Today NVIDIA announced their fiscal earnings for the third quarter of their 2017 fiscal year (and yes, that’s not a typo). NVIDIA has cracked the $2 billion mark for quarterly revenue, with earnings of $2.004 billion this quarter. This is up an impressive 54% compared to the same quarter last year. This record revenue follows a previous record for Q2, and NVIDIA is forecasting revenue for next quarter of $2.1 billion, plus or minus two percent. With this rate of growth, they will easily surpass their best yearly earnings ever which was $5.01 billion announced in January 2016. They are on pace for close to $7 billion for the year, which is a dramatic increase at a time when the core PC market is in decline. Gross margin for this quarter was up 2.7% year-over-year to 59.0%, and operating income was up 161% to $639 million. Net income for the quarter was $542 million, up 120% over last year, and earnings per share came in at $0.83, up 89% year-over-year.

NVIDIA Q3 2017 Financial Results (GAAP)
  Q3'2017 Q2'2017 Q3'2016 Q/Q Y/Y
Revenue (in millions USD) $2004 $1428 $1305 +40.3% +53.6%
Gross Margin 59.0% 57.9% 56.3% +1.1% +2.7%
Operating Income (in millions USD) $639 $317 $245 +102% +161%
Net Income $542 $261 $246 +108% +120%
EPS $0.83 $0.41 $0.44 +102% +89%

NVIDIA has done a decent job diversifying itself, but it’s core market is still consumer GPU sales. With the launch of Pascal, NVIDIA has maintained a very healthy performance lead, and that has certainly translated into sales. Gaming related sales for this quarter came in at a staggering $1.244 billion, up 63.5% compared to Q3 2016. NVIDIA gained more revenue in the gaming segment this quarter than all of AMD’s Computing and Graphics segment earned in their last quarter. Clearly there was some pent-up demand for the FinFET based GPUs after being on 28 nm for so long. Professional Visualization had a good quarter as well, with revenues of $207 million. That is a 9% increase year-over-year, although they did have a 3% drop in revenue compared to their previous quarter.

With the rise in GPU compute in the datacenter, NVIDIA has aggressively pursued this market, and it is starting to make some real inroads here as well. For Q3 2017, NVIDIA had revenue of $240 million in their Datacenter group, which is up from $82 million a year ago, or a 193% increase in revenue year-over-year. Datacenter revenue is now the second largest segment for NVIDIA, and only a year ago it was half of the professional GPU revenue.

Automotive continues to be a solid performer for NVIDIA too, and they’ve released quite a few SoCs specifically for this market. NVIDIA announced that it has an agreement to supply Tesla Motors the DRIVE PX 2 platform to power a new AutoPilot system in the Model S, X, and upcoming 3. With a maximum TDP of 250 Watts, DRIVE PX 2 casts off the mobile SoC constraints of the previous design, despite still having NVIDIA’s Denver CPU paired with Cortex-A57. With the continued investment in this sector, NVIDIA has seen strong growth here, and revenue for this quarter was $127 million, which is up from $79 million a year ago, or a gain of 60%.

Finally, OEM and IP had earnings of $186 million for the quarter, which is down slightly from the $193 million they earned a year ago, but with the recent announcement that they will power the Nintendo Switch, perhaps they will see some growth here in the future.

NVIDIA Quarterly Revenue Comparison (GAAP)
In millions Q3'2017 Q2'2017 Q3'2016 Q/Q Y/Y
Gaming $1244 $781 $761 +59.3% +63.5%
Professional Visualization $207 $214 $190 -3.3% +8.9%
Datacenter $240 $151 $82 +58.9% +192.7%
Automotive $127 $119 $79 +6.7% +60.8%
OEM & IP $186 $163 $193 +14.1% -3.6%

This entire year has been very good for NVIDIA, but this quarter in particular has seen some very strong growth. The best news for NVIDIA and their investors is that they are not just seeing growth in their diversified markets, although they are doing very well there, but the growth in their core market was incredibly strong as well.

Source: NVIDIA Investor Relations

POST A COMMENT

44 Comments

View All Comments

  • medi03 - Wednesday, November 16, 2016 - link

    Huh?
    AMD revenue in Q3 was 1.3 Billion.

    http://venturebeat.com/2016/10/20/amd-reports-1-3-...
    Reply
  • nagi603 - Thursday, November 10, 2016 - link

    Well, considering AMD basically gave up high-end GPU market for the time being, (meaning nvidia can keep prices high up without any sort of competition) and nvidia still has good options in all other segments, this is not that much of a shocker. Reply
  • HollyDOL - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    Damn, why didn't I buy their stock on February? Reply
  • Samus - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    February...2014? That was when Maxwell hit the market and it was clear AMD was going to be screwed.

