Tuesday, November 22nd 2016

Q3-2016 VGA Market - NVIDIA Gained Market Share While AMD's Declined: JPR

Jon Peddie Research (JPR), the graphics and multimedia industry's research and consulting firm, announced estimated PC graphics add-in-board (AIB) shipments and suppliers' market share for Q3'16. The last two quarters have seen both NVIDIA and AMD release and expand a new AIB line-up, the former launching the GeForce 10 series, powered by "Pascal" GPU's and the latter releasing the Radeon 400 series, powered by "Polaris" GPU's.

JPR's AIB Report tracks PC add-in graphics boards (AIBs), which carry discrete graphics chips. AIBs are used in desktop PCs, workstations, servers, and other devices such as scientific instruments. They can be factory installed or sold directly to customers as aftermarket products. In all cases, AIBs represent the higher end of the graphics industry using discrete chips and private high-speed memory, compared to the integrated GPUs in CPUs or SOCs that share slower system memory.
The report shows results which are not dissimilar to last years, where the AIB market increased 38.2%, which is which is above the ten-year average of 14.3%.

Quarter-to-quarter AIBs shipments increased 38.2%, and 9.2% year-to-year.

On a year-to-year basis, we found that total AIB shipments during the quarter rose 9.2%, which is greater than desktop PCs, which fell -17.1%.

However, in spite of the overall PC churn, somewhat due to tablets and embedded graphics, the PC gaming momentum continues to build and is the bright spot in the AIB market.

The gaming PC (system) market is as vibrant as the stand alone AIB market. All OEMs are investing in Gaming space because demand for Gaming PCs is robust. Intel also validated this on their earnings call, and the recent announcement of a new Enthusiast CPU. However, it won't show in the overall market numbers, because like gaming GPUs, the gaming PCs are dwarfed by the general-purpose machines.

The overall GPU shipments (integrated and discrete) is greater than desktop PC shipments due to double-attach-the adding of a second (or third) AIB to a system with integrated processor graphics-and to a lesser extent, dual AIBs in performance desktop machines using either AMD's Crossfire or NVIDIA's SLI technology Improved attach rate. The attach rate of AIBs to desktop PCs has declined from a high of 63% in Q1 2008 to 54% this quarter, an increase of 48.7% from last quarter which was outstanding. Compared to this quarter last year it increased 31.7% which was outstanding.

If anyone doubted that the PC was the platform of choice for gaming, this quarter's results will correct that incorrect misconception. The gaming market is lifting the entire PC market and has over whelmed the console market.

The report can be purchased here.
Add your own comment

27 Comments on Q3-2016 VGA Market - NVIDIA Gained Market Share While AMD's Declined: JPR

#1
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Sad...and why is S3 still on there? When's the last time they debuted a new product?
Posted on Reply
#2
Kursah
I believe S3 still does the basic server GPU's that don't get used beyond initial setup and deployment.
Posted on Reply
#3
RejZoR
It's so bizarre knowing we once had like 10 makers of GPU's and now only 2 are left.
Posted on Reply
#4
tehehe
RejZoR said:
It's so bizarre knowing we once had like 10 makers of GPU's and now only 2 are left.
High barriers to entry eg. patents.
Posted on Reply
#5
Melvis
No surprise really, next year should be alittle different.

I thought VIA still made GPU's?
Posted on Reply
#6
Mistral
Hang in there S3, hang in there!
Posted on Reply
#8
Nuckles56
I'm surprised that nobody has commented on how much AMD has clawed back in the AIB space compared with last year. As AMD have done pretty well for themselves actually from the numbers
Posted on Reply
#9
R-T-B
Nuckles56 said:
I'm surprised that nobody has commented on how much AMD has clawed back in the AIB space compared with last year. As AMD have done pretty well for themselves actually from the numbers
That's AIBs in general, not just AMD.
Posted on Reply
#10
the54thvoid
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
Posted on Reply
#11
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
AMD only launched how many new products in the last year? 3? 4 if we count Radeon Pro Duo? Meanwhile, NVIDIA has been launching cards left and right. The market loss is not surprising for AMD, unfortunately. :(

