Ask About Computers Blog

Many would say today that AMD has surpassed NVIDIA in graphics performance. The question is, however, is it right to compare the performance of two GPUs with a single GPU? For that is what is being compared. AMD puts two GPUs on one card to trump NVIDIA’s single-card. So there are two different ways of looking at this: single card vs. single GPU.

Fighting NVIDIA’s single GPUs with two GPUs can only go on for so long. For one thing, NVIDIA can put two GPUs on one card too. And NVIDIA’s multi-GPU SLI scales alot better than ATI’s Crossfire.

For another, putting two GPUs on a single card and dropping the price to compete with single GPUs hurts your profits. ATI has yet to achieve a net profit: their operating profit is still a loss.

Nevertheless AMD should eventually turn a profit. However, they will never get rich by targeting the mainstream.  The mainstream is by and large a commodity.

Pretending to have technology leadership by putting together two GPUs to compete with one GPU can only be seen as so much posing.

AMD’s sweet-spot strategy is nothing new. It’s the same thing they have done with CPUs. As with CPUs, the sweet-spot strategy as applied to graphics is based on an inability to compete on the high end. In the case of graphics, however, AMD has achieved much greater success. AMD now claims product and technical leadership in graphics. Furthermore it is not only AMD who claims this. The technical press abounds with assertions that AMD has the best performing GPUs. They have even trotted out an industry analyst to make the claim.

AMD’s resurgence in graphics is based on two things. One, rave reviews from the technical press, and, two, barn-burning low prices.

AMD had better enjoy the good times while they last. The technical press is notoriously fickle, and NVIDIA is in great shape to take back that single-card performance crown.

Disclosure: long NVIDIA

Further reading: Q&A with AMD’s Rick Bergman on the graphics sweet spot