| ▲ | chii 5 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The absolute value is irrelevant - it's the opportunity cost that determines this. It doesn't matter if the consumer market is 4T, if the AI market is 60T! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | mitthrowaway2 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One strategic reason is to remove oxygen from competitors. Otherwise someone will scoop up the gaming market and put the proceeds into developing technology to compete with NVIDIA in the more lucrative AI space. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | zmgsabst 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
“I wouldn’t pick up $20 if there was $100 on the ground!” Most people would pick up both. These economic proclamations don’t seem to make sense, when applied to different contexts — which suggests what you’re saying might be folk wisdom rather than sound theory (and greatly over simplifying the problem). You’re also discounting ecosystem effects — gaming GPUs driving demand for datacenter and workstation GPUs as hobbyist experimentation turns into industrial usage. We don’t know what would happen if nVidia stopped suppressing the GPU market, because it’s never been tried — nVidia has always viciously undercut their own grassroots. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||