Monday, September 9th 2024

AMD Confirms Retreat from the Enthusiast GPU Segment, to Focus on Gaining Market-Share

AMD in an interview with Tom's Hardware, confirmed that its next generation of gaming GPUs based on the RDNA 4 graphics architecture will not target the enthusiast graphics segment. Speaking with Paul Alcorn, AMD's Computing and Graphics Business Group head Jack Huynh, said that with its next generation, AMD will focus on gaining market share in the PC gaming graphics market, which means winning price-performance battles against NVIDIA in key mainstream- and performance segments, similar to what it did with the Radeon RX 5000 series based on the original RDNA graphics architecture, and not get into the enthusiast segment that's low-margin with the kind of die-sizes at play, and move low volumes. AMD currently only holds 12% of the gaming discrete GPU market, something it sorely needs to turn around, given that its graphics IP is contemporary.

On a pointed question on whether AMD will continue to address the enthusiast GPU market, given that allocation for cutting-edge wafers are better spent on data-center GPUs, Huynh replied: "I am looking at scale, and AMD is in a different place right now. We have this debate quite a bit at AMD, right? So the question I ask is, the PlayStation 5, do you think that's hurting us? It's $499. So, I ask, is it fun to go King of the Hill? Again, I'm looking for scale. Because when we get scale, then I bring developers with us. So, my number one priority right now is to build scale, to get us to 40 to 50 percent of the market faster. Do I want to go after 10% of the TAM [Total Addressable Market] or 80%? I'm an 80% kind of guy because I don't want AMD to be the company that only people who can afford Porsches and Ferraris can buy. We want to build gaming systems for millions of users. Yes, we will have great, great, great products. But we tried that strategy [King of the Hill]—it hasn't really grown. ATI has tried this King of the Hill strategy, and the market share has kind of been...the market share. I want to build the best products at the right system price point. So, think about price point-wise; we'll have leadership."
Alcorn pressed: "Price point-wise, you have leadership, but you won't go after the flagship market?," to which Huynh replied: "One day, we may. But my priority right now is to build scale for AMD. Because without scale right now, I can't get the developers. If I tell developers, 'I'm just going for 10 percent of the market share,' they just say, 'Jack, I wish you well, but we have to go with Nvidia.' So, I have to show them a plan that says, 'Hey, we can get to 40% market share with this strategy.' Then they say, 'I'm with you now, Jack. Now I'll optimize on AMD.' Once we get that, then we can go after the top."

The exchange seems to confirm that AMD's decision to withdraw from the enthusiast segment is driven mainly by the low volumes it is seeing for the kind of engineering effort and large wafer costs spent building enthusiast-segment GPUs. The company saw great success with its Radeon RX 6800 series and RX 6900 series mainly because the RDNA 2 generation benefited from the GPU-accelerated cryptomining craze, where high-end GPUs were in demand. This demand disappeared by the time AMD rolled out its next-generation Radeon RX 7900 series powered by RDNA 3, and the lack of performance leadership compared to the GeForce RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 with ray tracing enabled, hurt the company's prospects. News of AMD focusing on the performance segment (and below), aligns with the rumors that with RDNA 4, AMD is making a concerted effort to improving its ray tracing performance, to reduce the performance impact of enabling ray tracing. This, raster performance, and efficiency, could be the company's play in gaining market share.

The grand assumption AMD is making here, is that it has a product problem, and not a distribution problem, and that with a product that strikes the right performance/Watt and performance/price equations, it will gain market-share.

Catch the full interview in the source link below.
Source: Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

129 Comments on AMD Confirms Retreat from the Enthusiast GPU Segment, to Focus on Gaining Market-Share

#76
R0H1T
cerulliberthere's no free pizza. you either buy one or eat bread
Well you can always try eating the ingredients & then sitting in the oven :D
Posted on Reply
#77
Vayra86
ratirtIt is a wishful thinking. Obviously "IF". Will it happen. I have no idea my bet is no.
I dont care what the vast majority buys. That's the majorities problem not mine. I can speak only about myself and what I would want.
There's generally an ocean between 'want' and 'will do'.

What did you pay for your 6900XT? I think that'll underline this just fine :)
Posted on Reply
#78
TumbleGeorge
Hyderzif amd wants the market back to 50%
why not release a powerful gpu for the ps6 along side one for the pc segment and deliver great ray and path tracing
that way they maximize utilization of the wafers
Too early to talk anything for ps/6 hardware. When start sales before Christmas 2028 a lot of water will leak out.
Posted on Reply
#79
Dr. Dro
RuruAnd 8800 Ultra was just a factory-overclocked GTX with a redesigned cooler.
It actually had a newer stepping of the G80 compared to the 8800 GTX and Quadro FX 5600, and it used memory rated for 0.7 ns cycles instead of 1.0 ns. It was a sizable bit better, I can take my FX 5600 to the exact base clocks of the 8800 Ultra (sans the faster memory, although it has double of it) - not a MHz more.
Posted on Reply
#80
z1n0x
This is AMD admission that it can't compete. If AMD doesn't take radical steps to fix their shortcomings in hardware, software and marketing, Radeon is DONE. Competing solely on price/raster performance is no longer enough.
Posted on Reply
#81
R0H1T
Tell that to Aya Neo, Valve, Asus, Lenovo, Acer(?) & of course MS/Sony :rolleyes:
z1n0xRadeon is DONE.
Gaming != the self proclaimed PCMR :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#82
Dr. Dro
z1n0xThis is AMD admission that it can't compete. If AMD doesn't take radical steps to fix their shortcomings in hardware, software and marketing, Radeon is DONE. Competing solely on price/raster performance is no longer enough.
Nah, I don't think they are done. Look, I'll be the first one to say that they're doing badly - because they are. I saw Radeon at its prime, and this ain't it. But this is precisely why this needs to happen. Nothing is gonna change - all they'll do is stop pretending they're going for the performance crown (which they can't have and can't take anyway) and focus on the segments that actually matter - and the ones that most AMD buyers actually buy, ergo, the midrange segments.
Posted on Reply
#83
Redwoodz
Hopefully everyone starts realizing the 4090 is not a design for the enthusiast user either, Nvidia already abandoned them with their $2000 AI machine. As soon as people stop feeding the monster, it's greed will subside.

Just say no.
Posted on Reply
#84
z1n0x
R0H1TTell that to Aya Neo, Valve, Asus, Lenovo, Acer(?) & of course MS/Sony :rolleyes:


Gaming != the self proclaimed PCMR :shadedshu:
Consoles are low margins market that Nvidia is not interested in competing directly, at least for now. On the other hand, MS is pushing ARM hard, Nvidia is licensing graphics tech to Mediatek for ARM+Geforce SoC, Switch 2 is coming. And there's Qualcomm. ARM's efficiency with Nvidia's superior graphics tech and mindshare could bring a lot of trouble for AMD to a market segment that they think dominate. If i was AMD i wouldn't feel overconfident about my dominance of the console market.
Posted on Reply
#85
Darc Requiem
qcmadnessNVIDIA will not stand still.
It will adjust the pricing according to AMD to maintain the 10-15% pricing lead.
Nvidia will only adjust their pricing if they see AMD start to move units. Nvidia does not like changing pricing. They, from a business standpoint, have little reason to. It seems that people just want a competitive Radeon in order to buy their Nvidia cards for cheaper. Even when AMD had the superior product, people bought Nvidia anyway. Nvidia would need to see the buying habits of consumers change to incentivize them to lower prices.
Posted on Reply
#86
wolf
Better Than Native
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedias
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedias
Neo_MorpheusNgreedias
Neo_MorpheusNgreedias
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
Neo_MorpheusNgreedias
Neo_MorpheusNgreedia
This is all the times you said Ngreedia, in just this thread, we get it.. but isn't it a thread about AMD? Can we stay on topic?

The biggest threat to AMD pulling this off is AMD.
Posted on Reply
#87
Dr. Dro
Darc RequiemNvidia will only adjust their pricing if they see AMD start to move units. Nvidia does not like changing pricing. They, from a business standpoint, have little reason to. It seems that people just want a competitive Radeon in order to buy their Nvidia cards for cheaper. Even when AMD had the superior product, people bought Nvidia anyway. Nvidia would need to see the buying habits of consumers change to incentivize them to lower prices.
This is a point I often see floating around, but usually with a refusal to ponder why is it so. Fortunately, it's already been answered with a lot less malice than I could muster to after having to repeat myself for the nth time (and being called a "troll" or "dumb" and that "I lower the quality of every thread I participate on").
Vayra86Another aspect that cannot be overlooked is AMD's lacking consistency. You're buying a GPU, so you're also buying into an ecosystem of patches and feature updates throughout the years. AMD is not the best partner for a long term investment that way, every gen we're left to wonder what their new stack will look like; whether they will even compete in segment X or Y... or whether they'll even release anything other than rebrands. Nvidia is a lot more consistent that way, and this inspires trust. Customers are clearly ready to pay for that assurance as well.
wolfThis is all the times you said Ngreedia, in just this thread, we get it.. but isn't it a thread about AMD? Can we stay on topic?

