News
 

Bookmark and Share

(14) 

Even though sales of personal computers were below expectations in the first quarter this year, shipments of various graphics adapters were up both sequentially and annually, according to estimates by Jon Peddie Research, a market tracking and consulting firm. The analysts believe that system makers and channel resellers acquired too much inventory in Q1, which will negatively impact results of suppliers in Q2.

Over 125 million graphics chips and central processing units with graphics shipped in Q1 2011. Intel was the leader in unit shipments for the quarter, elevated by Intel Core i-series "Clarksdale" and "Arrandale", latest generations of  Atom chips for netbooks as well as the latest Core i-series "Sandy Bridge" microprocessors. Year to year this quarter AMD/ATI had tremendous market share growth, Intel had above average growth, and Nvidia slipped significantly.

Around 83 million PCs shipped worldwide in Q1’11, a drop of 5.4% compared to Q4 2010, (based on an average of reports various market trackers), which should have naturally negatively impacted sales of various graphics adapters (including discrete and integrated solutions for desktops and notebooks). Nevertheless, the Q1 2011 change in total shipments from last quarter increased 10.3%, significantly above the ten-year average of -4% raising concerns about an inventory buildup that will have to run down in Q2, according to JPR.

Graphics processing units (GPUs) and chips with graphics (chipsets, microprocessors) are the leading indicator of the PC market. At least one, and often two GPUs are present in every PC shipped. It can take a form of a discrete chip, integrated in the chipset or embedded in the CPU. The average has grown from 115% in 2001 to almost 145% GPUs per PC.

It is unclear why sales of graphics adapters - both standalone and integrated - were growing rapidly amid dropping sales of PCs.

One of the explanations is that PC makers and the channel players got too many discrete graphics cards to sell them to the end-users demanding better performance. However, recent report by AMD indicated that shipments of GPUs actually dropped quarter-over-quarter.

AMD graphics business unit's revenue for Q1 2011 was $430 million, down 3% compared to the Q4 2010. Operating income of graphics division during the quarter was $19 million, down from $68 million from the fourth quarter of 2010. The sequential decrease was driven primarily by a seasonal decline in royalties received in connection with the sale of game console systems. GPU ASP decreased sequentially and year-over-year, the company indicated.

Another explanation is that PC makers simply did not manage to build-in all of the Intel Core i-series "Sandy Bridge" chips into their systems due to issues with Intel's I/O controller, which delayed introductions  and sales of new systems.

Tags: ATI, Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Radeon, Geforce, Matrox, S3 Graphics, Via Technologies, SiS, Business, JPR

Discussion

Comments currently: 14
Discussion started: 05/04/11 09:23:18 PM
Latest comment: 05/05/11 11:08:42 PM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-6]

1. 
Ati: Seems like lower prices, higher volume. I'm assuming the market share is by units, not value.
0 0 [Posted by: Zoomer  | Date: 05/04/11 09:23:18 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Brazos APU's should also be taken into account. I'm sure they're counted as AMD GPU's.
0 0 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 05/05/11 11:30:28 AM]
Reply

2. 
Strange how Intel doesnt even make GPU's yet they have 50% of the market.
It goes to show how many people are still buying PC's without a dedicated graphics card and just making do with intergated intel.

Intel's intergrated Videocards even with all the improvements over the years are the worst performance parts on the market with low end AMD or Nvidia graphics being 100 to 200% faster. Even intergrated AMD video can be twice as fast.
0 0 [Posted by: vid_ghost  | Date: 05/04/11 10:56:28 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Actually if I read this article correctly, a PC with Sandy Bridge and a dedicated GPU will count as two GPU shipments. Since Intel has most of the CPU market and since most people don't buy more than one dedicated GPU, even if most people do buy a discrete GPU, Intel will have the majority of GPU sales in the market.

Considering the figure of 145% GPU's per PC, about 50% of Sandy Bridge buyers also add a discrete GPU.
2 0 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 05/05/11 03:20:58 AM]
Reply
 
The graphics in sandy bridge perform on par / or better then 60 dollar cards from ATI and Nvidia, yet they continue to make these products to fool dumb consumers.

Why would business customers require more then intel integrated for most purposes? Businesses make up a huge section of PC purchases.
0 0 [Posted by: cashkennedy  | Date: 05/05/11 09:18:47 AM]
Reply
 
Maybe yesteryear's $60 cards are weaker than Sandy Bridge's graphics, but the Radeon 6450, available for $50, beats the HD 3000 soundly.

