JPR: Nvidia gained in PC graphics last quarter

A few years ago, Nvidia’s future looked uncertain. Both AMD and Intel were combining graphics with x86 processors, while Nvidia was the only one stuck without an x86 CPU license. How could it succeed?

Fast forward to last quarter, and clearly, Nvidia is doing rather well. Strong sales of its Tegra mobile processors and GeForce GPUs allowed the company to post record revenue, and now, the latest figures from Jon Peddie Research show Nvidia actually gained on both AMD and Intel in the PC graphics market.

From the second quarter to the third, JPR says Nvidia’s PC graphics shipments grew 28.3% in desktops and 12% in notebooks. Intel suffered 7% and 8.6% declines in those same markets, respectively, while AMD saw a 2% decline on the desktop and a 17% decline in notebooks. Now, JPR’s data doesn’t paint a totally complete picture. While it includes both discrete graphics processors and graphics-enabled CPUs from AMD and Intel, it excludes chips for servers, handhelds, and tablets. Still, the numbers show Nvidia is faring quite well compared to the competition in the PC market. Just look at JPR’s market share estimates:

  Q3 2011 Q2 2012 Q3 2012
AMD 23.0% 22.7% 21.2%
Intel 60.3% 62.2% 59.8%
Nvidia 16.1% 14.8% 18.5%

Note how Nvidia’s share of shipments is catching up to AMD’s, even though the AMD figure includes processors with integrated graphics, like AMD’s A- and E-series APUs. (The Nvidia numbers exclude Tegra sales, since JPR says it doesn’t account for handheld or tablet chips.)

That said, JPR paints a somewhat bleak picture of the market at large. Compared to last year, shipments for all of the major vendors slipped—AMD’s by 20%, Intel’s by 14%, and Nvidia’s by 0.5%. JPR says shipments of PC graphics chips were down 10.8% year-over-year and 1.45% on a quarter-to-quarter basis. The quarter-to-quarter numbers are actually worse than those for the overall PC market, too, which JPR says is unusual. "The turmoil in the PC market has caused us to modify our forecast since the last report; it is less aggressive on both desktops and notebooks," the company adds.

Comments closed
    • sschaem
    • 7 years ago

    AMD overpay and destroy value, poor ATI folks 🙁

    kind of related.

    In 2008 “Advanced Micro Devices Inc. opened its $270 million Southwest Austin campus ”
    Today they plan to sell it for $150 million…

    “The campus measures 870,000 square feet and sits on 58 acres off of Southwest Parkway.
    with four four-story buildings as well as its Lone Star building with fitness center, cafeteria, gourmet coffee bar and gaming center”

    On top AMD had to pay 3 million in fees because of the pristine location they picked.

    Samsung will probably buy it for half and make a lot of its employee happy.
    Afterall Samsung need a place for all their AMD workers they recently got from the exodus.

    Little by little AMD will have to sell it all at huge discount to make the next VP payroll.
    Today AMD got no more cash and 2 billion in debt (now rated “deteriorating”)

    AMD at the hand of R. Read will be worth less then nothing in 12 month.

    I seen this happen to two other companies. CBM & SGI … all BOD & management.

    • Geistbar
    • 7 years ago

    I don’t see why anyone would be surprised by the overall decrease in shipments: the GPUs integrated on processors are getting significantly more capable with each generation, while the demand for graphics horsepower has remained flat. The cheaper (and higher volume) GPUs are getting pushed out of the market, while most games are still being designed around console hardware from 2005. Heck, I haven’t seen any numbers but I’d guess that the fastest growing parts of PC gaming are of the non-AAA variety, which would lead to even lower processing demands (how old of a system do you need to not be able to play Torchlight 2?).

    If anything, it’d be surprising if GPU sales hadn’t gone down.

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    This strikes me as silly every quarter. After following both AMD and Nvidia for years, it still amazes me that Nvidia keeps inching forward despite almost non-existant performance differences at the price points they represent. At some AMD is simply superior and there is no contest, like below $200. AMD even beats NVidia to market sometimes (like with the 7xxx series).

    Like what does Nvidia even have for integrated graphics in computers right now? It’s pretty much all AMD and Intel. Besides some really dated chipsets there really isn’t a whole lot of anything. So this gap is mainly represented by desktop graphics cards… which is ridiculous.

      • BestJinjo
      • 7 years ago

      Based on the article, it appears the major loss in market share actually came in the mobile sector, not desktop (17% vs. 2%). Still, it’s remarkable that for the first time in the history of GPU makers, one company has both the single-GPU and price/performance/overclocking crowns; and yet is losing market share on the desktop. HD7000 vs. GTX600 series is a study of poor execution vs. exceptional marketing. The enthusiast dark horse this round was bitcoin mining. For those who took the time to explore this perk, the price/performance of AMD cards was near $0. 🙂 For the mainstream gaming crowd, PhysX and TXAA were standout features, while exceptional performance in BF3 helped NV tremendously.

      Although, with latest drivers, most professional websites are seeing no value in NV’s $300+ line-up:

      [url<]http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best-graphics-cards/[/url<]

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        I wish PhysX was a standout feature, but the lobotomized husk of what it was is nothing more then shell of its former self. AMD has something similar to TXAA and AMD doesn’t perform poorly in BF3 either…

        This does still seem like Nvidia has more brand recognition and a much bigger marketing budget though. Hopefully that will change in the future with AMDs new gaming initiative. AMD should push surround gaming a little harder too. That’s definitely a feature they have that’s quite a bit more mature then the Nvidia equivalent.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 7 years ago

    And this is why AMD keeps dropping prices, throwing killer bundles, doing everything but paying us to buy their video cards. It’s also why they’re slowly going out of business.

    All this despite making amazing progress with their latest driver updates and offering an incredible value to those willing to risk not having drivers in a couple years when AMD goes bankrupt.

    I stuck with a 670 when I upgraded because I like my cards to continue to have support for a few years and I’m not sure AMD’ll be around in a few years…

      • thermistor
      • 7 years ago

      A few years is an eternity in gaming. DX12 out soon on the horizon? What’s the longest I’ve tried to stay current on play AAA titles and kept a card? About 2 years. I don’t think I’m super gamer, either, but screeen resolutions have gone up, multiple monitors, stereoscopic effects, etc.

      Buy the best buy for now, future-proofing any PC-type device is pure silliness.

      BTW, just picked up a 5450 for a HTPC for $10 after rebate. nVidia always wants a premium on cheap discrete GPU’s far in excess of the real performance of the card. Drivers are a non-issue for HTPC type applications, anyhow.

        • sschaem
        • 7 years ago

        “screeen resolutions have gone up”
        I have the same monitor from 2004 : 1920×1200

        The resolution actually went DOWN in the past 8 years.

        I had a 8800 GTS for 5 years and it played most game very well, Crysy2 being an example.
        (But at 1280×720)
        Why? the 8800 serie is like 3 time faster then a console and games today target console HW.

        I think AMD will be gone in 12 month, and most likely its driver support will vanish,
        1 month ago, I was optimistic and was waiting for a 8870.. now with all the new of AMD shutting down department and making “Radeon SSD”, I’m out.

        AMD public relation is the best marketing tool nvidia could hope for, AMD is just pooping all over itself 🙁

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      If AMD goes under, ATI will be spun off from the company or bought by another. That’s like one of the few surely profitable things in their company. Don’t confuse AMD CPUs with their graphics department.

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        You really need to check their results, before saying the graphics division is profitable…AMD’s graphics division profits are either very small or nearly non-existent for several years now. Plus you need to realize that a company works as a whole, not just as the bits you want to function properly, disregarding the rest.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          Way to be completely exact with your facts that obsolete mine. How about some sources?

          When it comes to liquidating a company or it goes under, entire divisions are spun or sold off. That isn’t uncommon and AMD graphics division still makes graphics cards.

