backtop


Print 24 comment(s) - last by Cullinaire.. on Oct 28 at 7:12 AM

AMD comes on strong in notebook market as Intel and NVIDIA weaken slightly

The world economy and especially the economy in the U.S. is a hot topic. The poor economy is the reason cited by many companies from auction giant eBay to massive consumer electronics retailers like Best Buy and Circuit City for falling profits.

So far, the GPU industry is maintaining its growth, which is an impressive feat. The latest figures are in from Jon Peddie Research (JPR) on the overall GPU industry for Q3 2008. JPR reports that more than one third of computer systems shipping today use multiple GPUs accounting for some of the increased growth in the market. In Q3 2008 111 million GPUs were shipped, that is up from 91 million GPUs shipped the same quarter of 2007.

In Q2 2008, 94 million GPUs were shipped. Those numbers represent a growth of close to 18% quarter-to-quarter and 22.5% compared to last year. JPR reports that almost all GPU makers grew over the quarter. Only SiS saw a loss and Matrox didn’t grow at all.

AMD showed the biggest quarterly growth with a 33.8% gain from 18.1% on Q2 2008 to 20.6% this quarter. Intel still holds the most market share at 49.4% compared to 47.3% last quarter. NVIDIA grew 4.4% to a market share of 27.8% for Q3 2008.

In the desktop GPU market, Intel shipments grew giving it a 43.9% share of the market compared to NVIDIA's market share decline to 32.6%. AMD gained market share growing to 20.3% for the quarter. In the notebook market Intel saw its shipments drop one point to 56.2% of the market NVIDIA's share dropped to 21.8% from 23.6% in Q2 2008. AMD grew at the expense of Intel and NVIDIA from 17.9% share in Q2 2008 to 20.9% share in Q3 2008.

Dr. Jon Peddie said in a statement, "The third quarter is seasonally up as OEMs place orders for chips to build inventory for the holiday season. However, this quarter was up more than any other for some time, and in spite of suggestions of a recession that started last Q4. Desktops increased seasonally and notebooks enjoyed quite significant gains."

NVIDIA is coming on strong though and thinks that its new 9400M GPU for the notebook market could grab it up to 30% of the notebook market. The new NVIDIA GPU has already replaced Intel's parts in the MacBook line and is looking to oust Intel graphics from other computers coming to market as well. NVIDIA and Apple claimed that the 9400M GPU offered about five times more performance than the Intel GPUs that had been used in MacBook systems.

If NVIDIA can deliver on its goals for the 9400M, we may see a new landscape in Q4 2008, traditionally the biggest quarter for computer makers. With the slowing economy, many might expect to see drops moving into the holiday season. However, consumer electronics is one of the only product categories expected to see growth in shipments over the 2008 holiday season, which is widely expected to be the worst holiday season since the early 1990's.

However, Intel has vowed to do what it takes to get the business back that NVIDIA has taken. Perhaps a new Intel GPU will come soon that offers performance on par with NVIDIA's offerings.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By kknd1967 on 10/27/2008 12:52:26 PM , Rating: 2
"more than one third of computer systems shipping today use multiple GPUs accounting for some of the increased growth in the market."
That got to be kidding... 1/3 of gaming computers maybe




RE: 1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/27/2008 12:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe they are counting machines that have both an integrated NVIDIA/ATI/Intel graphics chipset on the motherboard along with a dedicated GPU in the PCI-e slot.

That seems highly plausible.


By Aloonatic on 10/27/2008 1:15:23 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe, but the key word seems to be "use" rather than "have" as many machines may have an integrated GPU and then an add on PCIe card but can be used together?

Nvidian integrated GPU with Nvidia card or AMD/ATI integrated plus AMD/ATI card?

I can imagine that many "multiple" GPU systems that are being counted could be being shipped have intel integrated GPUs and then an Nvidia or AMD/ATI card.

So the number that are actually able to be used togetgher are probably much smaller than 1/3.


RE: 1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By murray13 on 10/27/2008 1:16:42 PM , Rating: 2
But not very likely...

Find me the 33% of ANY major pc makers line that has more than one GPU. Then it might be plausible.

not ...


RE: 1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By pauldovi on 10/27/2008 3:56:00 PM , Rating: 2
Lenovo's entire Montevina line-up is dual-GPU. They have the Intel X4500 and various ATI dedicated cards.


By Clauzii on 10/27/2008 10:08:30 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention the Mac Book Pro with 2xnvidia :D


RE: 1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By Kerdal on 10/27/2008 1:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
Or... They probably consider the various X2 cards (9800GTX2, 4870X2, etc.) as being multi-GPU.


By Dark Legion on 10/28/2008 1:45:42 AM , Rating: 2
Well that would make sense since they ARE multi-GPU.


RE: 1/3 of new computers use multi-GPU?
By Rev1 on 10/27/2008 2:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
I think more on the lines of hybrid sli where a dedicated PCI-e and intergrated gpu's are connected together, seems like HP at least has been doing this alot.


By majorpain on 10/27/2008 3:50:44 PM , Rating: 2
Must be the only plausible in fact. In the factory i work, machines with two gfx represent 1% all sales. Not even Dell or HP sell any machine with two cards here.


By mm2587 on 10/27/2008 4:42:30 PM , Rating: 2
they are must be counting systems with both an igp and a dedicated card.


By inighthawki on 10/27/2008 9:12:11 PM , Rating: 2
I know this sounds far out there and maybe not even sufficient for the 1/3, but what about large businesses and schools that use sli/crossfire setups to render large amounts on the screen. The school i go to has dual gpus in many of the computers, and some laboratory environments might easily have 2 or more very high end cards


SiS
By rudolphna on 10/27/2008 1:46:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Only SiS saw a loss


Maybe because SiS doesnt even sell chipsets really anymore. I mean really, when was the last time you bought/built a computer with an SiS chipset. Most new computers come with intel, nvidia, or amd chipsets. I liked SiS, one of the best motherboards I ever had was an ECS K7S5A which used the SiS 735 chipset. That thing is stable as a rock, even today! Never been able to crash it. I think if SiS wants to stay in buisness they need to get their heads out of their arses, and start producing some good, competetive chipsets.




RE: SiS
By Staples on 10/27/2008 2:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
Believe it or not, they make the chipset inside of the Xbox 360.


RE: SiS
By Warren21 on 10/27/2008 2:24:53 PM , Rating: 2
An SiS chipset, an IBM PowerPC CPU and an ATI graphics chip..? Quite the mix. SiS chipsets have always been nice and stable in the past though.


RE: SiS
By V3ctorPT on 10/27/2008 2:36:30 PM , Rating: 2
I have friends that hated that mobo... the capacitors blew up constantly... it happened to me too, it was a nice mobo, but melted alot, that's why they made so many revisions of it


RE: SiS
By ThePooBurner on 10/27/2008 4:46:32 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed. I had 2 1.x revisions and a K7S5A pro 3.0. After 7 years of fiathful service mine only gave up the ghost to leaked capasitors ruining stabily last month. I need to check the other 2 boards still since those boxes are currently just stashed away in a closet not being used. They were great boxes in their day. They couldn't overclock for snot, though. I did get lucky with the RAM i had in them, as i got the same performance increase in every benchmark app i had with the agressive timings i set as when i did the 200mhz overclock (as far as i could push the system). All the add in cards are useless to me now cause everything is on my new mobo. Still can't bring myself to throw them out though.


I think it has to do with the cost of these things
By Staples on 10/27/2008 1:47:05 PM , Rating: 3
When the 8800 series came out, there was just about no competition and NVIDIA priced thier cards sky high. In fact, I even bought a 7950 after the 8800s had been out for six months because NVIDIA's pricing was ridiculous. Then 10 month or so later when the 8800GTX had not dropped one cent, NVIDIA brought the 8800GT to market which was actually a good price. NVIDIA was prompted to lower their prices and do a better job (remember the supposed hardware decode in the 8800GTX that NVIDIA finally admitted did not exist?). More recently, it has been AMD who has been keeping prices low on midrange GPUs.

18 months ago a midrange GPU was 350$, now they are $200. People say that Intel is terrible at keeping prices high when they have no competition and that is true to an extent as they did with the Core 2 for a year and they are definitely doing it again with the Quad Cores however, everyone seems to forget abouut the worst violator and that is NVIDIA. I hope AMD stays competitive with at least their GPUs for the market's sake.




By 325hhee on 10/27/2008 2:48:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
[Collapse Comment] NEW! I think it has to do with the cost of these things By Staples on 10/27/08, Rating: 3 By Staples on 10/27/2008 1:47:05 PM , Rating: 3 When the 8800 series came out, there was just about no competition and NVIDIA priced thier cards sky high. In fact, I even bought a 7950 after the 8800s had been out for six months because NVIDIA's pricing was ridiculous. Then 10 month or so later when the 8800GTX had not dropped one cent, NVIDIA brought the 8800GT to market which was actually a good price. NVIDIA was prompted to lower their prices and do a better job (remember the supposed hardware decode in the 8800GTX that NVIDIA finally admitted did not exist?). More recently, it has been AMD who has been keeping prices low on midrange GPUs. 18 months ago a midrange GPU was 350$, now they are $200. People say that Intel is terrible at keeping prices high when they have no competition and that is true to an extent as they did with the Core 2 for a year and they are definitely doing it again with the Quad Cores however, everyone seems to forget abouut the worst violator and that is NVIDIA. I


Total agreement over there, Ultra 8800 was the card, at $800 or so, maybe $600. ATI tried to counter with the HD2900, which was more talk than performance, I've bought one to my disappointment. Then the 3800s came out, still nothing to brag about, the 8800GT out performed it by leaps and bounds.

And then, ATI's shining moment finally arose, the 4800 series, after much speculation, many so called reported leaks, ATI held up to its promises unlike its two predecessors. Nvidia cards debuted at $700, the 4870 debuted at $300. Nvida dropped their prices 3 times in two weeks, one price drop happened 2 days after another. ATI 4850 debuted at $200. Both cards had beautiful numbers, and the prices were extremely attractive. And eventually mail in rebates were available putting the 4850 at $150, 4870 at around $250. Again, Nvidia was forced to drop its prices and add rebates to compete.

Here we have are great gaming cards for reasonable prices, and real competition on hand. ATI was no competition at all with the 2900s and 3800s. So Nvidia could dictate what ever prices they wanted. Not so with the third round, and the net has been vivid about the ATI 4800's vs Nvidia's GT200s. The card wars are on again, and the techies have been waiting for this moment, many held off on buying the G80 series by Nvidia, even more held off on the 2900 and 3800. The G92 was even a stop over card according to some techies, but the GT200s and the 4800s both claimed price/performance. And that's what we finally have.

Good day for gamers and ATI/Nvidia. The masses have spoken $200 gaming card is the target. Well more like $150, the 4850 is doing extremely well in sales, it's affordable for casual gamers niche as well. Even surveys shows that most people really don't want more than $100.


By Pirks on 10/27/2008 2:55:37 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think that Intel can keep its prices on Quads as high as it was in early Core 2 days. AMD Phenom doesn't let them do this, fortunately.


By FITCamaro on 10/27/2008 5:19:11 PM , Rating: 2
Midrange cards aren't even $200. The 4850 can easily be had for $150. The new 4830 is nearly as good and is $110. There's also the 9800GTX which is a solid performer for the money.


Intel /= GPU Performance
By palindrome on 10/27/2008 5:45:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, Intel has vowed to do what it takes to get the business back that NVIDIA has taken. Perhaps a new Intel GPU will come soon that offers performance on par with NVIDIA's offerings.


The words "Intel" and "GPU performance" shouldn't be in the same sentence without the words "lack of."




RE: Intel /= GPU Performance
By Cullinaire on 10/28/2008 7:12:19 AM , Rating: 2
I can only hope that this will be remedied soon.


Just wait
By FXi on 10/27/2008 9:50:25 PM , Rating: 2
Wait till the mobile complements to the current G200 and R700 series show up. @40nm they will do nothing but further this frenzy in the GPU buying!




“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki