Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is _one_ other GPU maker.
Intel, AMD, Apple?
Apple's not super relevant for a mass market OEM type of discussion.
Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
241–250 of 379 posts
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#242Somehow I wish it weren't true because I hate monopolies in any markets. Nvidia has been enjoying their absurd premium on consumer and production GPUs and intentionally removed the NVLink capability in the GeForce 4090 series (3090 had them) to avoid cannibalizing their A100 and H100 business. With NVLink, people could chain multiple GPUs and increase the overall VRAM without much reduction in bandwidth. But without…
NN research and crypto assholes ruined the market for gaming graphics. I'm glad NVlink was taken out.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#243Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
Azure, Oracle, Meta, Tesla, Hot Aisle... all buying up MI300x. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/06/meta-and-microsoft-to-buy-am... https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-scores-two-big-wins-or... https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...
> Azure, Oracle, Meta, Tesla, Hot Aisle... all buying up MI300x. You really should disclose that you’re a founder when you mention your company like that
It is in my profile. Pretty well disclosed imho.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Big tech and AI startups would buy all the 4090's in existence if they had NVLink. You would not be able to find one for gaming without a multiple x markup
So we’re deeply hampering our AI startups, limiting their growth and possibilities by jacking up the prices x10, to reserve some silicium only for gamers which could perfectly be used for AI? Maybe gamers can wait and the next technological leap should have priority?
let the startups do some work on their own for once lol
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
Big tech and AI startups would buy all the 4090's in existence if they had NVLink. You would not be able to find one for gaming without a multiple x markup
So we’re deeply hampering our AI startups, limiting their growth and possibilities by jacking up the prices x10, to reserve some silicium only for gamers which could perfectly be used for AI? Maybe gamers can wait and the next technological leap should have priority?
This is a ridiculous argument.
People need entertainment, too, we're not machines.
If the current ML craze is really that impactful, it will happen regardless. If it can't break through it's because most of it is just a bunch of hot air.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most GPUs are sold as integrated such as SoCs and in consoles nowadays. But those are mostly AMD, and doesn't really have anything to do with what features someone puts on their discrete gaming cards, except insofar as it implies gamers don't need the cards some amateur ML hobbyist might buy. > In a shrinking market, the midrange and low-end products will cease to be profitable. That's assuming the products have hi…
Customers who want midrange or low end GPUs are price sensitive. Therefore, midrange and low end GPUs are a low margin business. Hence, there's little to no reason to provide a very compelling product in those categories. While midrange GPUs are a cut from highend GPUs, they're still significantly more expensive to manufacture than say CPUs, at a transistor to transistor level. Look at an AMD 7950x transistor count,…
> Customers who want midrange or low end GPUs are price sensitive. Therefore, midrange and low end GPUs are a low margin business.
Customers who want petroleum are price sensitive. Therefore, petroleum exporting is a low margin business. This is why the Saudis make the profit margins they do. Wait, something's not right here.
> Look at an AMD 7950x transistor count, and then an RTX 4060 transistor count. The GPU has ~50% more transistors but sell at half the price.
You're comparing the high end CPU to the mid-range GPU. The AMD 8500G has more transistors than the RTX 4060 and costs less.
> In addition, the GPU requires RAM, a board, circuitry, and a heatsink fan.
The 8500G comes with a heatsink and fan. The 8GB of GDDR6 on the 4060 costs $27 but the 4060 costs $120 more. A printed circuit board doesn't cost $93.
> Previously, Nvidia and AMD can make it up through volume. But again, the market has gotten much smaller going from 60 million discrete GPUs per year sold to 30 million. That's half!
That's not because people stopped buying them, it's because they shifted production capacity to servers.
> Based on your logic, AMD should feast on midrange and low end discrete GPU market because Nvidia does not have value products there. But AMD isn't feasting. You know why? Because there's also no profit there for AMD either.
But they do though. You can find lower end AMD GPUs from the last two years for $125 (e.g. RX 6400) whereas the cheapest RTX 3000 or 4000 series is around twice that.
And anyway who is talking about the bottom end? The question is why they don't produce more of e.g. the RTX 3070, which is on the old Samsung 8LPP process, has fewer transistors than the RTX 4060, is faster, and is still selling for a higher price.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be honest this just sounds like a bunch of talking points stuck together, can you write a credible argument based on known case-law/precedent/etc... if you have a legal angle to critique?
Society isn’t shaped just by current laws, but also by where we want things to go. If the current situations is undesirable, changing laws and regulations is the way to change it. (Of course actually enforcing current laws and regulations can also go a long way in many cases…)
Sounds like it's just undesirable to you. (I don't own any Nvidia stock). Their growth to their current position in the market was organic. You don't just break down big companies for no reason other than them being big. If we did, there's a long line of companies ahead of Nvidia to be broken up first.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If they sold comparable products to gamers at a low price the non-gamers would just end up buying them up and even if there was enough supply to satisfy the needs of everyone Nvidia would still be out a fortune. That's the point. They're not trying to do gamers a favor, if it was that they'd just make more cards. What they're trying to do is market segmentation, which customers despise and resent.
I don’t know, in the world you want, gamers don’t have GPUs, and NVIDIA has less money. The only winners are people buying hardware for data centers.
They could leave the connector on the GPUs and then make more of them. Then everybody has more GPUs and everybody wins except Nvidia. Or to put it the other way, in the status quo everybody loses except Nvidia.
Re: Nvidia is now more valuable than Amazon and Google
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure I would bet an ads/spyware company with admittedly deep deep pockets would beat a specialized hyper focused company at its core business, especially as they have deeper pockets now with 30 years of experience in the sub sector. If Nvidia were wandering in the desert like Cisco I could believe it. But Nvidia isn’t, and I don’t believe Google, Amazon, or others will beat Nvidia at their own game. (Given my…
It's interesting that you would name drop Cisco. They exploded in market valuation in 1999/2000, having a near-monopoly on infrastructure that was in high demand due to the Web boom. Nvidia similarly profited from the Crypto/AI boom, but I wonder whether that is bound to end similarly.
All things end, and Nvidia will probably decay at some point. But they’ve had a long and strong run.