Print 80 comment(s) - last by .. on Aug 30 at 7:46 PM

Low cost and integrated GPUs gain the most in Q2

GPU sales are looked at as an indicator of how well the overall computer market is doing since all computers today ship with a GPU of some sort be it of the discrete or integrated variety. So far, 2009 has been a rough year for GPU makers.

Typically, GPU makers would be disappointed with no significant growth, but with the poor economy, it's a welcome change from the significant declines other quarters have seen. Jon Peddie Research (JPR) has unveiled its latest numbers for the add-in GPU industry for Q2 2009. The numbers show that 16.81 million add-in units were shipped, up 3% from the previous quarter and down 15% from the same quarter in 2008.

Inventories had to be replenished over Q2 and JPR estimates that the replenishment at least shadowed consumption or was a bit higher. With the poor economy still hurting many consumers, sales in the GPU market moved downstream. Most of the growth in the GPU market was in the integrated segment with a 4% year-over-year increase in shipments for the quarter. Lower cost discrete cards also saw modest improvements according to JPR with higher cost discrete cards taking the worst the quarter had to offer.

The quarter was the first where AMD finally started to gain back some share from NVIDIA. JPR reports that AMD's unit share rose from 31% in Q1 to 35% in Q2 with NVIDIA seeing their share decline the same 4% to 64% overall. That means that AMD took every bit of its growth from NVIDIA's marketshare. NVIDIA and Intel GPU shipments did rebound slightly in Q1 2009.

Comments     Threshold

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

Re: Why would you buy nVidia?
By justniz on 8/26/2009 4:20:05 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't ever consider buying ATI card because of their Linux driver quality.

IT seems that ATI just don't consider Linux to be worth any effort except as an afterthought, and that really shows in their driver quality.
nVidia do a much more solid job, and have better support for professional Linux applications.

ATI's linux drivers have always sucked badly for performance because they try and use DRI. nVidia's have always been much better because they implement their own custom backend too. I also particularly like that nVidia has a single driver for their whole range of cards, so you don't have to reinstall drivers when you switch different model cards in and out.

RE: Re: Why would you buy nVidia?
By Zingam on 8/27/2009 5:10:30 AM , Rating: 2
What is better for Laptops and which company has a better driver support for laptops?

I hate it when I buy a laptop that there is no way I can install official drivers because the manufacturer of the laptop hasn't released any new drivers for years.

I had to use Omega Drivers. Why can't they support some guy who would do unsupported drivers for them for laptops?

I believe laptops are the future. They have more sales right now and yet their graphics cards and drivers support are severely lacking in power, support and features or they get too hot and are come to the market much later then the desktop cards.

RE: Re: Why would you buy nVidia?
By ClownPuncher on 8/27/2009 11:49:20 AM , Rating: 2
Laptops are the future of what? I hope you don't mean for gaming, that would be a couple steps backwards in gaming experience.

RE: Re: Why would you buy nVidia?
By Indigo64 on 8/27/2009 1:22:30 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, no. I own a Dell M1530 and even with its "paltry" 8600 GPU and T9300 CPU, the laptop's LCD that it drives is at 1920x1200 and it plays everything I play on my desktop, at reasonable settings. If my laptop, which is over a year old now, can do that, then laptops will be just fine.

What people as a whole fail to realize is that the market is going to shift even more so to laptops, and those that think that won't ever happen are the same ones who think SATA is an acronym for sitting on your ass.

You'd be a fool to think that mobile gaming won't explode more than it already has. Once they become more pervasive, the price points will come down and we'll be buying laptops for everything.

My laptop can do 3/4 of what my desktop can do - technology has gotten small & fast enough at this point to comfortably do so. It's only going to get better. It's not completely here yet, but it will be soon. I'm just glad you aren't running a gaming PC company - none I know of at least.

If I had the option, I also would have gone ATI/AMD in the laptop to coincide with the Ph-2 940 / Radeon HD 4870 on my desktop. I'm extremely happy with the platform AMD has designed, and it's more than capable for everything I throw at it - so is the laptop, but to a lesser degree. Almost, not quite there.

By ClownPuncher on 8/27/2009 2:50:48 PM , Rating: 2
Which games at 1920x1200? What do you consider "reasonable settings"?

Honestly an 8600m paired with a T9300 is not going to play anything recent with any real quality settings at that resolution. Even Fear 1 is unplayable on that at anything over 1680x1050. So, did you mean flash based games? Even $3,000 gaming laptops with 4870 CF setups can barely play games like Oblivion (4 years old) at 1920x1080.

Sure, laptops have come a long way, but in no way do they cater to a gaming experience. I don't even have to mention battery life when gaming.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki