Tuesday, February 28th 2017

"Where Are My Graphics Cards?" - 3 Million Sold to Cryptocurrency Miners in 2017

The title of this piece is both question and answer, though users that keep up with PC-related news knew the answer already. Jon Peddie Research, in a new report, pegs the number of total graphics cards sold to miners at a pretty respectable 3 million units (worth some $776 million). That's some 3 million gamers that could be enjoying video games on their PCs right now, or which would be able to enjoy them at a much lower price that they had to recently pay to have the privilege.

AMD has been the primary benefactor here - its GPU market share went up by 8.1%, while NVIDIA's dropped by 6% and Intel's by 1.9% (the fact that Intel's graphics processing units come embedded in the company's processors helps keep that number stable). As it is, attachment rates of GPUs to systems was over 100% at 136%, the result of miners buying more cards per system in an effort to maximize profits. Jon Peddie thinks that gaming will still be the key player to drive GPU sales, though "augmented by the demand from cryptocurrency miners." The firm also expects demand for GPUs to slacken, coeteris paribus, due to "increasing utilities costs and supply and demand forces that drive up AIB prices." However, for those looking for prices to drop before upgrading their system, the news aren't rosy: the article states that pricing will not drop in the foreseeable future, so owners of GPUs that can actually mine already are being encouraged to mine while not gaming, so as to try and offset the markups in the current GPU offerings.
Overall GPU shipments in the fourth quarter of 2017 actually decreased 1.5% from the previous quarter, though JPR said that was due to normal seasonal activity. But even with miners' help to drive sales, overall GPU market shipments declined 4.8 percent - the only actual positive trend in that market were the actual discrete desktop GPUs.
Some key highlights JPR calls attention to are as follows:
  • AMD's overall unit shipments increased 8.08% quarter-to-quarter, Intel's total shipments decreased -1.98% from last quarter, and Nvidia's decreased -6.00%.
  • The attach rate of GPUs (includes integrated and discrete GPUs) to PCs for the quarter was 134% which was down -10.06% from last quarter.
  • Discrete GPUs were in 36.88% of PCs, which is down -2.67%.
  • The overall PC market increased 5.93% quarter-to-quarter, and decreased -0.15% year-to-year.
  • Desktop graphics add-in boards (AIBs) that use discrete GPUs decreased -4.62% from last quarter.
  • Q4'17 saw no change in tablet shipments from last quarter.
Sources: JPR, via PC Gamer
Add your own comment

117 Comments on "Where Are My Graphics Cards?" - 3 Million Sold to Cryptocurrency Miners in 2017

#52
Casecutter
yotano211 said:
trying to advance a new tech and it employs people in the market
But, running blockchain does exactly what? Cure cancer, entertain, produce gold to then make into everything from exotic electrical circuits to jewelry. I've yet to understand the "tangible" that mining pays for?
Posted on Reply
#53
Xzibit
yotano211 said:
You can say the same thing with mining, its trying to advance a new tech and it employs people in the market.
BBC
Smari McCarthy, a member of the Icelandic parliament for the Pirate Party, tweeted: "Cryptocurrency mining requires almost no staff, very little in capital investments, and mostly leaves no taxes either.
"The value to Iceland... is virtually zero."
Posted on Reply
#54
R-T-B
Xzibit said:
Fortune - Iceland Expects to Use More Electricity Mining Bitcoin Than Powering Homes This Year
To be completely fair, not that many people live in Iceland...

And lol @ using a tweet as a source (of the PIRATE PARTY no less)... he obviously hasn't seen the fully staffed mining farms. They use more staff than an equivalent datacenter. This is bringing far more money into iceland than this guy will ever imagine...

Casecutter said:
But, running blockchain does exactly what? Cure cancer, entertain, produce gold to then make into everything from exotic electrical circuits to jewelry. I've yet to understand the "tangible" that mining pays for?
The payment network. That's the product.
Posted on Reply
#55
Xzibit
R-T-B said:
To be completely fair, not that many people live in Iceland...

And lol @ using a tweet as a source (of the PIRATE PARTY no less)... he obviously hasn't seen the fully staffed mining farms. They use more staff than an equivalent datacenter. This is bringing far more money into iceland than this guy will ever imagine...
Have you seen the sources used around here. Thats like real journalism.

If they pass the tax proposals for them (data miner) they will. If not they will continue to leach their green energy resources and cry about it later when they pack up and leave or their lease is up.

R-T-B said:

The payment network. That's the product.
Motherboard - One Bitcoin Transaction Now Uses as Much Energy as Your House in a Week
Posted on Reply
#56
Casecutter
R-T-B said:
The payment network. That's the product.
I see it as more a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they where doing something like checking and encrypting say MasterCard transaction there enough outside simulation.

But here the payment network is self-feeding it's own business. When transactions slow (as perhaps a minor loss in value have people sit on it hoping it rebound) so do the folk working the transitions (less Bitcoins moving around). You see less return (harder to generate coin) to the point when cost to operate is not adding cryptocurrency and spiral even more.
Posted on Reply
#57
R-T-B
Casecutter said:
I see it as more a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they where doing something like checking and encrypting say MasterCard transaction there enough outside simulation.
They ARE encrypting and validating bitcoin (or whatever crypto).

Bitcoin issues at the same rate regardless of how many mine. Most cryptos operate that way.

Xzibit said:
Have you seen the sources used around here. Thats like real journalism.
Sorry, it's not and never will be, no matter who does it. A random set of words does not make an actual researched position.

Xzibit said:
Motherboard - One Bitcoin Transaction Now Uses as Much Energy as Your House in a Week
You post that like I'm some kind of bitcoin advocate.

I've maintained bitcoin is a dying beast for a very long time.
Posted on Reply
#58
yotano211
Casecutter said:
But, running blockchain does exactly what? Cure cancer, entertain, produce gold to then make into everything from exotic electrical circuits to jewelry. I've yet to understand the "tangible" that mining pays for?
You and everyone else thinks that crypto mining is tangible items, its not, its intangible items. Like a digital download of a game. A decade or more ago, I had to go to best buy or circuit city to buy my games on a DVD or CD disk, today I can just log into Steam and buy a downloadable game.
Crypto mining keeps the network going, its like its own internet. Without the huge datacenters around the world there would be no internet.
Posted on Reply
#59
R-T-B
yotano211 said:
You and everyone else thinks that crypto mining is tangible items, its not, its intangible items. Like a digital download of a game. A decade ago, I had to go to best buy or circuit city to buy my games on a DVD or CD disk, today I can just log into Steam and buy a downloadable game.
Crypto mining keeps the network going, its like its own internet. Without the huge datacenters around the world there would be no internet.
I want to know what the electric cost is to create all those cat pictures on the internet.

I mean, really. I do.
Posted on Reply
#60
yotano211
R-T-B said:
I want to know what the electric cost is to create all those cat pictures on the internet.

I mean, really. I do.
I want to know how much power it cost to store all of those tide pod challenge videos on YouTube and other media websites.
Or the many many other viral challenge videos going around, I guess the newest one that the media is trying to popularize is the lemon challenge.
Posted on Reply
#61
R-T-B
yotano211 said:
I want to know how much power it cost to store all of those tide pod challenge videos on YouTube and other media websites.
Forget the kids. THINK OF THE CO2!
Posted on Reply
#62
yotano211
R-T-B said:
Forget the kids. THINK OF THE CO2!
If people die from that challenge it helps global warming and the gene pool
Posted on Reply
#63
R-T-B
yotano211 said:
If people die from that challenge it helps global warming
Depends. We don't know how much those stupid videos take up.

The world must know!
Posted on Reply
#64
yotano211
R-T-B said:
Depends. We don't know how much those stupid videos take up.

The world must know!
i dont think the world is ready
Posted on Reply
#65
Xzibit
yotano211 said:
I want to know how much power it cost to store all of those tide pod challenge videos on YouTube and other media websites.
Or the many many other viral challenge videos going around, I guess the newest one that the media is trying to popularize is the lemon challenge.
2.26 Terrawatts (Energy Google uses a year 2010)
*source PCMagazine

30.1 Terrawatts (Energy used for Bitcon a year and growing)
*source WIRED
Posted on Reply
#66
yotano211
Xzibit said:
2.26 Terrawatts (Energy Google uses a year 2010)
*source PCMagazine

