261–270 of 379 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have exploitable market advantage? Explain.
Do you work in tech in the United States? Congratulations, you’re one of the wealthiest people on the planet. That’s one hell of a market advantage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is in my profile. Pretty well disclosed imho.
Insufficient disclosure. You must be aware that of the companies you listed, one (yours) sticks out as being unknown. Don't die on this hill, just do the decent thing and add a disclosure. This doesn't show you in a good light.
Earlier 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?
lol
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>and is built on the older process which should no longer be in short supply. I am not sure where that idea came from. It is from Samsung 8nm Fab. It never had the capacity to play with in the first place. Especially when Samsung Foundry is upgrading to chase with leading node.
In general you want to upgrade your oldest fab to the newest node, or build a new one, instead of shutting down a recent one and taking it out of production even though there is still demand for that node. There are still plenty of things being produced in fabs with older technology than that . Global Foundaries is the third largest in the world and they're offering 12nm or worse. People buy it because not everything…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand the sentiment. But the only reason you're mad at Nvidia is because they made something desirable (a GPU that does NN training) but didn't do it in the way you prefer (NVLink, Linux compatibility etc). It's not their fault AMD and others have been asleep at the wheel and handed them the whole market for free. Any company with a monopoly on the hot new thing would try to capitalize on it. When the other GP…
Is that even logistically possible for rivals at this point? You think AMD doesn't want to carve out a chunk of that pie? What Nvidia is doing is hard and the engineers with the skill to design those chips are few far between. I'm sure Nvidia's already hired most of the best in the business. Anyone who wants to unseat Nvidia will need very talented people, who aren't cheap, and that means massive investment capital w…
The thing that is missing is AMD focusing their software engineers that develop the drivers, and making them put work into RoCM to make it usable across all cards, all driver versions, like with NVIDIA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile I'm of the opinion that Google started it's slide downhill during Larry Page's time as CEO. Somewhat ironically, I think Google's brightest days had Eric Schmidt (MBA, "adult in the room") as CEO. This isn't to say MBAs are always a good thing either, and certainly Google isn't a typical example.
Eric Schmidt started his career as a hacker at Bell Labs. He is an MBA in name only.
>Early in his career, Schmidt held a series of technical positions with IT companies including Byzromotti Design, Bell Labs (in research and development),[19] Zilog, and Palo Alto Research Center (PARC).
During his summers at Bell Labs, he and Mike Lesk wrote Lex,[23][7] a program used in compiler construction that generates lexical-analyzers from regular-expression descriptions.
Sun Microsystems In 1983, Schmidt joined Sun Microsystems as its first software manager.[19]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
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. What do you think? I gave you my reasons. Why don't you take a crack at your own question? There has to be a logical business reason right? Customers who want petroleum ar…
Selling 30M GPUs with a huge margin is more profitable than selling 60M GPUs with a modest margin, and they can point to Bitcoin or AI as an excuse.
But also, we're talking about them crippling the cards "for gamers" so there will be cards "for gamers" -- the premise of this has to be that they're supply constrained (artificially or otherwise) because otherwise they would just make more at the evidently profitable price gamers are already paying. It can't be a lack of demand because the purpose of removing the feature is to suppress demand (and shift it to more expensive cards).
> One is a commodity. The other is about as high tech as it gets. Completely different economic rules that govern these products.
So you're saying that if a high tech product only has a limited number of suppliers then they could charge high margins even if customers are price sensitive.
> One has an entire board that needs soldering, assembled by a manufacturing line, tested, with many parts, and a team of dedicated engineers optimizing drivers constantly. The other is a CPU that is machine tested, and shipped with a heatsink fan unattached. Come on now.
GPU manufacturing is automated. The CPU heatsink isn't attached because it mounts to the system board, not because attaching it would meaningfully affect the unit price.
Driver development isn't part of the unit cost, its contribution per unit goes down when you ship more units.
You can buy an entire GPU for the price difference between the 8500G and the RTX 4060.
> That's not true. The discrete GPU market has been shrinking for 14 years straight with some crypto boom years here and there. See the chart I posted previously.
That's only because you're limiting things to discrete GPUs and customers have increasingly been purchasing GPUs in other form factors (consoles, laptops, iGPUs) which have different attachment methods but are based on the same technology.
> According to Steam charts, Nvidia still dominates midrange cards.
Steam is measuring installed base. That changes slowly, especially when prices are high.
> Furthermore, when I said "feast", I meant making profits. AMD does not make much profit from midrange or low end cards.
They make a non-zero amount of profit, which is why they do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…)
So what changes to the law do you propose? None of the little annoyances that Nvidia is occasionally creating amount to anything that could have resulted in their current dominance in AI processing. They made a good product. The competition is responding too slowly. And they got lucky with this crazy (in a good way) AI boom. I don't see how this could possibly be outlawed or why you would even want to. It will resolv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Insufficient disclosure. You must be aware that of the companies you listed, one (yours) sticks out as being unknown. Don't die on this hill, just do the decent thing and add a disclosure. This doesn't show you in a good light.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand the sentiment. But the only reason you're mad at Nvidia is because they made something desirable (a GPU that does NN training) but didn't do it in the way you prefer (NVLink, Linux compatibility etc). It's not their fault AMD and others have been asleep at the wheel and handed them the whole market for free. Any company with a monopoly on the hot new thing would try to capitalize on it. When the other GP…
> But the only reason you're mad at Nvidia is because they made something desirable This is true. It's like blaming the company for being successful. "Stop making products that are so much better than any other product". I'm not sure we want that?