Monday, November 4th 2024

AMD Falling Behind: Radeon dGPUs Absent from Steam's Top 20

As we entered November, Valve just finished processing data for October in its monthly update of Steam Hardware and Software Survey, showcasing trend changes in the largest gaming community. And according to October data, AMD's discrete GPUs are not exactly in the best place. In the top 20 most commonly used GPUs, not a single discrete SKU was based on AMD. All of them included NVIDIA as their primary GPU choice. However, there is some change to AMD's entries, as the Radeon RX 580, which used to be the most popular AMD GPU, just got bested by the Radeon RX 6600 as the most common choice for AMD gamers. The AMD Radeon RX 6600 now holds 0.98% of the GPU market.

NVIDIA's situation paints a different picture, as the top 20 spots are all occupied by NVIDIA-powered gamers. The GeForce RTX 3060 remains the most popular GPU at 7.46% of the GPU market, but the number two spot is now held by the GeForce RTX 4060 Laptop GPU at 5.61%. This is an interesting change since this NVIDIA GPU was in third place, right behind the regular GeForce RTX 4060 for desktops. However, laptop gamers are in abundance, and they are showing their strength, placing the desktop GeForce RTX 4060 in third place, recording 5.25% usage.
Source: Steam Survey
Add your own comment

222 Comments on AMD Falling Behind: Radeon dGPUs Absent from Steam's Top 20

#26
AusWolf
OnasiGaming is irrelevant. I know it’s a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of gamers, but no serious company in the space - not NV, not AMD and not Intel - cares about gaming. What the segment gets is scraps off the table. All the development is focused on more important and profitable things.

And yeah, NV developed cool tech (or rather adapted their datacenter tech for gaming use) and incentivizes devs to use it to maintain mind-share. That’s just good business. I have no idea why people trot this argument out as if NV is literally Sauron leading hordes of Orcs to oppress the free people.
Agreed. Orcs (people) enslave themselves by their own free will, they don't need Sauron for that. :laugh:

Seriously, though. Making good products is one thing. AMD can do that, too. Being able to sell them is another.
Onasi@AusWolf
Fair. NV has finally started getting better about Linux support, but AMD driver stack is still superior.
Not to mention that AMD has open source drivers that the Linux teams implement into the kernel. No Windows user can imagine the wonders of fully working 3D and other advanced display features on first boot.
Not to mention that AMD works closely together with said Linux teams and Valve to make Steam and Proton a better experience day by day, at least as far as I know. :)
Posted on Reply
#27
LittleBro
OnasiGaming is irrelevant. I know it’s a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of gamers, but no serious company in the space - not NV, not AMD and not Intel - cares about gaming. What the segment gets is scraps off the table. All the development is focused on more important and profitable things.
Dude, we're talking about Steam and gaming GPUs in this thread ... And that is exactly the way I was looking at this discussion from the start. Globally, Nvidia is so called "AI" company now.
Posted on Reply
#28
Onasi
@LittleBro
Do… do you not realize that everything is connected in this space? The “non-gaming” segment is literally what fuels the development for what becomes the “gaming GPUs”. AMD even acknowledged it when they recently announced that RDNA and CDNA will be merged back into one arch. Gaming-only GPUs aren’t a thing. And having the pull in one segment directly translates to another.
Posted on Reply
#29
LittleBro
Onasi@LittleBro
Do… do you not realize that everything is connected in this space? The “non-gaming” segment is literally what fuels the development for what becomes the “gaming GPUs”.
Not quite from the historical perspective, but for last few years I agree. Thanks to "AI" accelerators, instead of proper rasterizing performance, we now have frame guessing and image distortion in extremely expensive way.
Posted on Reply
#30
Onasi
@LittleBro
No, from the historical perspective too. The moment GPUs became GPGPUs they died as simple “3D accelerators”. And that happened almost 20 years ago. Do you really think using GPUs for compute is a new thing with AI? It isn’t.
Posted on Reply
#31
LittleBro
20 years ago gaming GPUs were very much about gaming and not GPGPU, although they might have supported this feature. This does not mean I don't agree with you. My point of view on that timeline is a bit different than yours, though.
Posted on Reply
#32
Assimilator
Jesus christ... the GTX 1050, a midrange card from 2016, has a higher marketshare than any of AMD's dGPUs.

This is not "falling behind", this is a bloodbath, and an entirely self-inflicted one from AMD. Greed destroys companies, exhibit A.
AusWolfNo Windows user can imagine the wonders of fully working 3D and other advanced display features on first boot.
Never had that problem with an NVIDIA GPU.
Posted on Reply
#33
tpa-pr
It's a bit of a shame. AMD constantly shooting themselves in the foot with marketing and pricing, the seemingly unshakeable mindshare that Nvidia have on the average consumer, the fearmongering for AMD's past transgressions which have long since been fixed or lessened. All of it adds up and is really hard to shift.

For what it's worth i've been doing my part. I think i've helped 7 (8?) people upgrade their gaming PCs in the last year and they've all gone with Ryzen and RDNA3 on my recommendation. So far no complaints. I'm hoping the word will spread from there that if you don't really want Nvidia's "special sauce" and/or are on a budget, an AMD GPU will do you just fine.
Posted on Reply
#34
AusWolf
AssimilatorJesus christ... the GTX 1050, a midrange card from 2016, has a higher marketshare than any of AMD's dGPUs.

This is not "falling behind", this is a bloodbath, and an entirely self-inflicted one from AMD. Greed destroys companies, exhibit A.
The 1050 was a gaming capable card just above $100. No card released since then can say the same about itself.
AssimilatorNever had that problem with an NVIDIA GPU.
Never said it was a problem. But it's still nice not having to install any driver to have my PC and all my peripherals fully functioning. :)
Posted on Reply
#35
Assimilator
AusWolfThe 1050 was a gaming capable card just above $100. No card released since then can say the same about itself.
It's almost like AMD could take some inspiration from that. And yet.
Posted on Reply
#36
Onasi
LittleBro20 years ago gaming GPUs were very much about gaming and not GPGPU, although they might have supported this feature. This does not mean I don't agree with you.
It’s not a feature, it’s fundamentally a different way of building a GPU (and programming for it). You don’t support it or not - you either build a GPGPU or you don’t. NVidias Tesla (as in the architecture, not the line) and accompanying it CUDA changed everything. I am just trying to educate here, not going for a victory lap of an argument.
LittleBroMy point of view on that timeline is a bit different than yours, though.
It’s not really a point of view thing. It’s objective reality. Tesla came out in 2007 and by the early 10s using GPUs for compute, for example in HPCs and supercomputers, has become the norm fully. I did say “nearly” 20 years ago, right? Though the concept is even older.
This 2010 presentation from NV is actually a good overview:
www.nvidia.com/content/gtc-2010/pdfs/2275_gtc2010.pdf
AssimilatorIt's almost like AMD could take some inspiration from that. And yet.
Small TOP 100 company that overtook Intel and IBM by market cap a while ago, pls donut bully.
People still acting as if AMD is still the underdog of mid-10s is wild.
Posted on Reply
#37
AusWolf
OnasiSmall TOP 100 company that overtook Intel and IBM by market cap a while ago, pls donut bully.
People still acting as if AMD is still the underdog of mid-10s is wild.
I think the point was that the $100 range of GPUs have been replaced with a gaping hole in recent years, which AMD could fill if they wanted to, but they don't for some wild reason.
Posted on Reply
#38
SOAREVERSOR
AusWolfTheir biggest problems that need urgent tackling imo, are their public image and the fact that they tried to follow Nvidia's pricing recently. As long as people look at Radeon as the cheaper alternative for gaming, it's not gonna work. That's why I have high hopes of RDNA 4 which is said to do the complete opposite: offer decent midrange performance at a relatively affordable price, which is exactly what PC gaming desperately needs. I hope it's not all empty promises.
Their pricing isn't an issue. Each time they drop prices people get happy because they assume this will lead to cheaper nvidia. It never does and those same people go right out and buy nvidia despite AMD having much better value for the price.

