graphics cards, because they do. But what we have is still immensely better than having to buy a GPU from one sole supplier.

 

[rinzler]

I'm going to have to hard disagree with this. Just because they are trailing Nvidia doesn't mean they should pull from the discrete GPU market.

They still offer competitive options especially those in the mid to high range area and it would be a terrible thing to see Nvidia running rampant with absolutely no one to keep their prices in check.

Wendy's shouldn't pull out of the fast food market just because McDonald's dwarfs them. It's always nice to have options.

 

[historia]

Sony does not go with AMD because they made GPU, it is because they offer x86 APU solutions.

Also AMD GPU R&D ran on peanut budget so don't expect cutting edge technology from them. They still need brand recognition so pulling from consumer graphic cards gonna do more harm. It costs OEM more than AMD who only supply GPU chips and PCB blueprints anyway. Pretty much AMD does not really lose anything staying graphics cards market.

 

[Sircaw]

Tescos, Sainsburys, Asda should all close down as Aldi is undercutting them all.

 

[monstrpower30]

View attachment 4535

As you can see above, semi-custom is already AMD's biggest income, they have no chance at beating NVidia head to head in the discrete GPU area, so what I suggest is leaving or limiting PC GPU manufacture to leave NVidia charge whatever they want, even drive up prices by charging more for their own fewer GPU's increasing margins.

Then put their full force behind console GPU production, creating more efficient economies of scale and pushing more gamers to purchase consoles due to the sole reason of affordability.

This defeats NVidia on a higher level and benefits both AMD and Sony massively.

if amd will stop make dedicate gpu
price at nvidia gpu will be more higher

 

[Systemshock2023]

The Huang's have been colluding for a long time. AMD could easily dominate the entry level and mid range segments (where most GPU are sold) but has been dropping the ball after Polaris. Stuff is worse but not cheap enough to make you ditch NVIDIA.

I remember waiting for the RX 5000 series... what a disappointment.

 

[Bryank75]

if amd will stop make dedicate gpu
price at nvidia gpu will be more higher

Exactly and push PC gaming prices up and benefit console gaming... that is what I want to see.

 

[rinzler]

Exactly and push PC gaming prices up and benefit console gaming... that is what I want to see.

I don't even know what to say to this LOL

 

[Bryank75]

I don't even know what to say to this LOL

 

[rinzler]

 

[Nhomnhom]

Exactly and push PC gaming prices up and benefit console gaming... that is what I want to see.

In PC communities it's pretty common to run across people that want AMD to exists just to keep NVidia GPU prices lowerer, no matter how competitive AMD is they'll always end up buying a NVidia GPU anyway.

AMD is aware of that and their plan seems to be to just shadow NVidia for a while an cash in on the inflated GPU prices as wel, waiting for an opening.

RT and DLSS just seem like too much for AMD right now, but on just rasterization they are extremely competitive.

 

[Systemshock2023]

For consoles to continue being a thing as they have been the last couple of generations, PCs have to continue developing and evolving. Otherwise Sony will have to fund another underperforming processor with a fancy name, lose tons of money, sell a few buildings... we know the drill. Remember when the cell processor was supposed to power the ENTIRE PS3? What a bunch of clowns. They had to go and run against the clock for an NVDIA hand me down GPU...

If I were AMD I would straight Sony and MS out asking for more money, even a cut over software sold. Where are they going to go? Nvidia? Intel? They will ask for a pretty penny. Also any choice and they also risk easy BC built over the last 2 generations.

 

[Airbus]

Nah hard disagree

Just because AMD is making consoles gpu doesnt mean they have to give up against nvidia on higher level

You want an nvidia monopoly on high end GPU thats a big no for me

 

[Infinity]

If they used that same line of thinking they would've quit the CPU market long ago, before they were able to turn the table on Intel.

AMD GPUs are extremely competitive as they are in most segments, it's just that NVidia has extremely strong brand name and market share.

With that said, it has been obvious for many years that APUs were the best thing AMD had going on for them but they somehow refused to go around the limitation of regular computer memory to provide better products. They are still moving at a glacial pace on a segment that NVidia has pretty much no answer for and allowed Intel to attempt to catch up.

What AMD should do for sure, is to focus a lot less in the high end market and more on the segments where they are competitive. They should also have worked on a deeper partnership with PlayStation for their software solutions (they seem to have bet on Xbox and DirectX Ultimate and now they are left hanging since MS seems awful at this stuff and half-assess everything they do).

i wouldnt say its the extremely strong brand name(which is true). Their gpus are just higher quality and have better tech. DLSS 3, Frame generation, better ray tracing etc.

 

[Yurinka]

I think the Nvidia prices would go even more expensive if AMD wasn't there. So AMD better continues in the PC business, because as a side benefit it helps them to continue with making stuff for consoles/Sony.

 

[Nhomnhom]

i wouldnt say its the extremely strong brand name(which is true). Their gpus are just higher quality and have better tech. DLSS 3, Frame generation, better ray tracing etc.

Still for the same price AMD is extremelly competitive, but most people lile you will just go with Nvidia no matter what.

If AMD was the one with DLSS and frame gen you would be going with Nvidia anyway and finding some other excuse to do it.

Years ago it was PhysX, 3D vision, claims that AMD had inferior drivers or some other thing.

I got my first Nvidia gpu in many years recently and I'm surprised by how much better Adrenaline is to whatever that Nvidia panel is.

It's just like with Intel, AMD had to completelly crush them to get recognition, but against NVidia iit'sgoing to be hard to ever pull that off.

 

[Maverick]

I vastly prefer Nvidia to AMD GPUs but I don't want AMD GPUs to go away. When Intel released Sandy Bridge CPUs, everyone thought AMD can never catch Intel again. But they are now similar or better in CPU market now. Plus they can use their know-how in PlayStation APUs.

 

[rinzler]

I think the Nvidia prices would go even more expensive if AMD wasn't there. So AMD better continues in the PC business, because as a side benefit it helps them to continue with making stuff for consoles/Sony.

One other thing that Bryan isn't really understanding is that while these consoles may be using custom APU's the underlying framework which is driving the GPU portion of the chip is pulled from their discreet GPU development pipeline.