If you want a low power, high end graphics card, NVIDIA is the only one offering that product right now. A lot of people can't twiddle their thumbs and wait for Vega. That's on AMD to compete and they're not.
Posted on Reply
#12
Dragonsmonk
FordGT90Concept said:
AMD only launched how many new products in the last year? 3? 4 if we count Radeon Pro Duo? Meanwhile, NVIDIA has been launching cards left and right. The market loss is not surprising for AMD, unfortunately. :(

If you want a low power, high end graphics card, NVIDIA is the only one offering that product right now. A lot of people can't twiddle their thumbs and wait for Vega. That's on AMD to compete and they're not.
When looking at the numbers year over year I don't see the decline for AMD, just for NVidia. As always, it depends on how you read numbers. If AMD keeps up the trend of GAINING 11% (!) year over year it would be interesting enough.
Posted on Reply
#13
ZeDestructor
the54thvoid said:
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
Between the 1060s selling more and the 1070, 1080 and Titan X existing, it's obvious who's gonna ship more chips.
Posted on Reply
#14
john_
the54thvoid said:
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
I was writing doing unit sales of a German retailer a few months ago(they where shown for every model on the page). Unfortunately they seem to remove models that they stop selling(or something). I didn't knew that, so when I noticed that, I decided not to continue keeping score.
But for a period of 1-2 months that I was looking at sales, the 1060 was selling almost at 2+ times compared to the RX 480. I believe with GTX 1050(Ti) Nvidia will take back more market share. Seeing AMD losing "only" 0.9% it is not bad. Not bad at all. They will probably lose a couple more point until the end of this year, because of the 1050's, but I don't think they really care that much. Polaris was meant to keep GCN architecture relative on PCs and it succeeded doing that. Zen based APUs will make GCN more important next year, IF Zen is a success.
Posted on Reply
#15
RejZoR
R-T-B said:
Dude, I'm totally buying a S3 S27 and doing multichrome in my next build, cause fuck numbers:

http://www.dailytech.com/S3+Introduces+MultiChrome+MultiGPU+Technology+For+Budget+Gamers/article2101.htm
I was talking with graphics engineer back then about S3 Chrome cards and he praised them a lot how capable they are. Unfortunately traditionally shitty drivers made it less than competitive against ATi and NVIDIA, which is why they never really achieved any success.

I guess I'll just have to stick with nice memories of my S3 Savage3D 8MB from more than a decade and a half ago. It gave me a lot of joy on PC, especially in Unreal based games where I could use max settings with their low level API named S3 Metal and still get very smooth performance. It really elevated performance over both OpenGL and D3D. And since back then many games used Unreal Engine, I really made good use of it. And things just worked on it using same driver since I didn't really know much about updating shit back then (and the fact I could only find 1 driver update using crappy 56k modem). Would be so cool if we still had at least S3, 3dfx and Matrox in the game...
Posted on Reply
#16
R-T-B
RejZoR said:
I was talking with graphics engineer back then about S3 Chrome cards and he praised them a lot how capable they are. Unfortunately traditionally shitty drivers made it less than competitive against ATi and NVIDIA, which is why they never really achieved any success.

I guess I'll just have to stick with nice memories of my S3 Savage3D 8MB from more than a decade and a half ago. It gave me a lot of joy on PC, especially in Unreal based games where I could use max settings with their low level API named S3 Metal and still get very smooth performance. It really elevated performance over both OpenGL and D3D. And since back then many games used Unreal Engine, I really made good use of it. And things just worked on it using same driver since I didn't really know much about updating shit back then (and the fact I could only find 1 driver update using crappy 56k modem). Would be so cool if we still had at least S3, 3dfx and Matrox in the game...
Back in the Radeon 9700 pro dominance days, I was kinda excited for the Matrox Parehelia or whatever that card was called. It's too bad it was really the final blow to their gaming ambitions...
Posted on Reply
#17
bug
the54thvoid said:
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
Not really. If nothing else, for almost half a year now if you upgrade and want high-end, the only option is Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#18
bug
R-T-B said:
Back in the Radeon 9700 pro dominance days, I was kinda excited for the Matrox Parehelia or whatever that card was called. It's too bad it was really the final blow to their gaming ambitions...
There were a lot of companies promising a lot of things back in those days. I was waiting for Bitboys Oy's Glaze3D. I was also eyeing STMicro's Kyro II for a while, but could never afford it.
Posted on Reply
#19
$ReaPeR$
the54thvoid said:
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
to the average consumer the nuances of perf/price, power and other factors are lost. this is a game of marketing and it has been for the last years. generally Nvidia has been better, except for the last months that AMD has started giving out games and maintaining a better driver quality. the perception of a better product is more important than its existence to the average consumer.
Posted on Reply
#20
RejZoR
R-T-B said:
Back in the Radeon 9700 pro dominance days, I was kinda excited for the Matrox Parehelia or whatever that card was called. It's too bad it was really the final blow to their gaming ambitions...
Matrox brought us EMBM 3D flat surfaces (Environmental Mapped Bump Mapping) back when the rest only knew to render flat textures.
Posted on Reply
#21
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
IMO Matrox should have been on that list instead of S3 -- Matrox are weird because their focus isnt on the commercial/mainstream market but their cards are available commercially and very very easy to get if you can overlook how overpriced they often are.
Posted on Reply
#22
Dimi
How is this surprising?