    As nVidia scaled Maxwell up, there was no competition for efficiency or performance per mm/2 (which translates directly to higher margins on production)

    Pascal is simply the nail in the coffin that we all saw coming when it was obvious over the course of many years, essentially since the Radeon 7970, AMD has had nothing, and all of their products since, up until the R480, are loosely based on 3 generation old hardware.
    Reply
  • CiccioB - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    Maybe AMD fanboys will stop with the infinite price/performance ratio saga that they have been addressing since AMD came out with a sub par architecture with respect to the competition (aka TeraScale).
    Good price/performance ratio (while competition does not follow that same path) just means that the company is under pricing its solutions <b>because there is not enough request for them!</b>. And that brings low margins, low incomes and no money to invest in next architecture.

    I constantly read "if AMD had the money to.. they could..". The money is made by creating good products that can sell for what they deserve. If AMD can't sell them with good enough margins it just means they are not good enough for the market. It means that AMD will constantly loose money while nvidia will make a bunch of them.

    If it was not clear with Kepler vs GCN and then Maxwell vs GCN 1.2 and then again Pascal vs Polaris, AMD just came out with a shame retarded architecture that cannot compete, despite they are selling it almost for free to show they product have some appeal.

    Please stop with this lament about price and performance, and the future, and the miraculous drivers and the future, and Mantle, and the future, and the DX12 and the future and everything that does not talk about resources/performance ratio (which is an indication of the quality of the architecture).

    AMD simply needs more (a quite lot more) of resources than is needed by nvidia to get to the same performance point. It means that AMD cannot do a real battle on price, as the same performing solution is always going to cost less to nvidia (and being nvidia is not going to under price it).
    So all this talking about how low price are AMD products is useless. It is not driving nvidia better solutions to lower prices is short term and more important it is not giving AMD money to create next killer architecture. It is not and advantage to the market (and then to us) in the long term period. And we had this period for 9 years now.. it is time to change things for real.
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    I somewhat agree with your 1st two paragraphs, but then you start to exaggerate until incredibility. Look at e.g. how gracefully HD7970 has aged compared to GTX680. You can still play at decent settings today with that "shame retarded architecture", whereas the nVidia card is seriously struggeling.

    Don't get me wrong, my last 3 cards have been nVidias due to their superior power efficiency. But that won't make me bash AMD in an undeserved way.
    Reply
  • renz496 - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    those HD7k age better because the major console (PS4 and Xbone) using the same architecture. AMD themselves never deny about the advantage they have because of console. why did you think AMD pushing low level API with Mantle? part of the reason was they want to ease their burden on driver development and since console are using the same architecture as their current gpu game developer should be familiar using low level API with their hardware. in short they want to streamline their architecture with console. but because of that AMD probably did not dare to make radical changes to their architecture. if they change too much they might lose the benefit "same architecture as console". hence their current polaris rely heavily on node shrink to gain their power efficiency. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    That's not the only reason. GCN was rather forward looking, which pays off as the compute workloads /shaders become more complex nowadays. Apart from the fact that AMD simply gave the chip more raw power compared to its nVidia counterpart from "back then". Reply
  • owan - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    Don't underestimate the fact that AMD has stuck with the same chips through multiple generations. The 7970 was several years old and still being sold, which means its been an optimization target for the driver team for a much longer period of time than the 680 was over at Nvidia. AMD had to keep pushing performance as much as it could just to keep those chips relevant in new games, while Nvidia made a significant change with Maxwell and didn't look back at Kepler. Reply
  • renz496 - Friday, November 11, 2016 - link

    AMD always try to be forward looking but it does not mean they always give them the advantage they need in the future. just that this time they both own the contract for PS4 and Xbone they have more influence with game developer and also with MS on what feature to be added on DirectX API. take tessellation for example. even those HD4k series have the hardware for it. some people take it when tessellation will be part of the API those HD4k series will have absolute advantage vs nvidia 200 series. but in the end that advantage did not turn into reality when to use tessellation the hardware still need to be fully compliant with MS Shader Model 5.

    both AMD and nvidia push what they believe what should be added to game but right now AMD have more influence than they did in the past. that's why nvidia no longer ignore console market completely. because when AMD have all their hands on all of them they will put nvidia at disadvantage.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now