      • BestJinjo
      • 7 years ago

      “I stuck with a 670 when I upgraded because I like my cards to continue to have support for a few years and I’m not sure AMD’ll be around in a few years…”

      Most enthusiasts who buy GTX670 style cards don’t keep them for 5+ years. Only first time builders/rookies who don’t have a good grasp on PC upgrading do that because someone on a budget knows it’s way better to buy $200-250 GPUs more frequently than to spend $400-500 on a high-end GPU and keep it for 5-6 years. Considering GTX660Ti offers ~ GTX580 level of performance for just $250-260 just two years later, you can see how such strategy of future proofing is flawed/wasteful. Others buy $400 GPUs and upgrade annually because they can afford it easily. The issue of long-term support is not an issue for PC enthusiasts who upgrade $400+ GPUs every 2 years, 3 at most, and most of them resell their GPUs to reduce the cost of ownership because it’s the smart thing to do :). I can see it being a factor for those who want a spare cheap GPU to keep for a long-time, but GTX670 is not such card.

      If anything, it sounds like you always planned to buy an NV card in the first place since factors such as overclocking features, superior performance/$, superior performance with MSAA/mods and game bundles were all less important than your assumption that AMD will go bankrupt. And if you bought GTX670 when it was better in nearly every way to AMD cards (prior to early summer 2012), there wasn’t any negative financial news about AMD being for sale, or its restructuring woes.

      In either case, your story doesn’t add up because HD7950/7970 series released Jan 2012 and were superior to GTX570/580s and back then AMD’s finances were in far better shape. If you waited 2.5 more months to see what NV brings, AMD’s finances were still not that bad at that point. Sounds like you are just justifying to yourself why GTX670 was a smart choice for you at the time, and certainly it was an amazing card for a while. Yet, you aren’t objectively evaluating the current GPU landscape in terms of how gamers look at it. Instead, you are just assigning AMD’s cards to risky status based on your fear of a company going bankrupt. That’s like saying you won’t buy a PS4 next year because Sony’s credit rating got downgraded to “junk status”. That’s cool, but it doesn’t change that fact that NV’s cards have lost the single-GPU performance crown, have inferior overclocking features/overclocking scaling headroom and most certainly worse price/performance for single-GPUs. An objective buyer would say, there is some business risk to AMD, but NV needed to lower prices and add its own game bundles to remain competitive, which thankfully for prospective buyers this holiday season they did with Borderlands 2 and Assassin’s Creed 3. Still, when HD7850 2GB is going for $170, HD7870 for $200, HD7950 OC for $280 and HD7970 OC cards for $380, it’s hard to consider any NV card worth buying without a special sale.

      Next time NV lowers prices and adds its own game bundles, are you going to claim that they are also going out of business? Game bundle practices existed since Half-Life 2 and Far Cry bundles, as well as a large # of game bundles during Fermi days, including Just Cause 2, Mafia 2, Cryostasis, Metro 2033. Price drops existed since forever. GTX280 $649 –> GTX285 for $350-360 less than 9 months later. How about 8800GTX320/640MB being replaced with faster and cheaper 8800GT? That was desperation too? I am guessing you didn’t claim NV was going out of business then? Competition is awesome, and yet you paint it as a sign of desperation, rather than how we gamers benefit from these prices drops and game bundles, which I personally view as a healthy state of the market efficiencies in the GPU market that have existed for a decade.

    • sschaem
    • 7 years ago

    AMD keep losing money while nvidia make profit by the *hundreds* of millions.

    Mind blowing how AMD was able to destroy the years and years of ATI success.
    ATI was possibly 2 years ahead of nvidia in term of compute & SoC before AMD acquisition.
    Both where vapoorized by AMD CEOs (3 so far?)

    Next on AMD CEO agenda… make the 360 millions spent on Seamicro be worth nothing by 2014.
    But I think AMD will surprise us and we might see this happen much sooner.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]But I think AMD will surprise us and we might see this happen much sooner.[/quote<] Filing for Chapter 11 wouldn't surprise anyone.

    • Silus
    • 7 years ago

    These just confirm NVIDIA’s record results. Most of those were definitely related with Tegra, but a good chunk came from the excellent work being done in all the other markets that NVIDIA is in.

      • BestJinjo
      • 7 years ago

      “While it includes both discrete graphics processors and graphics-enabled CPUs from AMD and Intel, it EXCLUDES chips for servers, handhelds, and tablets.”

      NV took a ton of market share from AMD in the dGPU laptop/mobile space — 17%.

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    “That said, JPR paints a somewhat bleak picture of the market at large. Compared to last year, shipments for all of the major vendors slipped—AMD’s by 20%, Intel’s by 14%, and Nvidia’s by 0.5%. JPR says shipments of PC graphics chips were down 10.8% year-over-year and 1.45% on a quarter-to-quarter basis. The quarter-to-quarter numbers are actually worse than those for the overall PC market, too, which JPR says is unusual. “The turmoil in the PC market has caused us to modify our forecast since the last report; it is less aggressive on both desktops and notebooks,” the company adds.”

    Another sign of the Post-PC era and shift away from ‘traditional PCs’. The overwhelming evidence is mounting but I’m sure I will be blasted anyway.

      • Waco
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah, forget that sales of almost everything are down in the past year. 😛

        • jdaven
        • 7 years ago

        Except for tablets

        [url<]http://phys.org/news/2012-09-tablet-sales-million-year-survey.html[/url<] And smartphones [url<]http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/14/gartner-phone-sales-q3-2012/[/url<] However your comment is very much down in truthiness.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          Tablets & Smartphones are both emerging markets and even their growth could be “down” compared to the growth that could have happened if the economy wasn’t in the dumpster.

          Go read some Wikipedia and learn what an opportunity cost is: [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost[/url<] PCs on the other hand are a well established market where everybody already owns one, and when the economy goes in the tank the PCs are not thrown out the window, they are just replaced at a slower rate. One day (not too long from now) smartphones & tablets will reach the same saturation point. Since smartphones & tablets tend to fall apart faster than PCs, they will likely have a higher replacement rate, but the growth we are seeing now will not last (and is already showing signs of slowing down).

            • jdaven
            • 7 years ago

            But that is not what Waco said. He/she simply said sales are down which they are not.

            • Waco
            • 7 years ago

            I meant that they’re just down overall from what they could be in a healthy economy, not down overall. Sorry for the confusion.

            Just like laptop sales almost always outstrip PC sales (because they get broken more) I assume tablets will follow similar trends. PCs aren’t going anywhere though…they just aren’t being dropped on the ground as often.

            • Washer
            • 7 years ago

            No… laptops outsell desktops because most people rather have a laptop.

            • Waco
            • 7 years ago

            If you say so. I disagree.

            • Washer
            • 7 years ago

            [url<]https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=84757[/url<] I haven't seen evidence to suggest laptops fail at a greater rate than desktops. In fact, the above thread and linked study suggests the opposite. Even more... I ask you to simply ask anyone who doesn't call themselves a computer enthusiast if they'd rather have a desktop or laptop. Just seems you're making several large, unsupported leaps to arrive at your opinion. First, that people even want desktops more than laptops (they don't, seems painfully obvious to me given every industry reports says otherwise). Second, that laptops fail more than desktops (again, doesn't seem to be the case). Finally, that laptops fail at such a greater rate that this difference would explain why laptops outsell desktops.

            • jdaven
            • 7 years ago

            Uh what?

            “I meant that they’re just down overall…” then nine words later “…not down overall.”

            • Waco
            • 7 years ago

            Selectively quoting partial sentences isn’t a great way to make a point. Just saying.

            • jdaven
            • 7 years ago

            I really don’t understand your comment. Are you trying to say that if reality wasn’t reality, the numbers would be different?

          • HisDivineOrder
          • 7 years ago

          Their momentum is slowing. It’s much easier to get a lot of sales with products that are being bought for the first time. Much harder when there’s less obvious reason to upgrade from the device you already own and lately PC’s seem “fast enough.”

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      You know, just because other segments of the market are growing, doesn’t mean a certain are of the market is in decline. The size of the pie is merely shifting, not it’s contents. This isn’t necessarily a zero sum game. People can own PCs, tablets, and cellphones. People also own PCs so tablets and cellphones will show more growth. If you compared this to like 2000 you’d see quite a bit more growth in PCs.

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    Nvidia staying away from the x86 market and therefore Intel was the best move ever. Hopefully AMD will follow.

    Good job, Nvidia. Also congrats on winning back Apple.

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      So uh… how did Nvidia win back Apple by staying away from the x86 market again?

      Your ability to post contradictory statements is increasing rapidly. You used to do it between stories, then between different posts, and now you are a down to different sentences within a single post. I want to see you contradict yourself in a single sentence FTW.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 7 years ago

        He always does, except when he doesn’t.

        Also, nVidia avoided x86 by winning Apple back. Most of their shipments form quite the ARMy.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          He contradicts himself 60% of the time, every time.

        • jdaven
        • 7 years ago

        What I meant was that Nvidia stayed away from the x86 CPU market by not pursuing chipsets and cpus (not that Intel was going to let them anyway). They went after ARM instead. You know that selling discrete graphics cards is not related to x86 competition. You can put an Nvidia discrete graphics card in Power, Sparc or other CPU architectures if the drivers are available. In some cases they are.

        Are you implying that motherboards with DDR memory means DDR companies are competing in the x86 market against Intel? Of course not. A component inside an x86 computer is not competing against another component just because they are inside the same box.

        You guys are picking fights just to pick fights.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]You can put an Nvidia discrete graphics card in Power, Sparc or other CPU architectures if the drivers are available. [/quote<] Oh yeah... I'm sure Nvidia's sales growth was entirely due to Sparc... get real. I would probably be low-balling the estimate if I said that 99.99% of Nvidia's GPU sales go into x86 systems. When you comment about an article that is specifically directed to the discrete GPU sales and then make an assertion that Nvidia has absolutely nothing to do with the x86 market, it's like saying that Goodyear sales have nothing at all to do with the car market because you can theoretically put Goodyear tires on a wheelchair.

        • OU812
        • 7 years ago

        Chuckie, Oh chuckie you really do have a reading problem don’t you.

        Their are TWO sentences in J’s post. How you managed to combine them into one and then take it out of context only you and your remedial teacher can understand.

        1st sentence refers to Nvidia gaining from not being in the dying X86 PC market whereas AMD is.

        2nd sentence refers to Nvidia winning Apple for GPUs since subject of this article is graphics.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          Oh it’s you again… it took you that long to recover from Xeon Phis winning first place in the Green 500 list while AMD came in second and Nvidia trailed both of them? (http://www.green500.org/news/green500-list-november-2012) What were you saying about Intel & AMD having energy efficiency problems again?

            • OU812
            • 7 years ago

            Chuckie I see that you again can not stay on topic. This seems to also be an additional disability as you frequently go off topic.

            I won’t bother you with a long reply as I know you need to dedicate all your time to your remedial teacher to learn “How to read and comprehend more than one sentence” and “How to stay on topic”.

            • flip-mode
            • 7 years ago

            Oooh, how creative! Can you call me flippy? Just don’t call me surely.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            Surely you can’t be serious?

    • Deanjo
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]it excludes chips for servers, handhelds, and tablets.[/quote<] With servers graphics are not really a concern. Virtually nothing is done on a server that requires advance graphics and a lot run headless. If they were to include handhelds and tablets, I would imagine that nvidia's share would grow even more with their tegra line being used in many devices.

      • Alexko
      • 7 years ago

      If they included handheld devices, they would have to include smartphones, so NVIDIA’s share would probably go down quite a bit.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        In between the three companies nvidia would be effected the least. AMD’s and Intels share would drop drastically compared to nvidia.

      • Game_boy
      • 7 years ago

      Opteron APUs.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 7 years ago

        They have those?

      • xeridea
      • 7 years ago

      Unless it is a server that uses GPU for massive computer performance…..

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        GPGPU clusters excluded of course. I’m talking just in the realm of displays. If they included GPGPU clusters then that would just increase nvidias share as well.

      • eofpi
      • 7 years ago

      Server graphics may not be a concern, but how many of those Sandy and Ivy i5s, and especially i7s, are using the counted integrated GPU? In gaming PCs, that’s just wasted die space. Server graphics may not see much use, but if they’re going to count the ones Intel ships that never get used, they should count the ones shipped in x86/x64 servers too.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<] In gaming PCs, that's just wasted die space.[/quote<] Not with the modern implementations. The GPU on the CPU can still be utilized with the means of Lucid Logics Virtu.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This