I know this is a fairly small percentage of consumers but look at how many reviews these cards have on newegg.

GTX 1070 Top 5 number of reviews = 241 - 218 - 163 - 141 - 94

RX 480 Top 5 number of reviews = 62 - 55 - 44 - 37 - 34

The total of the top 5 RX 480 reviews (232) doesn't even beat the highest number of reviews for a single 1070.

Thats quite shocking tbh.
Posted on Reply
#23
TheinsanegamerN
the54thvoid said:
Surprising that Nvidia increased share against AMD. I'd really like to see unit sales per board (480, 1070, etc) from the two companies.
I thought the cheaper 480 would have given AMD a clear advantage over the more expensive Nvidia parts, unless the 1060 sold way more.
I'm not. AMD's entire strategy of "corner the low end market and cede the high end to nvidia for a year" was not the brightest idea when they tried it with the 300 series. The 1070 and 1080, along with the current titan, have 0 competition from AMD. This also applies in the mobile market, where amd currently has 0 presence in gaming laptops.

It didnt take nvidia long to make the 1060, which is neck and neck with the 480, and the 1050ti, which while slower and more pricey then the 470, can run without a PCIe connector, which even the 460 cant seem to manage.

Even if they gain market share and sales, nvidia is making lots of profit, which is what is more important here. AMD can control 80% of the market, ala android, but it wont matter if they cant make any money. they needed a high end product months ago, and we still havent got one.

And when we finally do get vega, nvidia will have a high end GPU more powerful then vega out within a week. nvidia has had months to come out with a new solution. AMD needed to come out hard, and instead came out with a bit of a whimper and just sputtered out.
Posted on Reply
#24
$ReaPeR$
TheinsanegamerN said:
I'm not. AMD's entire strategy of "corner the low end market and cede the high end to nvidia for a year" was not the brightest idea when they tried it with the 300 series. The 1070 and 1080, along with the current titan, have 0 competition from AMD. This also applies in the mobile market, where amd currently has 0 presence in gaming laptops.

It didnt take nvidia long to make the 1060, which is neck and neck with the 480, and the 1050ti, which while slower and more pricey then the 470, can run without a PCIe connector, which even the 460 cant seem to manage.

Even if they gain market share and sales, nvidia is making lots of profit, which is what is more important here. AMD can control 80% of the market, ala android, but it wont matter if they cant make any money. they needed a high end product months ago, and we still havent got one.

And when we finally do get vega, nvidia will have a high end GPU more powerful then vega out within a week. nvidia has had months to come out with a new solution. AMD needed to come out hard, and instead came out with a bit of a whimper and just sputtered out.
though i generally agree with your points, I'm not so sure that Nvidia can provide the same perf gains in the next GPU cycle. only time will tell though.
Posted on Reply
#25
bug
$ReaPeR$ said:
though i generally agree with your points, I'm not so sure that Nvidia can provide the same perf gains in the next GPU cycle. only time will tell though.
This generation was a rather sizable leap for both camps (admittedly, after years of stagnation because of being stuck at 28nm). The next generation will be much tamer. Probably HBM with a few tweaks. Personally, I think the next significant leap will be in 2018/2019 when 4k gaming will (hopefully) reach mid-range cards.
Needless to say, both AMD and Nvidia are free to prove me wrong :P
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment