Support NeoGAF

[Steverulez]

Exactly my point. If a competition regulator took a look at the acquisition and saw the PS4/NX as a conflict, it would passed off as nothing more than a bulletpoint compared to the broader business objectives of cloud, PC and mobile hardware.

It's utter madness to assume they would do this to give Sony a hard time as their primary objective (especially considering the Minecraft revenue), and the regulator would think the same.

They have to be professional about it as well, which I think they would be.

Sony/Nintendo and whoever else would be well aware of the benefits MS gain from owning AMD and having them in-house to design and make any next Xbox console which should be a huge benefit for them cost wise (and power if it suits) which competitors wouldn't have because they have to pay [more] for the service.

I can't see Microsoft causing problems for the competition over games consoles though that would be an incredibly narrow minded and poor way of doing business, whether Sony or Nintendo (probably less likely for Nintendo if AMD are involved in NX) opt to go elsewhere for their own reasons would be a different scenario but I can't see a situation where they are forced to do it.

 

[wumster3000]

This will not be good for the PC GPU market, as of now we have two similar companies in size that can trade blows and compete with eachother, but if Microsoft (a huge company) get AMD then Nvidia will not even be able to compete or keep up with AMD infinite resources, it'll be a one sided show with Microsoft against a tiny company like Nvidia and we'll end with one company only (Microsoft/AMD) in the desktop GPU market.

But isn't Nvidia dominating AMD right now? It's one sided as we speak. Nvidia has had the majority of market share for some time now.

 

[JayWood2010]

AMD certainly needs help by this point and Microsoft could be a good match. It will benefit AMD in terms of money, while it will help Microsoft lowers the expenses of their hardware.

On the opposite side of things, you have to be careful as you want to stay friends with Nvidia as well, though Nvidia absolutely needs Microsoft so they really dont have much of a choice honestly.

 

[MilkyJoe]

If PS5 chooses to use AMD then Ms will certainly have a heads up with their tech plans.

 

[leeh]

AMD has a lot of costs and low profit margins. It is also a totally different business then Microsoft is used to. They already develop games, so Minecraft fits in. Not so much with developing chips and graphics cards.

The portion of profits from consoles is very low. Those margins are so tiny AMD barely makes a profit from it now.

The Xbox division was entirely that until late in the 360 cycle. The Surface division is still like that and they're pumping a lot of money in to mobile which still looks like they're not gaining any traction.

MS is one of the companies who can afford to get losses in those areas because they recognise the impact of brand in the consumer space. Satya said that him self in their latest financial report PR.

I'm arguing for this, but I dont see it happening. I think it would be a good move though.

 

[jelly]

I think longer term someone should be serious about competing against Intel, Nvidia etc. and have the capital to do it. If you're going to sell hardware you would want a more competitive marketplace for the parts instead of paying top dollar because there is no competition and innovation goes along with that. A fire needs to be lit under the industries arse. When you can get AMD cheap, benefit more from owning them and still be a source for hardware manufactures, I think it makes sense. The investment and time needed to make AMD great is a hard road though. Microsoft have a big enough influence not to get steam rolled by Intel and Nvidia unfairly. What it comes down to, is there enough money to be made from AMD while having constant investment. 3rd party hardware, servers, 1st party hardware, mobile etc.

 

[Ol No Bones]

They have to uphold any contractual agreement between any of those companies. They can't just change everything because of an acquisition. Nothing would change in that area.

Think of how Samsung make Apples SoC but they're a direct competitor in the phone space.

Whereas next-gen, MS would have a huge advantage from the get go by only having to worry about manufacturing cost rather than the price AMD would sell to them for. This means they can put a lot more power in a new console for the same money.

I'm seeing a lot of people saying that MS would not gain from this. Are people forgetting they're one of the leading cloud computing companies while producing hardware?

Yes. Some people can only see this from a gaming perspective. MS has Surface, Hololens, Xbox, Microsoft Band, Windows Phone and Azure. In an employee letter some months ago Satya mentioned them testing GPU virtualization via azure. The plan from build this year is for Windows Phones to be able to run full desktop programs with Continuum eventually. Surface will demand more and more graphics muscle and designing chips in house isnt a terrible idea. Hololens and future iterations of it will require small custom chips.

There is a lot of reasons MS might purchase AMD that have nothing to do with Xbox.

 

[OEM]

If PS5 chooses to use AMD then Ms will certainly have a heads up with their tech plans.

See this is where things get confusing. I don't know if Sony would do a business with AMD (technically MS) if that were the case. I mean why would you tell your spec and plans to your rival company? So not sure why type of things they have set in place to prevent such things.

 

[Steverulez]

If PS5 chooses to use AMD then Ms will certainly have a heads up with their tech plans.

As I said above, they have to be professional about it (MS).

MS owning AMD should offer them benefits far greater than a heads up on the PS5s tech plan, considering how similar the Xbox One and PS4 architecture is I don't think think we should expect such a deviation from that plan in the future.

The reason why we don't have more similarly powered boxes is because MS insisted on esram and Kinect which affected their ability to match what Sony did, obviously a bet that we can now see didn't pay off. If MS had gone for the same idea Sony did, we could well have ended up with two boxes with the exact same amount of power but we didn't.

MS would use AMD to get what they wanted either for a lower price of the box or more power, whichever one suited them rather than needing to peak over at Sony's plans

See this is where things get confusing. I don't know if Sony would do a business with AMD (technically MS) if that were the case. I mean why would you tell your spec and plans to your rival company? So not sure why type of things they have set in place to prevent such things.

Any PS5 team would surely work in a vacuum compared to the rest of the team and not allowed to discuss projects. iirc MS do a similar thing as it now anyway, to varying degrees of success

 

[Woo-Fu]

Unlikely. Even if they wanted to the justice department probably wouldn't let them.

 

[Ol No Bones]

Unlikely. Even if they wanted to the justice department probably wouldn't let them.

What year is this?

 

[Chris1]

There is a lot of reasons MS might purchase AMD that have nothing to do with Xbox.

Xbox will obviously be some part of the reason to buy AMD. It's gonna save them a ton of money on xbox per year, it's definitely going to have its own bulletpoint on the "reasons to buy AMD list". Will it be a big factor? Probably not, but it'll be a factor even if small. Just Azure or Hololens on its own isn't going to make MS buy AMD either (I don't think.. anyways), it'll be a collection of things.


Is there a new rumour that brought this topic back to life or something?

 

[OEM]

As I said above, they have to be professional about it (MS).

MS owning AMD should offer them benefits far greater than a heads up on the PS5s tech plan, considering how similar the Xbox One and PS4 architecture is I don't think think we should expect such a deviation from that plan in the future.

The reason why we don't have more similarly powered boxes is because MS insisted on esram and Kinect which affected their ability to match what Sony did, obviously a bet that we can now see didn't pay off. If MS had gone for the same idea Sony did, we could well have ended up with two boxes with the exact same amount of power but we didn't.

MS would use AMD to get what they wanted either for a lower price of the box or more power, whichever one suited them rather than needing to peak over at Sony's plans

I see what you saying but as a Sony, you would never do a business with your competition just because you think, or they make you think they will be "professional". This is not about a component only, you are literally designing your console architecture with the rival company. I mean there would be NOTHING, stopping MS to blind side Sony to be the dominating console again. This is just the fact, and it applies to every company on this planet not just Microsoft.

 

[leeh]

See this is where things get confusing. I don't know if Sony would do a business with AMD (technically MS) if that were the case. I mean why would you tell your spec and plans to your rival company? So not sure why type of things they have set in place to prevent such things.

They'd be different divisions and held to contractual secrecy. I have this a lot at the place where I work.

It's just like how Samsung know what Apple are doing. Their phone division don't know, it's only the subset of folk who work with Apple to produce the chips. Just because it's Samsung, doesn't mean the whole of the company knows.

 

[Ol No Bones]

Xbox will obviously be some part of the reason to buy AMD. It's gonna save them a ton of money on xbox per year, it's definitely going to have its own bulletpoint on the "reasons to buy AMD list". Will it be a big factor? Probably not, but it'll be a factor even if small. Just Azure or Hololens on its own isn't going to make MS buy AMD either (I don't think.. anyways), it'll be a collection of things.