Prices also will not come down. They will only go up. Each new generation of GPUs costs vastly more to design and to make. That's the cost of progress. If you want prices to go down the only way to do that is for PC gamers to stop buying GPUs and demand we turn back graphics to well over a decade ago. That's the only way to stop price increases. That or move it all to the cloud and have gaming as a service fees for performance tiers. As PC gamers won't accept moving graphics back they have screamed at the top of their lungs they want 3000 buck or higher GPUs or gaming by streaming and that's what they are going to get.

AMD doesn't have an image problem. PC gamers have a PC gamer problem. Where everyone demands two things happen. First companies don't make money or go bankrupt costing people their jobs all for the sake of PC gamers. Second that other PC gamers all bolt to AMD so they can have cheap nvidia. AMD isn't the issue. Nvidia isn't the issue. Image isn't the issue. Pricing isn't the issue. The issue is and always has been PC gamers. Until PC gamers change the situation is not fixable. But as they won't admit that, they are getting what the deserve and are treated far too kindly as is.
Onasi@LittleBro
No, from the historical perspective too. The moment GPUs became GPGPUs they died as simple “3D accelerators”. And that happened almost 20 years ago. Do you really think using GPUs for compute is a new thing with AI? It isn’t.
Nvidia told everyone this with the 8800 series and CUDA. If people missed it oh well but that's not changing.
Posted on Reply
#39
Hecate91
AusWolfThe 7700 XT is a good call. I wouldn't buy a used card, though, especially on a budget. If $300 is the maximum I can fork out, then I suppose I didn't earn that money overnight, which means I have to be careful of what I spend it on. In that case, having a warranty is a must.
A 7700XT is the least I'd spend for a decent GPU, maybe a 4060Ti if it were close to $400. I completely agree on used cards though, I wouldn't trust a used 30 series card much without a warranty as it could've been used for mining.
Although If the most I could spend is $300, I'd really consider just saving for a Steam Deck.
AusWolfI think the point was that the $100 range of GPUs have been replaced with a gaping hole in recent years, which AMD could fill if they wanted to, but they don't for some wild reason.
If AMD didn't have console sales to rely on they might cut costs, though they seem to be following Nvidia on pricing. IMO its a dumb move to make when AMD could price their cards much lower and sell even more, then again Nvidia could undercut AMD while still having massive profit margins.
Posted on Reply
#40
Onasi
SOAREVERSORAMD doesn't have an image problem. PC gamers have a PC gamer problem. Where everyone demands two things happen. First companies don't make money or go bankrupt costing people their jobs all for the sake of PC gamers. Second that other PC gamers all bolt to AMD so they can have cheap nvidia. AMD isn't the issue. Nvidia isn't the issue. Image isn't the issue. Pricing isn't the issue. The issue is and always has been PC gamers. Until PC gamers change the situation is not fixable. But as they won't admit that, they are getting what the deserve and are treated far too kindly as is.
This is actually a based take, not gonna lie. I wanted to say something similar, but my (imaginary) therapist told me to be kinder to people.
I also would absolutely not mind reverting graphics progress in games since those were “good enough” looking like 15 years ago and some awesome and striking art-styles don’t even require much processing grunt. But the masses want their photo-realistic slop and they want it now, so that train left the station long ago.
Posted on Reply
#41
SOAREVERSOR
AusWolfI think the point was that the $100 range of GPUs have been replaced with a gaping hole in recent years, which AMD could fill if they wanted to, but they don't for some wild reason.
The cost to manufacture any GPU have gone up due to complexity. It's not possible now.

FWIW cheap GPUs that work just fine do exist. They exist in the form of APUs and SOCs. AMD is very good at APUs and SOCs and dominates that market.
Posted on Reply
#42
AnarchoPrimitiv
Onasi@Hecate91
Come on, you are almost there, you’re getting it, you are so close. Now WHY does AMD not have the same pull with their Radeon division as NV does? Is it because NV is Satan or is it because they have mismanaged it since they acquired ATI? Hint: at one point NV and ATI had an almost even split of the market. The situation wasn’t always as grim as what we have now.
You seem to have a very simplistic view of capitalism and completely ignore the "grey area" actions of Nvidia in creating their supremacy.....for example, the GeForce Partner Program and other highly anti-competitive actions of Nvidia, many I'm sure we don't know about and will never know about. Then of course there are the actions Nvidia has taken over the past decade with the Cuda walled garden to basically make users dependent upon it....Nvidia has had its hands dirty for years and got it's hands dirty very early on like in 2003 when it's CFO engaged in fraudulent financial activity. Christine Hoberg, the CFO, struck a deal with one of Nvidia's suppliers, arranging to undercharge for goods purchased in one quarter and then allow the supplier to overcharge in the following quarter to equalize the financial impact. This manipulation artificially inflated Nvidia's earnings by 15%, leading to a significant stock price surge. Does anybody here HONESTLY think that Nvidia hasn't engaged in similar use of its power and leverage with partners and competitors throughout the years?;

What about the 2018 inadequate disclosure of crypto mining information? Or the questions surrounding Nvidia, Cor Weave, and Magnetar Capital...

You see, all the fairy tail "a company who makes the best product succeeds" meritocracy stuff ends when a company reaches a certain size, and then they start engaging in "gamesmanship" or "gaming the system" and manipulating the system in ways it wasn't intended. Every company engages in it when they reach a certain size and Nvidia is no different. For example, this would be like a company just deciding to make it standard practice to habitually violate a regulation because it's more profitable to violate the law and pay the fine than it is to comply with the law. We saw this with Intel bribing OEMs to not use AMD products and we still see it now in technically legal though, I'd argue unethical, "joint development funds" where Intel basically gives OEMs a boat load of cash to "help develop products" like the r&d on a laptop model, but the end result is that only Intel products are allowed in the top laptop models.

Does anybody here HONESTLY think Nvidia isn't engaging in such things? That Nvidia doesn't or hasn't used "levarage", i.e. coercion to get what it wants from partners and competitors? Nobody is claiming Nvidia is "Sauron"...after all, Sauron was once a "good" Maiar and Jensen Haung has been evil since he left the womb, but anybody claiming "Nvidia did nothing wrong" is completely naive....the fact that they're extracting every last dime out of already stretched consumers while they make money hand over fist from enterprise customers is a perfect example of that....and their seeming refusal to give 16GB of VRAM in an affordable video card (my guess is so the useful life of these videocards will be much shorter....what's going to hang around longer, a 16GB 7900GRE or a 12GB 4070 Super? I feel bad for the 3070 owners with 8GBs...
Posted on Reply
#43
64K
If AMD had continued trying to fully compete with Nvidia and Intel at the same time they would have been bankrupt years ago. I wonder if some remember just how badly that failed business strategy beat them down to the point that they couldn't compete well on either side. That business philosophy utterly wrecked them. Don't look at their Market Cap and financial reports today and imagine that this has been the story all along. They had to make a choice and they chose wisely to go with their CPU division. We've had several generations of AMD CPUs now to see what the company is capable of achieving against Intel but they got here by focusing the lion's share of their R&D budget on the CPU division.

Does anyone really want to see history repeated by AMD going back to trying to fully compete on a two-front war again?
Posted on Reply
#44
Onasi
AnarchoPrimitivYou seem to have a very simplistic view of capitalism
AnarchoPrimitivJensen Haung has been evil since he left the womb
Pot, meet kettle?
And no, I have a perfectly adequate understanding of capitalism. I never said that NV actions were ETHICAL. But they were good business. The fact that AMD was unwilling or unable to mirror or counter them is on AMD.
Everything else in that wall of text is just standard boiler-plate AMD apologia that I am too tired and impatient to respond to. I have done so a thousand times and there is no point in it. Educating people as I have done in this thread previously is worth it, arguing with people trotting out moral/ethical and conspiracy based arguments is not.
64KDoes anyone really want to see history repeated by AMD going back to trying to fully compete on a two-front war again?
No, what I want is them to either do something worthwhile with the Radeon division or sell it to someone who will. I am tired of the wasted potential that we’ve witnessed since the acquisition. AMD is clearly interested in being a CPU company, they do it well nowadays. Seeing what was once a beloved and successful entity in the form of ATI being mismanaged is painful. Seeing terrible marketing and business decisions is painful. Them constantly flip-flopping on what they even want to do with the thing is… You get the idea. I am a “fan”, you could say, though I would prefer “supporter” or “enjoyer”, of AMD. Same for (in theory) Radeon. Just not them together as things stand.
Posted on Reply
#45
Dr. Dro
OnasiAnd yeah, NV developed cool tech (or rather adapted their datacenter tech for gaming use) and incentivizes devs to use it to maintain mind-share. That’s just good business. I have no idea why people trot this argument out as if NV is literally Sauron leading hordes of Orcs to oppress the free people.

@AusWolf
Fair. NV has finally started getting better about Linux support, but AMD driver stack is still superior.
I mean, you've seen the other thread. I think it's beginning to make sense now, I might have inadvertently hit a nerve back there. Yowch. I knew things were bad but not quite this bad. The market rejection of RDNA 3 seems unprecedented.
Posted on Reply
#46
AusWolf
SOAREVERSORThe cost to manufacture any GPU have gone up due to complexity. It's not possible now.
Why has the price gone up only now when GPUs have been increasing in complexity since they've been invented? Something doesn't add up.
Posted on Reply
#47
Onasi
@AusWolf
Because, inflation and market situation aside, the costs of development and manufacturing are rising exponentially, not linearly. Especially for really big dense chips, which GPUs are. It isn’t a complete coincidence that the price increases are coinciding with lithography switching to ever more expensive and complex EUV machines. Of course, if market realities been different, the increases to MSRP might have been lower. But it would have crept up all the same regardless. NVidia isn’t exactly lying about their sky-high RnD costs and TSMC is not lying either about each new manufacturing step up being more and more expensive and time consuming.
Posted on Reply
#48
Assimilator
AnarchoPrimitiv<stupid childish ranting>
And this is why NVIDIA is winning and will continue to win. Because while fanboys like you cry on forums about how NVIDIA is "evil", consumers are buying NVIDIA GPUs, not AMD ones. The market has spoken, it's telling you you're wrong, the fact you refuse to admit that is your problem and nobody cares.
64KDoes anyone really want to see history repeated by AMD going back to trying to fully compete on a two-front war again?
AMD's problem is that they are actually really, really, really bad at competing. Not because of cashflow, but because they just fail abysmally at it whenever there's actual competition. Honestly I think it's because they have the same mindset as their fanboys, that their product is inherently superior and therefore somehow deserving of being purchased over their competitors', with the result that when the market chooses differently, AMD sits in the corner sucking its thumb and wondering "what happen?" instead of doing something about it.

Their CPUs are going the same way. Zen 1 through 3 were massive triumphant curbstomps, but then they released Zen 4 which is very much meh and expected the market to react the same way as it did to the previous generation, and surprise surprise the market didn't. And instead of taking proactive measures to fix this with Zen 5 (like, I dunno, making its IO not a steaming pile of shit) AMD just shrugged and decided to release "Zen 4 but a little bit faster" as Zen 5, and the market has responded with an even bigger meh, and AMD still doesn't understand why.

This isn't rocket science, this is business 101: add new features to drive new sales! But instead we have some clock speed bumps and bolted-on USB4 that should have been integrated into the previous generation Zen 4 CPU, but they contracted with ASmedia who is always late, so instead it's a discrete and thus more expensive chipset that also consumes CPU lanes, thus Zen 5 is actually worse off in terms of connectivity than its predecessor which is literally insane. Meanwhile its competitor Intel, despite going through some serious internal fuckery, is able to deliver a CPU with two integrated USB4 ports like it's nothing, which is how things should be. Like, Intel is on its fucking knees and it's still able to do a better job of IO than AMD who should be riding high, what does that tell you?

I dunno man; I've just about come to the conclusion that AMD actually wants to fail. Nothing else adequately explains its inability to capitalise on its successes and build momentum from them, or fight back from its failures. Regardless of how smart their engineers are, their management just seems perpetually clueless, and there never seems to be any attempt to fix this.
Onasi@AusWolf
Because, inflation and market situation aside, the costs of development and manufacturing are rising exponentially, not linearly. Especially for really big dense chips, which GPUs are. It isn’t a complete coincidence that the price increases are coinciding with lithography switching to ever more expensive and complex EUV machines. Of course, if market realities been different, the increases to MSRP might have been lower. But it would have crept up all the same regardless. NVidia isn’t exactly lying about their sky-high RnD costs and TSMC is not lying either about each new manufacturing step up being more and more expensive and time consuming.
This, so much this. Very few people, even so-called technology enthusiasts, seem to realise just how hard of a brick wall silicon lithography has hit. It used to be that every year or two we'd get a full node halving which means 4x the transistors for the same area, now we're lucky if we drop by a single nanometer. EUV is slower and smaller node sizes have inherently higher defect rates too... basically it's a perfect storm.
Posted on Reply
#49
Onasi
AssimilatorHonestly I think it's because they have the same mindset as their fanboys, that their product is inherently superior and therefore somehow deserving of being purchased over their competitors', with the result that when the market chooses differently, AMD sits in the corner sucking its thumb and wondering "what happen?" instead of doing something about it.
To paraphrase HUB Steve in his talk to GN Steve about AMD GPUs, they really seem to have a strategy of just plopping a product into the market and going “Wouldn’t it be really nice if X would sell at *insert inane price here*? Yeah, it would. Cool. Why isn’t it selling?!”. This just isn’t a sustainable and effective strategy. Just isn’t.
Posted on Reply
#50
AusWolf
Onasi@AusWolf
Because, inflation and market situation aside, the costs of development and manufacturing are rising exponentially, not linearly. Especially for really big dense chips, which GPUs are. It isn’t a complete coincidence that the price increases are coinciding with lithography switching to ever more expensive and complex EUV machines. Of course, if market realities been different, the increases to MSRP might have been lower. But it would have crept up all the same regardless. NVidia isn’t exactly lying about their sky-high RnD costs and TSMC is not lying either about each new manufacturing step up being more and more expensive and time consuming.
Then maybe it's time to change our perspective both as hobby gamers / PC builders, and as a species, and appreciate what we've got while using it to the fullest before moving on to the next best thing at enormous costs. Of course it wouldn't be good for the market, but is the market in its current state good for us?
OnasiTo paraphrase HUB Steve in his talk to GN Steve about AMD GPUs, they really seem to have a strategy of just plopping a product into the market and going “Wouldn’t it be really nice if X would sell at *insert inane price here*? Yeah, it would. Cool. Why isn’t it selling?!”. This just isn’t a sustainable and effective strategy. Just isn’t.
It's sad, though, because the GPUs themselves are really good.

I hope consoles and Linux gaming (however small that market is) will keep Radeon going and urge AMD to get better. If anything, changing market strategy with RDNA 4 is a good thing, imo.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 12th, 2024 21:42 CST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts