PDA

View Full Version : Market Share


Lezmaka
04-29-03, 12:31 AM
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030428.watii428/BNStory/Technology/

Total market shrank 5% from 56 million to 53 million in first the quarter

Previous market share in ()

Overall Graphics:
Nvidia: 31% (30%)
Intel: 29% (?)
ATI: 19% (18%)

Desktop Discrete:
Nvidia: 64% (65%)
ATI: 28% (26%)

Portable Discrete:
ATI: 60% (56%)
Nvidia: 31% (25%)

Bopple
04-29-03, 12:39 AM
ATi portable seems 60(56).

Richthofen
04-29-03, 03:09 AM
well here is the whole article

"
Nvidia Corp. had the biggest share of the overall graphics accelerator market in the first quarter, beating Intel Corp. and ATI Technologies Inc., according to market research firm Mercury Research Inc.

For the sixth successive quarter, Nvidia claimed the top spot, increasing one percentage point to 31 per cent. Intel maintained its second spot with 29 per cent while ATI grew one percentage point to 19 per cent.

Markham, Ont.-based ATI, which makes chips that handle graphics in desktop personal computers, laptops and video game consoles, is doing "significantly better" in its desktop PC business and Nvidia is performing better in its mobile business, said Dean McCarron, Mercury Research's president.

"Each company is doing better in their weaker segments," Mr. McCarron said.

The overall graphics market, which in the March quarter fell 5 per cent to 53 million units from 56 million in the December period, consists of four segments: desktop standalone, desktop integrated, portable standalone and portable integrated.

In the desktop standalone segment, where Nvidia dominates, the company lost one percentage point to 64 per cent while ATI gained two points to 28 per cent.

Joe Osha, an analyst at Merrill Lynch & Co., said in a report Monday that since ATI has had an advantage with its newer graphics chips, "we were surprised to see that the company has not gained more share from Nvidia."

In the portable standalone segment, where ATI leads, its share grew four points to 60 per cent while Nvidia gained six points to 31 per cent.

About three years ago, ATI found itself being outdone by Nvidia, which was coming out with leading products at a faster rate, and ATI subsequently began losing market share.

However, ATI spent the better part of 2001 turning itself around. It made significant changes to its organization and altered its strategy to cope with a changing market to ensure that it can release products as fast as its rivals.

Both Nvidia and Intel are based in Santa Clara, Calif.
"

Seems to me that the smaller guys lost littlebit like Trident, SIS and so on.
If you look at the numbers it is quite interesting that ATI could not gain substantial market share from nVidia even though they had the better products.
Biggest problem should be supply.
I don't think this will change very soon. It seems that TSMC 0.13 micron process can't deliver enough so both have to share that capacity.

StealthHawk
04-29-03, 04:20 AM
What was the previous quarter like? Did nvidia lose any significant portion of the market share in discrete graphics to ATI?

I find it interesting that the botched gfFX launch didn't cost nvidia any market share. The results of the article appear to be from December to March. The gfFX reviews went out at the end of Jan.

Richthofen
04-29-03, 07:51 AM
previous quater was nearly the same.
Nvidia between 30 and 32, ATI between 17 and 19.

vvolkman
04-29-03, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
What was the previous quarter like? Did nvidia lose any significant portion of the market share in discrete graphics to ATI?

I find it interesting that the botched gfFX launch didn't cost nvidia any market share. The results of the article appear to be from December to March. The gfFX reviews went out at the end of Jan.

Isn't it true that 95% of the gfx card market is the under-$200 pricepoint? Even a huge swing in the $200+ gfx card market hardly affects the overall market share.

StealthHawk
04-30-03, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by vvolkman
Isn't it true that 95% of the gfx card market is the under-$200 pricepoint? Even a huge swing in the $200+ gfx card market hardly affects the overall market share.

I don't know about a 95% share, but the gross majority surely is in the budget and midrange sector. With that said, you see a trickle down effect in the 3d graphics industry. That is, whoever has the performance crown with a high end product will establish themselves as "the brand" to own, and mindless consumers will buy the midrange or lowend products which have the same brand, regardless of whether or not those actual products are better than the competitions.

Quite frankly ATI's lowend solutions have had better value than nvidia's since the release of the r9000. And the r9500 series is one of the best deals ever.

Richthofen
04-30-03, 03:03 AM
yeah the 9500pro is pretty good but not widely available.
That's why they couldn't gain share. Now the DX9 advantage is over.
ATI will stop producing 9500pros because they are to costly.
On the other hand Nvidia has their DX9 lineup ready now.
In the low end Nvidia offers DX9 and ATI DX8.
I think the 5200 and Ultra are the better OEM cards.
FX5600 Ultra and 9600pro there is not much of a difference and both are not widely available which won't change during the next months.
TSMC can't deliver enough. Migh be a capacity problem.