The biggest threat to AMD pulling this off is AMD.
Never mind that dude, he makes any other AMD diehard on this forum look like they're card-carrying members of the Jensen Huang fanclub :D
Posted on Reply
#88
R0H1T
z1n0xConsoles are low margins market that Nvidia is not interested in competing directly, at least for now. On the other hand, MS is pushing ARM hard, Nvidia is licensing graphics tech to Mediatek for ARM+Geforce SoC, Switch 2 is coming. And there's Qualcomm. ARM's efficiency with Nvidia's superior graphics tech and mindshare could bring a lot of trouble for AMD to a market segment that they think dominate. If i was AMD i wouldn't feel overconfident about my dominance of the console market.
Ok but you said Radeon is done. The PC market isn't even 50% of the overall gaming market out there, that belongs to mobiles, and the second most/biggest share's likely held by consoles ~ probably with an increasing market share at that.

Not really, I don't see them pusing ARM over x86 for instance. They're going all in on "AI" but the uarch doesn't matter, if Sammy sticks to Radeon for a few more years AMD could potentially have a much larger market share in Droidverse as well.
Posted on Reply
#89
john_
Average user:
Please AMD, build something good enough so I can buy cheaper Nvidia hardware.
But not too good, because I want at the same time to be able to ridicule Radeon owners online.
Average Tech channel/site
Let's attack AMD to prove to our viewers/readers that we are not afraid to criticize big multi billion corporations.
Let's be careful with Nvidia because we want to have review samples from day one.
Well, the market gets what it wished for.
:peace:

Intel save us!!!!
:p:roll::p


Yes, I know, low quality post or trolling you will say. No. It's not.
It is just the reality of today's market. Users don't want to even consider a Radeon product, even when it is the best option for their budget and tech press is more aggressive towards AMD. AMD will look at the markets and target not only the one that gives them better margins, but also that market where buyers will acknowledge the advantages of it's products and will choose it over the competition. The market where buyers will buy based on their needs, not based on the sticker on the product. If AMD and more specifically the Radeon brand was receiving some love in the retail market and better AMD models at the same price range where outselling Nvidia models, AMD would have a reason to keep investing in gaming cards. Now they will limit their products in the market and they could be doing so, for as many generations they feel it is needed for consumers to stop drooling in front of an Nvidia logo. Many expect a repeat of the RDNA1 situation where AMD stayed only one generation without a high end model. Well, who can say that if people keep buying Nvidia hardware no matter what, RDNA5 will have an enthusiast model? And why should AMD build a high end model when people will keep finding excuses to buy the Nvidia sticker?
Posted on Reply
#90
Steevo
This is what they used to do, release new architecture on midrange and iron out the kinks then release a optimized higher end device, it's worked well and should allow them to know the performance they will get.
Posted on Reply
#91
DudeBeFishing
Does this mean we'll get 2 slot GPUs instead of these 3+ slot monstrosities?
Posted on Reply
#92
64K
wolfThis is all the times you said Ngreedia, in just this thread, we get it.. but isn't it a thread about AMD? Can we stay on topic?

The biggest threat to AMD pulling this off is AMD.
Some AMD fans are AMD's worst enemy. All of the mind-numbing hate just puts people off from wanting to be associated with the brand. AMD deserves better fans than that imo because they really do accomplish a hell of a lot with little resources.
Posted on Reply
#93
Broken Processor
Honestly I think this is utter nonsense they had a good line up with 7000 series but they priced it wrong and so many 7900 models and over priced with mid range under powered for the name looking at you 7800xt. Flat out they need to compete on price to performance and that also confuses me because didn't they go on record previously stating that with 6000 competing on price didn't work so they where sticking me products with 7000 and pricing similar to Nvidia products.
Maybe they should have a multi generation strategy and just stick to it and stop getting on like Microsoft.
Posted on Reply
#94
neatfeatguy
If AMD can bring in a GPU that gives 4090 performance (or better) at a $500 price point, I wouldn't mind picking one up. I don't care about RT and I haven't turned on DLSS in one single game that I play using my 3080Ti.

I'd be willing to get something from AMD if they can price it well and provide solid performance.
Posted on Reply
#95
Dr. Dro
neatfeatguyIf AMD can bring in a GPU that gives 4090 performance (or better) at a $500 price point, I wouldn't mind picking one up. I don't care about RT and I haven't turned on DLSS in one single game that I play using my 3080Ti.