You're right about the business PC's, though. Most of them don't require discrete graphics. Also notebooks outsell desktops by quite a bit, and I think it's more standard for them to use integrated graphics. Which suggests that most desktop PC's come with a dedicated card.
0 0 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 05/05/11 11:19:27 AM]
Reply
 
Sandy bridge costs over $200 if you want to get the better gpu. The cheaper sb chips have a crippled gpu, as if the HD3000 isnt crippled enough. Anyone spendign over $200 on a cpu should at least spend half of that on a gpu. Which means that anyone buying intel HD3000 (ie 2500k, 2600k) for their desktop is just wasting their money because it is going to end up disabled in the bios. Better to wait for bulldozer or the next thing from intel that has no gpu.
0 0 [Posted by: shadowmaster625  | Date: 05/05/11 02:23:40 PM]
Reply
 
intel makes integrated video cards. always has.

you just are thinking of dedicated cards
0 0 [Posted by: ultimaone  | Date: 05/05/11 11:08:42 PM]
Reply

3. 
'Considering the figure of 145% GPU's per PC, about 50% of Sandy Bridge buyers also add a discrete GPU.'

Nope.

Only 80% is intel's CPU share, and not all intel CPU's are sold with GPUs.

The discrete buyer's ratio must be much smaller.
0 0 [Posted by: visz963  | Date: 05/05/11 05:19:37 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
A lot of factors go into the GPU's per PC. 145% doesn't surprise me at all, considering
1)cheap oem builds often have integrated + choice of a entry level graphics card
2)intel and amd make integrated graphics heavy chipsets (like business chipsets always come with integrated) / and processors with integrated graphics
3) SLI / Crossfire
4) Upgrades / Replacement cards (this is usually the best part to upgrade vs cpu for gaming, as well as video cards fail significantly more often)
0 0 [Posted by: cashkennedy  | Date: 05/05/11 09:24:21 AM]
Reply
 
Actually by what you say it would be higher (and that's why I said 50% and not 45% in the first place). Suppose that 50% of the market has just one GPU because the CPU or chipset doesn't come with a GPU. Then 90% of the other CPU's (i.e., virtually all Sandy Bridge) would have a discrete GPU added to get to the 145% figure. That's just a rough example (so no need to argue details like SLI) but hopefully it explains why what you say suggests a higher ratio and not a lower one.
0 0 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 05/05/11 10:59:23 AM]
Reply

4. 
I bought a SB laptop with a discrete GPU and a discrete GPU upgrade for my desktop. So...did I buy 3 GPUs?
0 0 [Posted by: bbo320  | Date: 05/05/11 01:35:24 PM]
Reply

5. 
More and more people are demanding more and more from their GPU, and integrated graphics just arent up to the task. So more and more computers are adding discrete GPUs. The "145%" number is misleading though because we have no way of knowing just how many intel craptastic GPUs are being disabled. If you are an intel fanboi then keep this in mind before you get your panties in a bunch over just how good sandy bridge GPU is: it costs an arm and a leg for that gpu, and only an idiot would spend that much on an intel gpu. It just makes sense to go with a less powerful and cheaper AMD Phenom/bulldozer because they waste no transistors on what is sure to be an underpowered GPU that is just going to end up being disabled in the BIOS.
0 0 [Posted by: shadowmaster625  | Date: 05/05/11 02:20:14 PM]
Reply

6. 
WHAT>>> ? go with a less powerful and cheaper AMD bulldozer ??? Bulldozer isnt even out yet It comes out on the 7th of June at E3

and you cant say its slower untel we see reviews.. but all leaked bencmarks so far show that the top of the line bulldozer being FASTER then Top of the line Sandybridge
0 1 [Posted by: vid_ghost  | Date: 05/05/11 05:23:38 PM]
Reply

[1-6]

Add your Comment




Related news

Latest News

Thursday, August 28, 2014

12:22 pm | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

9:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

6:41 pm | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture

Monday, August 25, 2014

6:05 pm | Chinese Inspur to Sell Mission-Critical Servers with AMD Software, Power 8 Processors. IBM to Enter Chinese Big Data Market with the Help from Inspur

Sunday, August 24, 2014

6:12 pm | Former X-Bit Labs Editor Aims to Wed Tabletop Games with Mobile Platforms. Game Master Wants to Become a New World of Warcraft