Why is both Sony and Microsoft going with AMD instead of Nvidia? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 19 Old 05-21-2012, 09:14 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that both the PS4 and Xbox Next are going to use AMD for the GPU. Nintendo is using AMD in the Wii U as well... Right? Yet, it seems on the PC side of things that Nvidia has the better bang for the buck.

Why are all the console companies going with AMD ?
Anthony1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 19 Old 05-21-2012, 09:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,733
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 300
It's all about the money! I'm sure they signed some sort of deal for cheap GPU's. The specs for sony and microsoft are not set in stone yet though.

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is online now  
post #3 of 19 Old 05-21-2012, 10:23 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

It's all about the money! I'm sure they signed some sort of deal for cheap GPU's. The specs for sony and microsoft are not set in stone yet though.


Why didn't Nvidia try to give a decent deal? It must really hurt Nvidia to know that all of the big 3 companies are going with the OTHER guy.
Anthony1 is offline  
post #4 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 06:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
G-Bull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 707
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post


Why didn't Nvidia try to give a decent deal? It must really hurt Nvidia to know that all of the big 3 companies are going with the OTHER guy.

Who's to say they didn't try?
G-Bull is offline  
post #5 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 07:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
Threefiddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 21
nvidia will still wipe the floor with pc anyways graphics wise. soon as the 720 and ps4 come out. the tech will at least be two years old.

Threefiddie is offline  
post #6 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 09:23 AM
Senior Member
 
Bigfame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Bernardino, CA
Posts: 265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 25
How are they wiping the floor? I am not a Fanboy of either (I have had both GPU's) & right now I have a Sapphire Radeon 7850 (OC Edition) for $250 and it's an Awesome Card for the Money. I am very happy with it. Plus PC games are not pushing the limits of GPU's as most games are Console Ports with prettier graphics. The last game to really push PC graphics is Crysis & Metro 2033 (but that was because of bad coding).

Those Who Attempt To Destroy Me, Shall Be Obliterated!!

Megatron
Bigfame is offline  
post #7 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 02:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,733
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

Why didn't Nvidia try to give a decent deal? It must really hurt Nvidia to know that all of the big 3 companies are going with the OTHER guy.

I dunno, maybe they did try. but Nvidia also has a lot of other areas to focus on where as AMD is kinda stuck. I'm sure there is a good reason that the 3 companys are going with AMD over Nvidia but we'll probably never know.

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is online now  
post #8 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 03:36 PM
Senior Member
 
lurkor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 18
It will probably make porting between consoles much easier and cheaper if they all use AMD hardware, but who knows in the console world where easy is often confused with lazy.
lurkor is offline  
post #9 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 07:35 PM
Member
 
DerekUGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
To put it simply, ATi was better when they started building the PS3 and 360, plus they were priced well and all 3 companies did well with each other in this generation so it made it easier to just stick with a winner. Especially given that almost all of the problems with both consoles almost never had anything to do with the GPU's they used, and their now semi-longstanding partnership of success made it easier for everyone to sign on for another round.

Am I getting an nVidia for my new PC early next year, most likely. Does it make sense that console makers stuck with the brand that may not be performing as well so they could save more money on their next boxes, of course.

Now we just have to hope they realize that adequate cooling is the difference between lasting 2 years or 10 years.
DerekUGA is offline  
post #10 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 08:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Sony used Nvidia last round. Yeah, Xbox used AMD and so did Nintendo. It's not too suprising to see them stick with those companies if they are given the proper deal, but it just surprises me a little bit because Nvidia seems to really be knocking it out of the park right now in PC gaming. The AMD cards aren't bad by any means, but there are tons of games that just run better on Nvidia. You would think everybody would go with the company that currently is on top of things. Especially Sony, considering they had Nvidia last round.

Hopefully AMD will have some decent GPU's in those systems, but I have a hard time believing the Nvidia part wouldn't have had more bang per buck, unless AMD is just giving everybody an amazing deal and really undercutting Nvidia on the pricing.

How is Nvidia's stock doing if they have no console play? They have a bunch of portable GPU chips they sell right? I'm just a bit surprised that they would be content to let the console business just evaporate.
Anthony1 is offline  
post #11 of 19 Old 05-22-2012, 09:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

How is Nvidia's stock doing if they have no console play? They have a bunch of portable GPU chips they sell right? I'm just a bit surprised that they would be content to let the console business just evaporate.

Nvidia has a good foothold with their Tegra (mobile) and Tesla (high performance computing) solutions in addition to their GeForce (gaming) solutions.

Nobody ever said that Nvidia is "content" with having no representation in the next generation console gaming world. We have no idea how they feel in this regard, and it could simply be that they could not compete with AMD's pricing and supply.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #12 of 19 Old 05-23-2012, 09:58 AM
Member
 
DerekUGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

Sony used Nvidia last round. Yeah, Xbox used AMD and so did Nintendo. It's not too suprising to see them stick with those companies if they are given the proper deal, but it just surprises me a little bit because Nvidia seems to really be knocking it out of the park right now in PC gaming. The AMD cards aren't bad by any means, but there are tons of games that just run better on Nvidia. You would think everybody would go with the company that currently is on top of things. Especially Sony, considering they had Nvidia last round.

Hopefully AMD will have some decent GPU's in those systems, but I have a hard time believing the Nvidia part wouldn't have had more bang per buck, unless AMD is just giving everybody an amazing deal and really undercutting Nvidia on the pricing.

How is Nvidia's stock doing if they have no console play? They have a bunch of portable GPU chips they sell right? I'm just a bit surprised that they would be content to let the console business just evaporate.


I stand corrected but it makes sense that Sony would move over to ATi after their showing with MS. They already have the capability to pump out thousands, even millions, of these things at this point.
DerekUGA is offline  
post #13 of 19 Old 05-23-2012, 10:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mounta1n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

Sony used Nvidia last round. Yeah, Xbox used AMD and so did Nintendo. It's not too suprising to see them stick with those companies if they are given the proper deal, but it just surprises me a little bit because Nvidia seems to really be knocking it out of the park right now in PC gaming. The AMD cards aren't bad by any means, but there are tons of games that just run better on Nvidia. You would think everybody would go with the company that currently is on top of things. Especially Sony, considering they had Nvidia last round.

Hopefully AMD will have some decent GPU's in those systems, but I have a hard time believing the Nvidia part wouldn't have had more bang per buck, unless AMD is just giving everybody an amazing deal and really undercutting Nvidia on the pricing.

How is Nvidia's stock doing if they have no console play? They have a bunch of portable GPU chips they sell right? I'm just a bit surprised that they would be content to let the console business just evaporate.

Current-gen performance doesn't matter, because those aren't the chips they'll be using. It's not like they were deciding between including a 680 vs. a 7970. They'll be speccing chips about two generations back. I believe I read the xbox 720 will be using a 6670, which will be about two generations old by the time these come out. Back in those generations, I believe AMD had a pretty significant performance/watt lead over Nvidia as the original Fermi chips were power-sucking heat monsters. Also, they're not looking to use expensive low-yield chips in these machines that Nvidia can't even keep in stock. So while I agree with you that Nvidia is kicking some serious performance butt in this generation (minus their inventory problems), what matters is the performance/watt and price of the chips a gen or two back.

Enjoying BF4 on the PS4, bugs and all.
Mounta1n is offline  
post #14 of 19 Old 05-23-2012, 10:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 41
I'm guessing AMD took an "Achieve success at any cost" tact because consoles are what are keeping them alive. Their CPU's haven't been contenders in the PC world since the Core2Duo's came out years back, and their ATI line of video cards always seems stuck (in my mind) of being in constant second place. The only time they do well it seems is when Nvidia screws up with a product release (480's, for example).......AMD is probably as others have said in a better position to churn out chips.

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is offline  
post #15 of 19 Old 05-23-2012, 03:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
tomfoolery_79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'd be very curious to know the answer because the consoles will sell millions and millions of units during their lifetime. OF COURSE Nvidia put their hat in the ring, so why they couldn't work out a deal is curious. Sometimes, these companies sacrifice too much to get an important deal. Look at Morgan Stanley (or is it J.P. Morgan) they sacrificed a ton for the Facebook IPO and now they are in hot water. It's a fine line I'm sure between final nail in the coffin and keeping the company afloat.

STEAM: Augcliffe
PSN: Augcliffe
tomfoolery_79 is offline  
post #16 of 19 Old 05-23-2012, 07:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Afroteddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Well there was that thing with nvidia altering their drivers to get higher benchmarks with a loss of picture quality. Ati cards have always been known for their video ability. Perhaps Amd chips just integrate better. I've never heard of anyone buying a motherboard based on nvidia integrated graphics.
Afroteddy is offline  
post #17 of 19 Old 05-24-2012, 04:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
tomfoolery_79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Afroteddy View Post

I've never heard of anyone buying a motherboard based on nvidia integrated graphics.

?!?!

Does this make sense? If you are using integrated graphics it means you don't give a F about graphics quality and if you don't give a F about graphics quality you don't care if it's ATI or NVidia. That being said, if I was buying a laptop, I'd be looking for the best NVidia related graphics chip.

STEAM: Augcliffe
PSN: Augcliffe
tomfoolery_79 is offline  
post #18 of 19 Old 05-24-2012, 06:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
As long as its not "just enough" for some averaged goal for speed, ill be happy. I hope its fast, fast, fast. Fast enough to do 1080p in 2D and 3D and fast enough to allow for new innovations, as that Battlefield dev asked for. Fast enough so tens years down the line were not getting low rez textured ports for the PC.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

tory40 is offline  
post #19 of 19 Old 05-24-2012, 11:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

As long as its not "just enough" for some averaged goal for speed, ill be happy. I hope its fast, fast, fast. Fast enough to do 1080p in 2D and 3D and fast enough to allow for new innovations, as that Battlefield dev asked for. Fast enough so tens years down the line were not getting low rez textured ports for the PC.

I'm just hoping that the new consoles have very good OpenCL compute capabilities among the combination of their CPU and GPU, to allow for advanced physics to be coded into games from the start and not merely as an afterthought as we've seen with games supporting Nvidia's hardware PhysX.

I think we are at the point where the interactive elements of a game generally matter much more than texture quality.
MSmith83 is offline  
Reply HTPC Gaming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off