I'd be willing to get something from AMD if they can price it well and provide solid performance.
RDNA 4's fastest SKU (Navi48) is targeting RTX 4080 performance level. It likely will not happen.
Posted on Reply
#96
Firedrops
My favourite part, after he lied about AMD's discrete GPU market share, is where he tried to gaslight everyone into thinking that AMD's currently in the position equivalent to Porsches and Ferraris. That's why their market share is low.
Posted on Reply
#97
Octavean
This is why we can't have nice things people. Everyone thank AMD,....."Thanks AMD". Once more with feeling!!!
Posted on Reply
#98
Neo_Morpheus
Vayra86Perhaps personal then, but buying two games at full launch price? I'd have to be very heavily hyped to even consider that,
I agree, I personally never buy at launch or preorder, but cannot ignore the fact that when I received those games, that was indeed their prices. So that was their value at the moment.
Vayra86I learned buy at launch is generally not really a benefit to begin with.
Agreed.
Vayra86To be very honest I think there's a healthy load of cognitive dissonance in saying you got 170,- worth of value out of these games.
As mentioned, day one launch price was that and thats when I got them, so fair is fair.
Vayra86Wait a few months and you'll pay 30,- per game.
Sometimes that works, but will use one particular example, the Spider Man games have not come down in price. They do go on sale, but not "low" enough, considering their age.
Vayra86Think about this for a minute and reflect ;) Perhaps its really worth it to you and that's fine. But I strongly doubt this is a rational calculation here.
Please see above.
Vayra86I won't deny there IS value. But I'd value that at perhaps 60
Please see above.
Vayra86RDNA3 competes with Ada... but not quite.
It does, as stated, except perhaps with the 4090, but that was never the target.
Vayra86DLSS is superior and evolves faster
According to some, not entirely the case and sometimes, even their own customers get shafted, just ask the proud owners of the 30xx series.
Vayra86RT works better
That is something that many people have already mentioned and debunked here and other threads. Personally, I have seen a couple and I mean literally a couple of times where I say wow, rt is nice. And then reality hits, not even the 4090 with dlss and frame gen is enough for some of those, so I dont think such prices are worth now.
Vayra86Cards are slightly more power efficient
Funny how power consumption only matters when I can be used against AMD. I speak about the other times when this comes up, like with the current intel CPUs, when magically, power consumption on a desktop doesnt matter. yes, potato - potatoe or how the saying goes.
Vayra86Cuda as you mentioned...
Granted, they worked on that for a while and had the vision, but if you need it and there are alternatives, just not mature enough.
Vayra86So the reality is, Nvidia simply has a better product to sell, and people throughout the years have clearly shown preference for the biggest featureset
I wouldnt say its as a one sided but I get it.
Vayra86more so than a slightly lower price.
Again, that matters when is convenient, for example, how many post in this thread alone are asking for lower prices?
Vayra86And let's not forget AMD's terrible pricing strategy, waiting far too long with undercutting Nvidia hard, and instead trying to get maximum dollar for what is essentially a lesser offering. Customers don't like that.
Yet they were ok in accepting the price increase from the 3080 ($329) to the 4080 ($1100).
Vayra86For that all you need to compare is the development of FSR vs DLSS.
I'm willing to take the a slightly less "performant" tech if it helps a bigger userbase.
Vayra86You can of course not be a fan of the proprietary approach (I'm not, anyway), but the reality is, the overall experience with DLSS is better, so if you're just gaming, what do you pick? Principles, or optimal gaming?
Principles, hence why I like AMD.
z1n0xConsoles are low margins market that Nvidia is not interested in competing directly, at least for now.
They went extra hard on Tegra 2 or whatever is called for the upcoming Switch 2, since AMD also did a big push with Nintendo so they would switch to AMD.
wolfThis is all the times you said Ngreedia, in just this thread, we get it.. but isn't it a thread about AMD? Can we stay on topic?

The biggest threat to AMD pulling this off is AMD.
I love how I live rent free in your world.
Funny how people get triggered just because little ol'me doesnt like Ngreedia. ;)
Posted on Reply
#99
hurakura
The cousins have reached to an agreement. nVidia will give AMD room to breathe in the mid-range while nvidia is milking the high end. nvidia are too busy with ai stuff anyway so can really deal with cheap gpus, will leave that to amd. Amd has the consoles plus they are entered the ai circus as well, so everyone is happy. Except the hardcore gamers. Enjoy 4000$ gpus.
Posted on Reply
#100
venturi
None of this commentary makes any market or financial sense. Wordsmithing "we can't compete" into some lofty ideal about market share. Build a competitive card and deprecate into various price points, but don't make it sound like a business model, just say "we can't compete on performance with nvidia"

Shame, because nVidia could use some REAL competition, but don't make some BS statement for sheeple and expect everybody to nod in approval and accolades.

Nvidia isn't any better. example - DLSS = "run at a lower resolution" so that the hype about ray tracing is overlooked when the best card we got can't push 30fps with path tracing at 4k. Then nvidia kills of multi-gpu because the only way to achieve 4k. 144fps, path tracing is with another card, and multi-gpu DX12 and Vulkan drivers are then also deprecated.

Sometimes its tiring to be manipulated. Just stop

AMD, just say "we can't compete with nvidia at a technology level" but don't BS it with some market share line.


geeez
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Sep 9th, 2024 15:27 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts