Study: Nvidia losing market share to AMD & Intel in graphics chip business

Nvidia is losing market share to its biggest rivals AMD and Intel in the PC graphics chips business, according to a new study issues this week .Jon Peddie Research reports that Nvidia's current market share of the graphics chip market is 20 percent in the first quarter of 2011 which is a loss of 1.7 percent from the previous quarter. AMD's market share is 24.8 percent, an increase of 13.3 percent from the previous quarter. Intel remains the market share leader with 54.4 percent in the first quarter, an increase of 14.2 percent from the previous quarter. Other graphics chip companies like Matrox, SiS and VIA/S3 were far behind the big three. Together those companies make up just 1.2 percent of the market.

The study said that overall the total amount of PC graphics chips and processors with graphics features was over 125 million in the first quarter of 2011. Total shipments for graphics chips actually increased 10.1 percent in the quarter. However total PC shipments went down 5 percent in the same quarter. Jon Peddie Research speculates that the increase in graphic chips was due to businesses building up their inventories. That could mean that graphic chips could see a downturn in the current second quarter.

At least one GPU is put into every PC currently made, according to the report. The study also said that two GPUs are showing up more often in PCs. The average number of GPUs in PCs has increased from 115 percent in 2001 to 145 percent in current PCs.

Nvidia recently announced that it would be releasing ARM-based CPUs which would put the company in yet another direct competition bracket with AMD and Intel.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AT&T: Our users wanted data caps

Next Story

Intel courting Apple in bid to produce chips?

41 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I have a pair of hd4870's with the latest drivers for win 7x64 and have had no issues what so ever. I used to be a nvidia fan boy, but when I was building this rig about 4 years ago I wanted the best bang for my £ and amd seemed the logical choice. Yeah sure there are issues with crossfire with some games and other's run fine, same with SLI and some games.... its all about what you want at the end of the day.

ATI DRIVERS vs. NVIDIA DRIVERS
Comes with Advertisements VS. Comes without Advertisements
Silently Fails to install driver VS. ??? Never had such an issue.
Slow down Startup VS. Works just fine
Many Drivers with buggy video playback VS. Not some many divers with buggy video playback.
Meh Linux drivers VS. OK Linux Drivers.
Agreement not to support XP for Mobile GPUs VS. Supports Mobile GPUs
...

Ever since I got into custom building computers I have always gone with nVidia. I have not once had problems with them. I've owned a 5500gt, 7600gs, 8800gt, 9500gt, and am currently looking at the 550ti. Although they may be expensive, many distributors have pretty good sales throughout the year. Especially during the holidays. One of my friends has an AMD 5000 Series, and he hates it. It causes so many problems with his dual screen and artifacts too often than should be. Maybe its just luck or maybe its more? As for now I shall continue my brand loyalty to nVidia.

I've used both and switch depending upon value but I personally prefer AMD, as their business tactics have been less questionable. I would have to say that nVidia offers better drivers features, though - especially with individual game profiles.

Nvidia are just too expensive most of the time. I managed to pick up 2x 6950s from AMD for around the price I would have paid for a GTX580

I don't care about whose products I use as long as I'm getting good price-performance.

Olemus said,
Nvidia are just too expensive most of the time. I managed to pick up 2x 6950s from AMD for around the price I would have paid for a GTX580

You could have picked up two GTX 560 Ti's too.

Not being a fanboy, I'm just sick of people saying that Nvidia are too expensive when they're not.

If ATI had a card to target the GTX 580 it would be the same price.

reLapse said,

You could have picked up two GTX 560 Ti's too.

Not being a fanboy, I'm just sick of people saying that Nvidia are too expensive when they're not.

If ATI had a card to target the GTX 580 it would be the same price.

Not sure how things are now but when I bought my 6950s the 560s were £50 more (so £100 for both) and they do bench slightly worse in games. Just sayin'

Olemus said,

Not sure how things are now but when I bought my 6950s the 560s were £50 more (so £100 for both) and they do bench slightly worse in games. Just sayin'

Either pricing difference in your country or brand pricing differences.

reLapse said,

Either pricing difference in your country or brand pricing differences.

Possibly, could just be the e-tailer I use as well but that was my personal experience.

reLapse said,

Either pricing difference in your country or brand pricing differences.

Not on either side, but a price difference is a price difference...

Frazell Thomas said,

Not on either side, but a price difference is a price difference...

Exactly, a few years back I was in the same boat with an 8800 vs ATi's current offering and took the 8800 because it was cheaper for roughly the same performance.

I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?

WAR-DOG said,
I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?

they were crap before 2009, but now no driver issue at all.

WAR-DOG said,
I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?

I have had HD 2600 with 2 displays and had no issues. Now own HD 6670 with 3 displays setup and everything is butter smooth as well.

WAR-DOG said,
I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?

I own a 260 and have used dual screens for years without issue. Maybe you should throw a post in Hardware Hangout to figure out what the deal is?

The only issue I have had with the card is the latest Nvidia drivers have been unstable, but that was fixed with a roll back.

WAR-DOG said,
I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?


I run an ati 6850 with dual screens. Not one problem (windows 7)

WAR-DOG said,
I have a GTX 260 and I'm ****ed at it, because I have dual display and it keeps switching my displays on windows login like crazy. I have tried every driver, it seems the last release is the most stable of them all... I tested an ATI 5870 with no problems at all, but the card was borrowed... next card maybe an ATI card? who knows... crapy drivers make me switch..

Are ATI drivers more crappy?


I run an ati 6850 with dual screens. Not one problem (windows 7)

I haven't owned an ATI product since the 9800XT, Nvidia has just been the better choice since.

I'm currecntly running a Gigabyte Windforce 3 GTX 570.

My nvidia graphics card is amazing! And after the last couple of bad run ins I had with AMD I'm glad I made the switch!

I don't know... I like and have used both cards. I have a 5850 in one PC and a 470 in another. What I will say is the NVidia card runs hot and the fan spins up to the point it is pretty loud. I could take it apart and apply my own cooling but... that's a pain.

I AM looking at an Nvidia for my next build (500 series) with a dual fan configuration... I read good things about it (quieter despite two fans) and generally cooler. We'll see... I am more interested in seeing what these desktop ARM CPUs will be like!

Yeah, the 470/480s were hot and noisy... Sadly it sounds like you got in just before Nvidia sorted their act out a bit in that regard (the 460 and 5xx cards).

I would start buying Nvidia again if they weren't so expensive. I am happy with my Radeon HD 6950. It delivers a lot for the price. I will admit though that the ATi drivers are horrible compared to Nvidia.

xTdub said,
I would start buying Nvidia again if they weren't so expensive. I am happy with my Radeon HD 6950. It delivers a lot for the price. I will admit though that the ATi drivers are horrible compared to Nvidia.

You could have bought a GTX 560 Ti for the same price.

I never had any problem with ATI drivers, Got my first ATi card in summer 2009, and no driver or heating issue yet.

djdanster said,
Partially due to Apple dropping nvidia in favour of AMD?

Apple don't have that kind of impact on the graphics market

I prefer nVidia over AMD, their drivers are still lightyears ahead - especially if you don't use Windows.

daPhoenix said,
I prefer nVidia over AMD, their drivers are still lightyears ahead - especially if you don't use Windows.

I can understand that. I stopped using ATi/AMD because of their drivers actually. (well, that and my last ATi card burning out on me)

daPhoenix said,
I prefer nVidia over AMD, their drivers are still lightyears ahead - especially if you don't use Windows.

Same reason I only use nVidia over ATi/AMD.

How is that people complain about ATI drivers, yet all the articles are about NVIDIA? Oh, that's right, because you pull facts out of your arse and used ATI drivers 5 years ago.

NVIDIA 196.75 graphic drivers crash and burn your precious cards
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2010/...d-burn-your-precious-cards/

Driver Causes GeForce GTX 590 to Burn
http://www.ngohq.com/news/1965...eforce-gtx-590-to-burn.html

Putting perspective on the "30% of Vista crashes caused by nVIDIA"
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hard...used-by-nvidia-reports/1633

Now find an article where AMD drivers caused ATI cards meltdown.

Edited by FoxieFoxie, May 4 2011, 4:50pm :

FoxieFoxie said,
How is that people complain about ATI drivers, yet all the articles are about NVIDIA? Oh, that's right, because you pull facts out of your arse and used ATI drivers 5 years ago.

I don't think other people were talking about the edge cases where drivers cause hardware damage (dead.cell mentioned hardware damage in what I read as an unrelated note). Nvidia have made mistakes in the past, as has any company you'd care to name.

We're talking about what the drivers are like in general use, for everyone. I've had the same experience as others in this thread - Nvidia's drivers have worked all but flawlessly, whilst ATI's have caused problems or been uncooperative.
And that's just on Windows - if we're heading into Linux territory, I have more than enough horror stories with regards to fglrx...