Is there a new rumour that brought this topic back to life or something?

I agree. I just think people underestimate how this could benefit MS. They have several devices that could be positively affected by an acquisition like this. I agree that Xbox is definitely one of those and a big factor but I want people to see there are other reasons as well. Some people don't see what MS has been doing outside Xbox.

I have no idea why this thread was resurrected..

 

[Ol No Bones]

MS wouldn't buy AMD to potentially know PS5 hardware specs. That's just silly.

 

[etta]

MS wouldn't buy AMD to potentially know PS5 hardware specs. That's just silly.

Of course not. They'd do it for PS6, PS7, PS8...etc.

 

[Ol No Bones]

Of course not. They'd do it for PS6, PS7, PS8...etc.

Lol

 

[JayWood2010]

I have no idea why this thread was resurrected..

Its being reported that Microsoft is "seriously talking" on buying out AMD after AMD announced it was breaking its GPU division away into its own entity called Radeon Technology Group.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/graphics/38725-microsoft-interested-to-acquire-amd

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/47533...md-rumors-tease-takeover-chipmaker/index.html

 

[AP90]

Unlikely. Even if they wanted to the justice department probably wouldn't let them.

I think US justice department would want to keep the x64 license that only AMD and intel have rights to stay with an american company vs it being bought out buy some foreign one.

Either way it would benefit MS as im sure patents and royalties to intel must eat away at bottom line. I think acquiring AMD would be beneficial for all hardware, server side (aka cloud) as you would be able to take AMD's hardware and pump a billion or so into research which should bear fruit within a few years.

And wasnt apple allowed to buyout the only sapphire glass making company in the US maybe world?

 

[Obliterator]

AMD stock price has risen since the newest rumors of MS buying which means Wall Street has some belief this is happening

 

[Ingeniero]

I hope Microsoft does this, would be a great move for them

 

[AP90]

Of course not. They'd do it for PS6, PS7, PS8...etc.

Well by that time MS would have made AMD a serious competitor, resulting in NVIDIA having to compete for real.. and then we will have CELL 2.0 reemerge!!!!!! So Sony would go intel/nvidia.

Spoiler

=P LMAO

 

[etta]

AMD stock price has risen since the newest rumors of MS buying which means Wall Street has some belief this is happening

Wasn't that due to the restructuring?

 

[LukasTaves]

It's weird to think Ms may pay more for minecraft than for AMD XD

Edit: it would certainly be interesting, since ms is moving towards x86 for all devices, even phones.

 

[jelly]

See this is where things get confusing. I don't know if Sony would do a business with AMD (technically MS) if that were the case. I mean why would you tell your spec and plans to your rival company? So not sure why type of things they have set in place to prevent such things.

I don't think there is much that is secret, it's price, performance, power at the time and if it was anything exotic they wouldn't be going with AMD anyway. The technology is known. The reason they went Jaguar was just that. Microsoft and Sony likely had many different plans that went along the same lines, smart people doing their job. They do have separate teams working on competing products in secrecy, clients would demand that an MS would follow, business in the end. Price, performance, power is the only thing that matters.

 

[Obliterator]

Wasn't that due to the restructuring?

It went up 9.2% on Friday due to the newest rumors. Investors think something is up. Whether thats true or not who knows

 

[allan-bh]

They'd be different divisions and held to contractual secrecy. I have this a lot at the place where I work.

It's just like how Samsung know what Apple are doing. Their phone division don't know, it's only the subset of folk who work with Apple to produce the chips. Just because it's Samsung, doesn't mean the whole of the company knows.

I don't believe that even for a second.

 

[Human_me]

It would be very interesting if this does happen.

 

[Azih]

I don't believe that even for a second.

Apple would sue Samsung into oblivion.

 

[Steverulez]

I see what you saying but as a Sony, you would never do a business with your competition just because you think, or they make you think they will be "professional". This is not about a component only, you are literally designing your console architecture with the rival company. I mean there would be NOTHING, stopping MS to blind side Sony to be the dominating console again. This is just the fact, and it applies to every company on this planet not just Microsoft.

