Graphics Cards Shipments Way Down in Q4 2008
Like the rest of the economy, shipments of computer graphics chips were way down for the fourth calendar quarter of 2008.
According to numbers from John Peddie Research, total shipments of GPUs for Q4 2008 was 72.35 million -- down dramatically compared to the same quarter last year’s 100.5 million GPUs shipped. In the previous quarter, Q3 2008, 111.26 million units shipped represent a 34 percent drop quarter to quarter.
"The fourth quarter is usually a positive quarter for the computer industry. There has obviously been some inventory problems in the quarter as sales failed to live up to the optimistic expectations of the third quarter, 2008," said Dr. Jon Peddie, president of JPR in Tiburon, Calif.

In JPR’s Q3 to Q4 numbers spanning back to 2001 show overall GPU market growth each consecutive period until 2008. This is the first time Q4 shipments have decreased compared to Q3 since the year 2000. Year-over-year growth fell 28 percent drop from 2007.
While there was an undeniable dip in Q4 2008, the drop was made all the more dramatic as Q3 2008 saw surprisingly strong numbers, which were described as, “unusually high, even for the traditionally high third quarter.” JPR says that vendors in related industries saw the same scenario playing out -- a robust third quarter and a much slower fourth quarter.
“Vendors were bracing for a slower than usual quarter due to economic factors, but performance this quarter was surprisingly low. Put simply, the market stalled in the fourth quarter,” added Peddie. “Due to the worldwide financial market meltdown, the U.S. housing market meltdown, layoffs, and media reports, the consumer has hunkered down to wait out the storm.”

Both AMD and Nvidia saw slight increases in market share from Q3 to Q4, though Intel still has the lion’s share at still just under half of all GPUs shipped.
Although notebook shipments have now surpassed those of desktop computers, there are still a greater number of desktop GPUs shipped. In the fourth quarter of 2008, 37.45 million units shipped for the desktop, as compared to the 34.89 million units shipped for the notebook. This could be explained by the combination of both discrete graphics cards installed in desktops that already feature an IGP, and also by the hardcore who run SLI and Crossfire configurations.
Peddie doesn’t expect the slump to end just yet, saying, "We're forecasting a strong Q3 and Q4 for 2009 and bracing for what will probably be the worst Q1 and Q2 decline we've seen since the Internet bubble pop of 2000."
This will keep sales up, though may hurt profits but will do a lot for brand recognition and loyalty which can weather the recession.
Everything is down, telling me that the video card industry is down isn't all that descriptive.
Add to that a global recession.. and this industry will be lucky if it treads water for a couple of years. Maybe the industry will find it's footing again when Windows 7 arrives & 2gb graphics cards are common & cheap (about $100-150).
Intel and AMD already know sales of procesors are falling. Though, they still ship them and let wholesalers and retailers handle the losses.. but with $400+ graphics cards and $600+ processors, it's harder to take a loss, so you will see pushback by wholesalers & retailers if demand is not there. The high end of the market will see major reduction in sales.
Not many people are willing to shell out $250+ for a GPU when they can get an entire gaming console for the same price. Just not cost efficient at this time.
I however hardly ever play anything that comes with my video cards or sound cards. I remember they always use to bundle up to 4 games in those box's but never played one. I would preffer if they simply dropped the price instead of putting games in. It wont stop me from buying a new computer every 6 months to a year but it would be nice if it was a tad cheaper.
I would preffer the video card. It would go in my system i already have and let me play my current games at higher details (the one i have that makes me play in lower then max) and any future games in the same detail. If i got a crappy console i would need to buy all new games and thats not cost efficient at this time. Not to mention i dont want to take the quality hit.
Regarding SLI, when have two of the old ever been better than one of the new? Why don't mobos have like 8 sockets for CPUs?
^ +1 That, and a lot of people are just broke.
And for every person that would prefer the video card like yourself there are dozens of people that would prefer to end the upgrade cycle and switch to a console.
And when you get a "crappy" console (as if they were actually crappy in ANY way) you don't need to take your old PC and all the games and throw them in the trash. Those games will still play on the current system you know...
Notice the sales of consoles INCREASED in quarter 4 compared to the 34% DECREASE in GPU sales.
ATI, Nvidia, and Intel are just too good at their jobs. We are in performance heaven right now. I for one appreciate it greatly.
rofl i would never buy a console.. when for the same price i can get a graphics card which is 5times as powerful as the console and allows me backward compatibility.
While the games cost USD10 cheaper.
I'd say getting a ps3 or a Xbox is a bad deal.
they are by no means worth it for me since all the game i would even buy on a console are available on PC and at much better quality so yes i wouldnt buy a crappy console there is no advantage to being stuck in late 96 early 97 graphics ability. Sorry but good enough isnt good enough for me. and really i know this isnt the way it is but any gamer i know wont even touch a console unless they just seriously dont care about anything about the game other then the story. Maybe i just know people who care about the whole package when it comes to games. Graphics sound ect. i could start up my about4 year old comp and have what a console is going to give me and more.
So yeah if i wanted graphicly stripped down games i would go buy a xbox and ps3 paperweight.
Now if your just someone who just wants to game here and there and its not important sure whatever xbox whatever.
Besides my point with buying a console not being cost effective for me. What is a $300 or more console going to do with out the $60 games to go with it. Me being able to keep my PC games is irrelavent unless im going to be able to play them on a console. Unless you ment to buy a console to simply look at which is about all the use it would get in my house. So $1000 later ill have a console and a list of games to play now but with that $1000 i could build a PC that would do the same thing that would last for a few years (the life of a console about) which would be able to play anygame at the same low qality of a console for those years so i still fail to see your point at all. My current PC is now about a year old and it still is 10x better or more then a console i DONT NEED TO UPGRADE. i want to.
Well I just bought a video card. I'll tell you what though, I haven't bought a video card since the ti4600 from nvidia (well besides a couple free after rebate 5200's at fry's) but that is because they were WAY overpriced. I mean come on, who wants to spend $600 for the cutting edge technology when you know it's going to be outdated in 6 months by a longshot? That was rediculous and I didn't like spending ~$300 on the ti4600. I had a ti4200 after that but it doesn't really count because I hawked it on ebay and got the money back while my ti4600 was being RMA'd for the second time. Thank god for lifetime warranty
I just bought a new video card for about $130 after rebate and what the heck, it is faster than those $600 video cards were. Now we have cards upwards of $400. Who needs it, the card I got is almost as fast. I'm never spending over $200 on a graphics card again. If they pull that stunt again they just will lose a customer for another 5 years.