Support NeoGAF

[FyreWulff]

Not really. OG Xbox could source parts from other manufacturers. HDD couldn't scale in price and ended up becoming more expensive. They could have used newer drives.

But that wasn't the big issue... The GPU wasn't scaling in price and nvidia was rolling in large margins.

Yup. MS came to nVidia to lower the price they had to pay for their stuff. nVidia made the bad decision of short assured profit over long term relationship.

It fucked their relationship so hard that nVidia was also sent to the back of the line for DirectX discussions.

And now you have all 3 consoles running AMD-owned GPU tech.

 

[Perkel]

What part of "I think" didn't you understand?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?

I do have proof. Nvidia doesn't have SOC that would fit in console they are creating GPUs remember ? They don't do CPUs (proper ones for PC and consoles). All rest is right from me. If you have SOC you have CPU and GPU on die. You can't be cheaper going separate CPU+GPU because it cost more money. You just can't win with SOC in price if you don't have one. Also SOC does provide other benefits than just price.

If they would not choose SOC design they would again probably choose IBM CPU and probably Nvidia GPU.

 

[legacyzero]

Speaking as someone who owns an Nvidia card, Good for AMD. I don't want Nvidia to have a monopoly in the GPU market. That would be horrendous for consumers.

I just worry about PC ports for next gen :/

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Hm AMD giving business advice. Hands up all those GPU manufacturers that had to be bought out by a cpu company because they were failing badly.

So if Nvidia are salty I am sure they are enjoying being salty on the huge pile of money that PC gamers keep giving Nvidia instead of giving it to AMD.

Yikes. How's your blood pressure?

I just worry about PC ports for next gen :/

Unless AMD purposely gimps performance on non-AMD cards I'm sure it'll be fine.

 

[Can Crusher]

And then Nvidia launched Shield, and everybody laughed at them.

 

[Skeff]

It's not surprising really one of the strengths of console is performance per dollar and AMD are generally more well known for Performance per dollar than nVidia, who are known for best performance.

or at least in my opinion of course

 

[Truespeed]

Nvidia still hasn't even launched a full size commercial SoC design. It's no secret that they haven't invested much at all in the technology. Part of the difficulty of designing a APU like part is that they can't also design a capable CPU. They would have to bring in someone like IBM or ARM

But, they have designed a commercial SoC and they're called the Tegra 3 and Tegra 4. Also, Nvidia is a licensee of ARM. I'm not sure if you know what ARM does, but they don't manufacturer anything. Additionally, the Tegra 4 is probably one of the fastest, if not the fastest, ARM SoC's out there so I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing when it comes to 'commercial' SoC's.

 

[Skeff]

Hm AMD giving business advice. Hands up all those GPU manufacturers that had to be bought out by a cpu company because they were failing badly.

So if Nvidia are salty I am sure they are enjoying being salty on the huge pile of money that PC gamers keep giving Nvidia instead of giving it to AMD.

errrm AMD we're the company buying out ati, so AMD is a hardware manufacturer that did so well it was able to buy an established gpu maker.

two sides to every coin and all that.

 

[CharmingCharlie]

Speaking of salt...

Perhaps you could point out where in my post the "salt" is located ? Was I incorrect that ATI had to be rescued by AMD ? was I incorrect when I said Nvidia are rolling in it thanks to the PC market ?

Yikes. How's your blood pressure?

Blood pressure is fine and my heart rate is about 55 bpm. So unless I go "woohoo you go AMD you tell it like it is cos you rock" then I am immediately having a heart attack. I mean Nvidia criticizes AMD and they are "salty" yet when AMD criticize Nvidia it turns out Nvidia is salty. I mean come on lets have some balance here.

errrm AMD we're the company buying out ati, so AMD is a hardware manufacturer that did so well it was able to buy an established gpu maker.

Many apologies I naturally meant ATI were bought out by AMD.

 

[NinjaFridge]

Perhaps you could point out where in my post the "salt" is located ? Was I incorrect that ATI had to be rescued by AMD ? was I incorrect when I said Nvidia are rolling in it thanks to the PC market ?



Blood pressure is fine and my heart rate is about 55 bpm. So unless I go "woohoo you go AMD you tell it like it is cos you rock" then I am immediately having a heart attack. I mean Nvidia criticizes AMD and they are "salty" yet when AMD criticize Nvidia it turns out Nvidia is salty. I mean come on lets have some balance here.



Many apologies I naturally meant ATI were bought out by AMD.

Pretty much all of it. It isn't what you said, it's how you said it. Reeks of salt.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Nvidia has better drivers on PC, but AMD is outsmarting them everywhere else. Thanks to XB1 and PS4, devs worldwide are going to become AMD gurus out of necessity.

 

[iamshadowlark]

But, they have designed a commercial SoC and they're called the Tegra 3 and Tegra 4. Also, Nvidia is a licensee of ARM. I'm not sure if you know what ARM does, but they don't manufacturer anything. Additionally, the Tegra 4 is probably one of the fastest, if not the fastest, ARM SoC's out there so I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing when it comes to 'commercial' SoC's.

Ok first off mobile chipsets don't count. Nvidia has a lot more leeway in designing a cellphone part versus the requirements of a console like part.

Secondly, I never implied ARM would manufacture a thing. Not sure what you are commenting on? Not even Nvidia would manufacture their "console part". Try to keep up.

 

[polyh3dron]

Came in expecting copious amounts of salt, was not disappointed.

 

[sono]

I think this is reasonable call out by AMD and I hadnt appreciated the role Nvidia may have had in PS3 initially unti reading the comments by some in this thread. Interesting...

 

[Wynnebeck]

Pretty much all of it. It isn't what you said, it's how you said it. Reeks of salt.

+1

 

[XiaNaphryz]

It is a lot more than that. Almost every new game will be created on AMD hardware.

Eh, not entirely. Wouldn't be surprised if a lot of developer workstations will still end up using Quadros for asset creators.

 

[SiRatul]

Get involved in console contracts, or continue making $1000 GPUs that nutjobs buy in droves? I know where I'd put my money.

It doesn't make sense to just stick to only one market just because it's running well. These kind of business decisions can lead even huge companies to their downfall cause eventually it'll be too late to change the direction when the industrie moves into new grounds.
One has to have something like contracts that will gurantee steady profit and look into newer markets. That's why they entered the mobile market. If they didn't care cause their pc business was flourishing they wouldn't be trying so hard to penetrate that market.

And other than that, why would they be fine with letting one of their biggest rivals get such a huge contract if they could have it themselves? They aren't fine with it. They wanted it but didn't get it. That's all there is to it.

 

[UnrealEck]

Hopefully these two console deals will bring AMD back into the PC graphics market which Nvidia have been dominating for a while.

 

[RE_Player]

Hopefully these two console deals will bring AMD back into the PC graphics market which Nvidia have been dominating for a while.

I hope so too. Always been a fan of AMD.

 

[Addnan]

Hopefully these two console deals will bring AMD back into the PC graphics market which Nvidia have been dominating for a while.

Their graphics card are on par with Nvidia apart from the Titan which as a single card is in another league. What they need to do is step up their shitty CPUs because right now Intel has zero motivation to improve theirs. See Haswell.

 

[twobear]

They fucked Sony too, they over promised and under delivered on RSX. Cell had to pick up the slack due to shitty GPU.

It was Sony that overpromised and underdelivered with Cell. The original plan was to have two Cell processors inside the PS3 and no GPU at all. When Sony realised that wasn't going to cut it they ran to nVidia and bought an essentially off-the-shelf mid-range GPU which they quickly rebranded 'Reality Synthesiser' and announced was the most powerful GPU ever conceived. I don't see how that's nVidia fucking Sony, more like Sony shitting the beg and nVidia helping them clean it.

 

[MercuryLS]

Hopefully these two console deals will bring AMD back into the PC graphics market which Nvidia have been dominating for a while.

Same. Never liked nvidia. My next pc will probably have an amd apu.

 

[IN&OUT]

nVidia and AMD are like this.....

 

[Derpstar]

Pretty much all of it. It isn't what you said, it's how you said it. Reeks of salt.

But everything he said is true.
And honestly, I've had nothing but problems with AMD/ATI graphics cards on PC.
There's a reason why nVidia has been doing so much better than AMD/ATI in the PC graphics cards department.
Perhaps AMD is better suited for the console market than the PC market. I don't know.

 

[SolidSnakex]

And then Nvidia launched Shield, and everybody laughed at them.

I cant remember a platform launch that was ever as quiet as the Shield. It just came and went without much noise at all. And i'm still not sure what their goal is with it.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Hopefully these two console deals will bring AMD back into the PC graphics market which Nvidia have been dominating for a while.

Biggest issue is/was inferior or confusing driver support, no? Hopefully that's fixed or will be soon. I'm in the market for my first build's GPU and am waiting until October-ish for AMD's new GPUs to hit (8000 series I think).

AMD's biggest problem remains their CPUs though. Intel has them handily beat there.

Has any console ever used an Intel CPU before?

 

[kitch9]

What part of "I think" didn't you understand?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?


Do you have proof of this or are you just making things up?

No, but I have common sense. What he said was common sense.

Nvidia would have given their left nut to be in all the next generation consoles to screw AMD into the dust

Their incapability to deliver has brought AMD back into the game and overnight it will be they waiting days and weeks for scraps of game code from developers to optimise their drivers for software written primarily on their main competitors hardware instead of the other way round.

 

[NinjaFridge]

But everything he said is true.
And honestly, I've had nothing but problems with AMD/ATI graphics cards on PC.
There's a reason why nVidia has been doing so much better than AMD/ATI in the PC graphics cards department.
Perhaps AMD is better suited for the console market than the PC market. I don't know.

I didn't say he was wrong.

 

[krameriffic]

Their graphics card are on par with Nvidia apart from the Titan which as a single card is in another league. What they need to do is step up their shitty CPUs because right now Intel has zero motivation to improve theirs. See Haswell.

They should work on their fucking drivers also. I will not be purchasing another AMD card until their driver team gets their head out of their collective ass.

 

[Momentary]

AMD essentially guaranteed themselves 200 million in GPU sales

It's a lot of dough but AMD is desperate so they are the only one willing to license their designs which was a brilliant move

Nvidias loss, AMDs gain

They don't see money from units sold. They were contracted to design the hardware. That didn't guarantee themselves sales. Sony and MS don't by the hardware from them' they manufacture it on their own. Where do people make this stuff up from?

BTW nVIDIA is losing a much that their stock is worth 5 times that of AMDs. They should have never pushed to get into the medical, science, automotive, engineering, military, animation, and mobile computing industries. They definitely don't bring in more money than the videogame industry.

 

[FGMPR]

I cant remember a platform launch that was ever as quiet as the Shield. It just came and went without much noise at all. And i'm still not sure what their goal is with it.

That's because it's more of an accessory than a platform.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

No, but I have common sense. What he said was common sense.

Nvidia would have given their left nut to be in all the next generation consoles to screw AMD into the dust

Their incapability to deliver has brought AMD back into the game and overnight it will be they waiting for scraps of game code from developers to optimise their drivers instead of the other way round.

Common sense also says developers will continue to give Nvidia code to optimize drivers for PC releases. That won't change either, it's been going on for over 10 years. Developer and driver support was always Nvidia's strong suit.

It's not an all or nothing proposition.

 

[No_Style]

Has any console ever used an Intel CPU before?

The original Xbox. It wasn't a good time for MS.

 

[Truespeed]

I do have proof. Nvidia doesn't have SOC that would fit in console they are creating GPUs remember ? They don't do CPUs (proper ones for PC and consoles). All rest is right from me. If you have SOC you have CPU and GPU on die. You can't be cheaper going separate CPU+GPU because it cost more money. You just can't win with SOC in price if you don't have one. Also SOC does provide other benefits than just price.

If they would not choose SOC design they would again probably choose IBM CPU and probably Nvidia GPU.

No you don't have 'proof'. All you have is speculation that you can't definitively prove. Unless, of course you'd like to share some leaked Nvidia internal documents with us stating otherwise. Also, the qualification on 'proper' CPU's was quite lame since we both know Nvidia can easily do 'proper' SoC's and if they had an x86 licence they could also do one for that architecture also.

 

[dr_rus]

It is a lot more than that. Almost every new game will be created on AMD hardware. That is real win for AMD. They have PR ace on their hand for common people and they are already using it for promotion.

It doesn't mean anything technically though. And you won't do much with PR if your hardware is loosing in benchmarks.

 

[No_Style]

No you don't have 'proof'. All you have is speculation that you can't definitively prove. Unless, of course you'd like to share some leaked Nvidia internal documents with us stating otherwise. Also, the qualification on 'proper' CPU's was quite lame since we both know Nvidia can easily do 'proper' SoC's and if they had an x86 licence they could also do one for that architecture also.

Are you saying Nvidia can just whip together an x86 processor design that was competitive with AMD's in a couple of years?

Please.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

The original Xbox. It wasn't a good time for MS.

Did both Intel and Nvidia screw MS over on the Xbox? I've definitely read that Nvidia had.

 

[anexanhume]

Nvidia doesn't have the integration. There's no APU solution that they could have offered. The APU approach in the next gen consoles is essential to beginning of life cost and cost reduction schemes.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

It was Sony that overpromised and underdelivered with Cell. The original plan was to have two Cell processors inside the PS3 and no GPU at all. When Sony realised that wasn't going to cut it they ran to nVidia and bought an essentially off-the-shelf mid-range GPU which they quickly rebranded 'Reality Synthesiser' and announced was the most powerful GPU ever conceived. I don't see how that's nVidia fucking Sony, more like Sony shitting the beg and nVidia helping them clean it.

Was this ever proven? Sony announced collaboration with Nvidia back in 2004, in which Nvidia stated they worked with Sony for the last 2 years leading up to that announcement.

If 2 Cells was ever a consideration, it just sounds like a possible idea that was chucked out during the planning design stages. The way people talk it's like Sony got Nvidia at the last minute.

http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/avalon/571505p1.html

"We are thrilled to partner with Sony Computer Entertainment to build what will certainly be one of the most important computer entertainment and digital media platforms of the twenty-first century," added Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO, NVIDIA. "Over the past two years NVIDIA has worked closely with Sony Computer Entertainment on their next-generation computer entertainment system. In parallel, we have been designing our next-generation GeForce GPU. The combination of the revolutionary Cell processor and NVIDIA's graphics technologies will enable the creation of breathtaking imagery that will surprise and captivate consumers."

ATI delivered the newer better architecture to MS, but somehow Nvidia couldn't do it for Sony, and yet right soon after PS3 released, we're talking the release month of the PS3 here, they released the 8800 series with unified shaders tech to the market. Talk about off timing.

 

[madmaxx350]

he didnt exactly deny the low margins

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Well, they are right.

 

[No_Style]

Did both Intel and Nvidia screw MS over on the Xbox? I've definitely read that Nvidia had.

Screw? I don't know about that. Microsoft was new to the game, remember? Perhaps it was also an oversight on their part.

Console manufacturers love going to IBM because IBM will just design something, sell you the design and you can do whatever the hell you want with it. Intel and NVIDIA? Back then? Not so much. Intel will sell you the part but they're not going to help you integrate that part or help you shrink it down as time passes.

This is why Microsoft killed the original Xbox so abruptly because they were losing money due to their inability to cut costs on the Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU.

Microsoft learned from their mistakes and are insistent that they (and others) buy designs that they can fully manipulate to their liking.

 

[Moral Panic]

nVidia made millions in profits last quarter whilst AMD made millions in losses. I think I'll trust nVidia's business advice on worthy investments a little more.

 

[mephixto]

I'm not sure if some people is aware the financial situation of Intel and Nvidia are in comparisson to AMD.

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

AMD is in Xbone & PS4 because they're one of the few(only?) companies in the world able to deliver as a one stop shop for cpu & gpu. Nvidia can do the gpu but not the cpu(an arm chip won't cut it and intel will never ever ever ever give nvidia an x86 license), Intel can do the cpu but their gpus are weak(though they're starting to get there now). Also they were going along these lines with Jaguar & Kaveri anyway.

It's not a case of who can lower margins as nvidia like to put around, it's a case of who is physically able to do what sony/ms wanted.

 

[Can Crusher]

Nvidia has peaked by now. The future is low power designs where ARM and AMD will be crowned kings.

Intel and Nvidia will have the high end market to themselves, but that won't grow.

 

[Templar_Dante]

AMD, nah man. More like a crazy ex gf.
Nvidia and MS, everyone thought they make a great couple, then the fighting, the arguing!... We all know how that turned out, ended in court!
Nvidia leaves, finds comfort in the arms of Sony... but her lying kept getting on their nerves! Saying the 7800 is all that.. wouldnt you leave a girl like that???

Ofcourse, when Sony ditches her too, shes going to try throw dirt on both her exs!

So...Oh... yeah..right..., Sour grapes, AMD, sour grapes. You right.

 

[No_Style]

I'm not sure if some people is aware the financial situation of Intel and Nvidia are in comparisson to AMD.

Dude. It's all about the games, man.

Who cares about the future of mobile space, enterprise services or consumer graphics when you can reap in the residual cash from a couple hundred million consoles?

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

Nvidia has peaked by now. The future is low power designs where ARM and AMD will be crowned kings.

Intel and Nvidia will have the high end market to themselves, but that won't grow.

Intel will do at the least fairly well in the low end market, and will possibly rule it.

The power of having your own fabs that are 1-2 gens ahead of everyone else and huge cash reserves make it pretty much inevitable.

 

[twobear]

Was this ever proven? Sony announced collaboration with Nvidia back in 2004, in which Nvidia stated they worked with Sony for the last 2 years leading up to that announcement.

I don't think it was ever 'proven', but the next part is pretty much a smoking gun as far as I'm concerned:

ATI delivered the newer better architecture to MS, but somehow Nvidia couldn't do it for Sony, and yet right soon after PS3 released, we're talking the release month of the PS3 here, they released the 8800 series with unified shaders tech to the market. Talk about off timing.

I don't see why nVidia gets the flack here (actually, I do, but let's set that aside). It's pretty obvious that nVidia's inclusion was an afterthought. Also, for what it's worth, the RSX was pretty much on a par with Xenos and actually edged it out in a few ways.