FoxieFoxie said,
How is that people complain about ATI drivers, yet all the articles are about NVIDIA? Oh, that's right, because you pull facts out of your arse and used ATI drivers 5 years ago.

NVIDIA 196.75 graphic drivers crash and burn your precious cards
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2010/...d-burn-your-precious-cards/

Driver Causes GeForce GTX 590 to Burn
http://www.ngohq.com/news/1965...eforce-gtx-590-to-burn.html

Putting perspective on the "30% of Vista crashes caused by nVIDIA"
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hard...used-by-nvidia-reports/1633

Now find an article where AMD drivers caused ATI cards meltdown.

Cards by AMD I've had burn out (without ANY overclocking AT ALL):
72xx something,
9600 PRO,
9800 PRO,
x1600 PRO,
x1650 PRO(Not burnt out but the HDMI port flickers like hell and is unusable),
Some mobile laptop one

NVIDIA cards I've had burn out:
Riva TNT2

Problems I've had with display drivers:
ATI + Linux, what an utter joke. Driver support is so chronic you might as well not use it.
Compiz manages to either crash the system or X11 or screws everything up so it's unusable until you kill compiz and have to restard the PC.
ATI + Windows, they released a dodgy 'old' driver pack for my 9600 PRO that really screwed things up performance wise with server 03, they fixed it after a few months but I had to downgrade to get a usable system.
NVIDIA: None.

n_K said,

Cards by AMD I've had burn out (without ANY overclocking AT ALL):
72xx something,
9600 PRO,
9800 PRO,
x1600 PRO,
x1650 PRO(Not burnt out but the HDMI port flickers like hell and is unusable),
Some mobile laptop one

NVIDIA cards I've had burn out:
Riva TNT2

Problems I've had with display drivers:
ATI + Linux, what an utter joke. Driver support is so chronic you might as well not use it.
Compiz manages to either crash the system or X11 or screws everything up so it's unusable until you kill compiz and have to restard the PC.
ATI + Windows, they released a dodgy 'old' driver pack for my 9600 PRO that really screwed things up performance wise with server 03, they fixed it after a few months but I had to downgrade to get a usable system.
NVIDIA: None.

well you can see his point... those cards are old ATI card... that means... before AMD took over it. it has changed... now its not even called Catalyst, now its called AMD vision engine control center. its a nice interface, it looks nice... and the only issue i have heard lately its about how the gpu fan ran at full speed but what i read was it was preview released not even official ones. but now drivers are better, it doesn't mean you have to use AMD cards (Ati is wrong now lol) and i dont use linux so i cant say anything about their support, but look and see new macs ( i dont use them... since my friends mac gives me more headaches than when she uses it with windows) but now you see amd is used in their computers, it means they have made a better work lately to make it happen. for example, my friends mac has nvidia, it was a $3000 mbp, and it stopped working after almost 2 years, and she spent like $1000 fixiing it, they said one ofthe issued was due to nvidia card that it was mbp like the one she had. so she had really bad experience with it. but maybe others got another or even the same but it works perfectly fine.
But people saying "Ati" drivers sucks... well now they are called AMD and its getting better and better. you havent used a recent card so you cant critize it. and again it doesnt mean you will have the same good experience i have had. even in 3ds max, it works fine, and i see people with nvidia having more problems. so his point is... lately AMD drivers and cards have turn to be really good, i think if amd took ati way before it happened, xbox would have been so much better.
and now with opencl, even sony vegas will take advantage of it in 10.0d version, so hopefully soon you can see more opencl instead of just cuda. so stuff can be more... "no matter what card we can get, we will get faster speeds compared to cpu"

but you know, everyone has taste. some like this, some like that... as long as it works, and it improves, there shouldn't be a problem. like i said, i have had nice experience, even with cheap amd cards.

Esvandiary said,

I don't think other people were talking about the edge cases where drivers cause hardware damage (dead.cell mentioned hardware damage in what I read as an unrelated note). Nvidia have made mistakes in the past, as has any company you'd care to name.

We're talking about what the drivers are like in general use, for everyone. I've had the same experience as others in this thread - Nvidia's drivers have worked all but flawlessly, whilst ATI's have caused problems or been uncooperative.
And that's just on Windows - if we're heading into Linux territory, I have more than enough horror stories with regards to fglrx...

Exactly. I too have become Nvidia only after owning too many ATI cards. The problem was never the cards themselves, it was always the drivers. Unfortunately from what I have seen from friends, they still dont have the drivers nailed down. If they could make some decent drivers I would be back to ATI (if they were still cheaper for the same performance as nvidia).