The alternative could be going to Intel/Nvidia which given past history could be costly and possible detrimental to the box they're trying to produce or just a ridiculous hassle. Of course this is all speculative but Nvidia don't have a good history with MS or Sony really.

I can completely see the argument for not wanting to do that deal from Sony's side on face value you would expect them not to but it depends on the alternative and also what deals have already been signed.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Those of you suggesting that MS purchasing AMD would lead to MS sabotaging Sony really have no idea how business works. Contracts protect against such things and would lead to major lawsuits that would cripple a company.

 

[allan-bh]

Apple would sue Samsung into oblivion.

Certainly there are confidentiality agreements but I doubt that Samsung mobile team doesn't have a clue of what Apple is doing.

I mean, we know that IBM team behind CELL leaked details for the team working on Xbox 360 CPU. Samsung has divisions but it's a single company.

 

[Sydle]

I stopped following AMD a while ago. Do they even have any chips that are suitable for the products you mentioned? Outside of Lumia and Xbox, everything you mentioned has an Intel chip and I doubt it's for partnership reasons.

Yeah, go take a look at their roadmap. It has plans for CPU for desktop, GPU for gaming, APU/GPU for servers, etc. I have no idea how competent they are in each segment.

Give these a read (they're short):
AMD 2016-2017 Datacenter roadmap: http://anandtech.com/show/9234/amds-20162017-datacenter-roadmap-x86-arm-and-gpgpu
AMD 2016 x86 roadmap: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9231/amds-20162017-x86-roadmap-zen-is-in

They'd likely want to retain a healthy relationship with Intel, so maybe there would be an Apple-like setup where they partner with Intel on some products and handle others in house where they need to specialize the stack integration (e.g., HoloLens).

Ultimately, I think Microsoft's aim is to lead the way in showcasing their platform and productivity offerings (Windows, Azure, Office, etc), sometimes needing to create new device categories like they're doing with Surface, Surface Hub, and HoloLens to make it clear what can be accomplished using their software and services. I think there is a strong emphasis on the enterprise and datacenter, where Microsoft will want to be on the bleeding edge of development in virtual desktop infrastructure, high performance cloud compute, server storage, and, of course, security.

 

[plan9]

I'm also interested in buying AMD. And Microsoft. But I do not have sufficient funds.

 

[Majanew]

Sony could still use AMD for PS5, they'd just being paying MS (who cares?). Or Sony could talk to Nvidia since Nvidia would be sweatin' an AMD backed by the endless pockets of MS. That's why part of me would like to see MS buy AMD. Nvidia needs slapped around.

 

[krang]

So has this rumour resurfaced, or something? I thought it had died with this thread a while ago.

 

[Cheeseman Battitude]

Can Nintendo buy AMD?

 

[Exploratory]

Sony and Nintendo going with Intel and Nvidia chips would jack the prices up so much that they would not be very competitive with Microsoft in the console space. If you remember in earlier console generations they were heated arguments with console manufacturers accusing Nvidia of being too expensive and not willing to negotiate on price. Intel was the same, which is why Microsoft made huge losses on the Xbox. And PS3 had an overpriced and un-competitive GPU.



Who's to say that if Microsoft bought AMD that they wouldn't increase prices for any future console chips to Sony and Nintendo? Remember Sony and Nintendo are in direct competition with Microsoft for the consumer space. And Microsoft aren't exactly saints, they have been known to do things which are anti competitive in order to crush competition.

Lordy. MS isn't run by Xbox fanboys why does this have to be said on every page?

 

[chaosblade]

Can Nintendo buy AMD?

Actually, yes, but it wouldn't make any sense at all for them to do it. Would be a pretty dumb acquisition even if they were able to get the x86 license, since they aren't big enough to do any better than AMD has.


AMDs market cap is under $2 billion. A ton of companies could potentially buy them, but it's a raw deal for all but a few.

 

[dr_rus]

Sony could still use AMD for PS5, they'd just being paying MS (who cares?). Or Sony could talk to Nvidia since Nvidia would be sweatin' an AMD backed by the endless pockets of MS. That's why part of me would like to see MS buy AMD. Nvidia needs slapped around.

Money isn't the only thing that's needed to build a great hardware. Let me remind you that Intel's attempt at building a GPU failed miserably not so long ago. Same can be applied to CPUs as well. Also - console contracts bring little money so I highly doubt that NV will be "sweatin'" for anything PS5 related.

 

[Afro Thunder]

Don't know if it was posted yet but this is relevant to this discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/3b0ytk/discussion_what_is_an_x86_license_and_why_do/

 

[tensuke]

I wouldn't like this at all. It has nothing to do with AMD supplying to Sony/Nintendo, I mean Samsung supplies to Apple and other competitors. It's just that I don't think MS would treat AMD right, although they could probably use the money.

 

[archangelmorph]

Yeah this would be a dumb move...

Because driving a HUGE double-fingered wedge between themselves and Intel is probably not a very good for business...

Intel could, if they wanted to, systematically cripple their entire SW + OS businesses overnight by shipping HW that performs "non-optimally" for Windows and/or Office..

 

[LCGeek]

I wouldn't like this at all. It has nothing to do with AMD supplying to Sony/Nintendo, I mean Samsung supplies to Apple and other competitors. It's just that I don't think MS would treat AMD right, although they could probably use the money.

People bitch about AMD drivers I can't imagine what MS would fill it considering the bloat in their OS. At the very least nvidia might see how it feels when someone gimps them from the other end.

I just don't see how MS could have this situation and not piss off or worry Nvidia/Intel. Even if there were no problems AMD biggest problem right now is drivers, compatibility, and features aren't as consistent or as useful as Nvidia.

Yeah this would be a dumb move...

Because driving a HUGE double-fingered wedge between themselves and Intel is probably not a very good for business...

Intel could, if they wanted to, systematically cripple their entire SW + OS businesses overnight by shipping HW that performs "non-optimally" for Windows and/or Office..

This would never happen if intel wants to keep it power users. They charge us enough and if they start doing that I would gladly welcome MS or another company trying to catch up with them and displace them I'm sick of some of their shady moves in the industry and I'm sure plenty of other consumers are too.

 

[Cynn]

I think the biggest take away would be that MS could leverage significantly more tech into their hardware. A PS5 and an Xbox Next could cost the same to manufacture but with MS paying no royalties and sourcing components at cost, the Xbox could be much more powerful for that same build cost.

They could also use this to help Surface or any other MS hardware to be competitive.

 

[PnCIa]

Why doesnt qualcomm buy them? Would they get the x86 license in the process?

 

[infiniteheteroskdasticity]

The latest rumor was sparked by this poorly written article on a little known site. It is highly speculative and contradictory and ends by mentioning Intel as another possible buyer. I'm not convinced they know anything.

What is true is that AMD is in serious trouble. They're certainly setting the company up for change by spinning off the GPU business into the Radeon brand. They have two valuable parts. One is their x86 license (not their CPU business) and the second is their (now separated) GPU business. I could see some parts of Microsoft being interested in both but upper management at Microsoft seems less and less interested in their hardware businesses. Their presence at Apple's recent iPad pro launch is another indicator of this. Buying a semiconductor business would go against everything the new Microsoft seems to be setting itself up to be.

Apple is a far more likely buyer because the x86 license and GPU business would fit well with their current in house efforts and allow them to eventually walk away from Intel. Intel itself would probably be interested in the GPU business. Samsung and Qualcomm are other more remote possibilities.

 

[Rocky85]

That's exactly how it is now. IIRC AMD's combined R&D budget is like half Nvidia's, let alone a tiny insignificant fraction of Intel's. They aren't similarly sized, Nvidia is bigger and has a lot more money to put behind their products. And AMD's situation isn't getting any better.

One could hope that Intel might step into the discrete GPU market and compete with Nvidia if AMD were to fall out, but I really doubt that would happen.

How much of that r&d budget is directly related to GPUs though. Nvidia is spending quite a bit trying to branch out to mobile and automotive.
Nvidia is definitely in a better position than AMD but I think its always funny when people describe them as this huge behemoth and put them in the same sentence as Intel. AMD is still the same size company if you look at revenue generated.

 

[Dictator93]

Can Nintendo buy AMD?

lol