30.1 Terrawatts (Energy used for Bitcon a year and growing)
*source WIRED
Anything newer, like 2017 at least.
In 2010, I was using maybe 2 kilo/w per day of power, today I use 10-11.5 kilo/w per hour.
Posted on Reply
#67
Xzibit
yotano211 said:
Anything newer, like 2017 at least.
In 2010, I was using maybe 2 kilo/w per day of power, today I use 10-11.5 kilo/w per hour.
5.7 Terrawatts in 2016 for Google
Posted on Reply
#68
yotano211
Xzibit said:
5.7 Terrawatts in 2016 for Google
cool, thanks
Posted on Reply
#69
moproblems99
Xzibit said:
2.26 Terrawatts (Energy Google uses a year 2010)
*source PCMagazine

30.1 Terrawatts (Energy used for Bitcon a year and growing)
*source WIRED
In fairness, that doesn't count the power that it took to create the 'content'.
Posted on Reply
#70
R-T-B
moproblems99 said:
In fairness, that doesn't count the power that it took to create the 'content'.
Or power on a machine to view it.
Posted on Reply
#71
Xzibit
moproblems99 said:
In fairness, that doesn't count the power that it took to create the 'content'.
R-T-B said:
Or power on a machine to view it.
Yet your talking about a company that has a estimated 1/3rd of the internet traffic (Google is not just YouTube) and is dwarfed by 1 cryptocurrency many times over.

You can even toss in Facebook at 1.8 TWH for 2016 which combine with Google your talking about an estimated 70% of the internet traffic going through their services according to Newsweek article.

1.8 + 5.7 = 7.5 TwH - 30.1 = 22.6 TwH that 1 cryptocurrency (Just Bitcoin) is using over what Google & Facebook use who are responsible for 70% of the internets traffic.

Let that sink in...
Posted on Reply
#72
intelzen
Xzibit said:
Yet your talking about a company that has a estimated 1/3rd of the internet traffic (Google is not just YouTube) and is dwarfed by 1 cryptocurrency many times over.

You can even toss in Facebook at 1.8 TWH for 2016 which combine with Google your talking about an estimated 70% of the internet traffic going through their services according to Newsweek article.

1.8 + 5.7 = 7.5 TwH - 30.1 = 22.6 TwH that 1 cryptocurrency (Just Bitcoin) is using over 70% of the internets traffic.

Let that sink in...
these are factz. But on other side here - a few miner scums that can not even google this and still insists (!!) that they are the good guys here and insists that they are not mining for their greed (disregarding the CO2 footprint), but "support the new technology":banghead:
Posted on Reply
#73
yotano211
intelzen said:
these are factz. But on other side here - a few miner scums that can not even google this and still insists (!!) that they are the good guys here and insists that they are not mining for their greed (disregarding the CO2 footprint), but "support the new technology":banghead:
what, you lost me at, these are......
Posted on Reply
#74
intelzen
yotano211 said:
what, you lost me at, these are......
what is your point? oh right - you had none and the one you had was false (Xzibit showed you) - so now you just keep on trolling :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#75
R-T-B
intelzen said:
what is your point? oh right - you had none and the one you had was false (Xzibit showed you) - so now you just keep on trolling :banghead:
I think his point was it's somewhat ironic that you think you know the "factz" without being able to spell "facts"

I was being mostly ironic at any rate, as my main point was that humanity powers many useless things for CO2 and noone bats an eyelash until they suddenly lose something that means something to them (GPUs). That is a fact.

My miner uses 500W for fun. That is less than 10 lightbulbs. I was kind enough to compensate for my energy increase elsewhere and my bill actually dropped when I started mining.

Also a fact.


intelzen said:
these are factz. But on other side here - a few miner scums that can not even google this and still insists (!!) that they are the good guys here and insists that they are not mining for their greed (disregarding the CO2 footprint), but "support the new technology":banghead:
I have mined when it was not profitable. I'll likely be doing it again soon. How exactly do you explain that one?

Xzibit said:
1.8 + 5.7 = 7.5 TwH - 30.1 = 22.6 TwH that 1 cryptocurrency (Just Bitcoin) is using over 70% of the internets traffic.
Also lol @ this "fact." How does electricity usage = internet trafic. Simply a leap of logic there, and not a good one.

With facts like that, you sure have a lot of faith.

I've never denied bitcoin is an energy pig. I've actually said bitcoin needs to die on numerous occasions. Bitcoin is a prototype of what cryptocurrency has/can become, and not a good one either.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment