The “GPU market” is not an ideal market (E.g. with total fungibility of goods, low non-elastic demand, etc) - Intel has most of the share of GPUs sold because it’s impossible for NVIDIA - or anyone else - to compete with Intel in the spaces where Intel supplies without competition: CPU-integrated GPUs.

On a related note: with PCs now definitely heading towards ARM, this is a sensible move by NVIDIA: they could now sell GeForce-integrated ARM chips for future Windows and Linux boxes - and then they would be the ones with the dominant marketshare.

If only a point of balance. Intel integrated GPU is safe choice on Linux. If it was not there would be space for competitors - entry level GPUs, AMD iGPU.

The anti-competitiveness isn't the market isn't all GPUs, it's gaming hardware. The sole providers GPU providers for that space is just AMD and Nvidia.

Nvidia's GPP would require manufactures such as ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, HP, Dell, etc. to have their gaming brands only use Geforce GPUs. So all the well known gaming brands such as Alienware, Vodoo, ROG, Auros and Omen would only be allowed to have Geforce. nVidia already has aggressive marketing plastering their brand across every esports competition, which is fair game, but the GPP would be a contractual obligation to not use AMD products.

Which is a perfectly reasonable and legal thing to do, even if you don't personally like it.

Nike is the exclusive clothing brand of every NBA team. American Airlines is the exclusive airline of the Dallas Cowboys. UFC fighters can only wear Reebok apparel the entire week leading up to a fight.

Heck, I worked for a company that signed an exclusive deal to only use a single server vendor.

> Heck, I worked for a company that signed an exclusive deal to only use a single server vendor.

How did that work out? Did your company secure a good rate - and/or did the vendor become complacent once they realised they didn’t have to compete anymore? Did the contract require minimum levels of improvement in server reliability and performance with each future product generation?

He's not saying it's a good or bad idea, he's pointing out it isn't an illegal restraint in trade.

It's a tough spot to be in. AMD and Intel split the largest chunk of the cake because their products are cheap, so they make money in volume.

The only reason nvidia has 20% of the GPU market at all is because their products are better, but without volume, there is very little separating you from losing the market.

If NVIDIA slips over AMD and Intel perf wise during one generation, the competition will have cheaper and better products, so it's pretty much game over.

>If NVIDIA slips over AMD and Intel perf wise during one generation

It has happened many times.

In both graphics and compute ?

Its ok for nvidia to release an architecture that does compute very well, but barely improves graphics, and vice-versa.

But I don't recall any compute generation where there was a better product from the competition.

>While Nvidia has a vastly superior product to AMD

Which product? It can't possibly be their GPUs you mean because that would be hilariously wrong. That is like saying a Lamborghini is a better car than a VW because it has a higher top speed.

To me -and to many many buyers- AMD is the superior product. To most Intel has the best product by far (business laptop, Chromebook, etc.)

I'm curious what ways you think AMD GPUs are better? I can think of dozens of ways NVIDIA GPUs are better, struggling to think of any for AMD.

AMD has the best iGPUs available, which (unlike Intel's) are actually fast enough to play a lot of games. They're also significantly more power efficient as a result of 7nm. For any use where this is fast enough -- and this is a huge percentage of the PC market -- nVidia has no answer to this.

AMD is the only option for a performant GPU with reasonable open source drivers. Intel has the drivers but they don't currently offer discrete GPUs at all. nVidia doesn't have the drivers.

AMD makes it a lot easier to do GPU virtualization.

AMD GPUs are used in basically all modern game consoles, so games that run on both are often better optimized for them.

They also have the best price/performance in the ~$300 range, which is the sweet spot for discrete GPUs.

No. AMD's iGPU still not powerful to playing games with good quality, mainly due to memory bandwidth.

Performance per dollar, and usually more energy efficient. NVIDIA coasts on their proprietary extensions imo.