Nvidia’s original Xbox win was a sizable windfall for the company in 2002-2003 and the GPU designs of the Xbox 360 and PS3 (built by AMD and Nvidia respectively) were topics of intense discussion when those consoles were new and exciting.
Given these upsides, it might seem odd that Nvidia apparently walked away from the negotiating table with Sony on the PS4.
20°
30°
40°
30°
Ad 
40°
Sure they may make money in the long run but imagine the advertising they can get off say 50million consoles sold each gen.
The problem with this is that most of the parts in these cant be bought by consumers. Example, the AMD that SOny and Microsoft are using is custom built for the console. There is no way Sony and Microsoft will allow AMD to sell this "Custom" part to consumers.
1. Making console chips hardly provides any profit.
2. Consoles inevitably eat into PC sales share. It would take many more console sales to equal the profit from a single PC graphics card sold. Hence Nvidia or AMD for that matter would always want more PC graphics cards sold.
3. Consoles tend to stagnate the industry. Since games are designed with consoles in mind, it means they are designed for old hardware. Hence even PC gamers can play games with relatively old hardware, as can be seen with this gen even a 6 year old 8800gtx can still play games. This never used to happen before. However thanks to consoles stagnating the industry it is causing Nvidia and AMD lost sales as the industry isnt progressing. Nvidia sees this, yet AMD doesnt.
4. Console sales arent too much to begin with. Even today there about about 70million PS3s sold after 6 whole years. That means 10 million chips per year. That isnt a monsterous amount of busuiness for a company like AMD or Nvidia.
Bottom line Nvidia has finally gotten it that supporting consoles just means compromising PC GPU sales as consoles inevitably slow down game graphics power requirement, thus causing a slow down in the PC industry. The slow down doesnt just effect PC GPUs sold, it also effects CPUs, Motherboards, RAM etc As things dont need to be upgraded as often.
AMD is just being dumb by supporting consoles for a small benefit. They will pay the price in a PC market slow down where they will see less and less of their consumer upgrading and like i said in the beginning it takes far more consoles chip sales to cover up profit lost on PC hardware sold.
Hence in the long run its not beneficial for any of these companies to support consoles.
Take a game like the logo quiz games on smartphones and show the Nvidia logo to the average person to see if they get it right. Imagine if the AMD or Nvidia brand was printed on the console somewhere and consumers go into a store to purchase a new computer. They see the logo and can associate it with their PS or Xbox in or a good (or bad) way.
Sometimes that's all it takes is association. I'm sure Nvdia or AMD is really not noticed on a mainstream level and something like this would put their name out there.
Well if you read the box that the PS3 comes in, it shows you and tells you what's in the system...
Well at least the box that my "phat" ps3 came shows/tells me
1. Their chips are smaller in terms of die size, and also produce less heat and require less energy to run. This means the heatsink, and the PSU that Sony and MS have to make can be smaller, making the console itself smaller, meaning it is cheaper to make as there are less components, plastics etc.
2. AMD have the ability to offer CPU and GPU on the same chip because they own two businesses that do this, at a much cheaper and more efficient cost that nVidia.
Simple fact of the matter is, nVidia cards, whilst very powerful, are not very efficient and would require a lot of power, and generate more heat. This would increase console failures, which is the another reason that MS and Sony are not going with them.
*remembers Pachter saying "MS will bash Sony"
*remembers that MS has done that since MS-DOS
Methinks that the NextBox will be using an Nvidia graphics chip. I called it right here.
And you bet your butt that when MS reveals their next console hardware, 75% of their bragging will be about some newfangled, awesome, incredibly powerful, exclusive-to-NextBox Nvidia chip that is ONLY on NextBox (when in reality it's a 2-year-old Nvidia chip with a bit more RAM).
Maybe I'm wrong, but since Microsoft is likely going to try their hand (again) at merging mid-range PC gaming with their proprietary console market (attempted it with Games for Windows Live), partnering with the biggest PC card manufacturer may play a role in that.
If we're talking about the processing chip you need to be comparing AMD to Intel and not graphics only.
AMD chips compared to Intel do not run cooler nor are they faster. They are in fact much slower. AMD I'm not sure if you're aware makes both graphics and CPU processors. Nvidia only has out at this point in time their Tesla line which is a mobile chip.
Intel Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge processors already have the ability to process graphics and are much much quicker than AMD offerings.
Ur comment was a interesting read.
However one point I disagree with is that (if im perceiving ur point correctly), is that u seem to imply that AMD doesnt see that supporting consoles equals lower sales on the pc components side.
I dont think that is true.
AMD is going into consoles so they can expand and sell more. They are doing this becuz the pc market is already stagnating.
Most ppl across the globe already have a pc. Its hard to sell ppl new pc w new hardware from Amd/nvidia cuz the general pc users dont care. The necessity to upgrade the gpu has declined amongst consumers.
Consoles are not the main variable To blame. Its actually smartphones/tablets/netbooks that are eating into that section of the market. Not consoles.
Microsoft is struggling becuz consumers are not buying windows 8. It is reported that pc sales have a drastic decline on a global scale. But its not becuz consoles are stagnating the pc market. Its becuz pc market is already over-saturated.
http://i.imgur.com/0nIkCAb....
I personally went with an Intel/ Nvidia CPU/GPU combo in my PC, but AMD makes some very nice processors and cards. You don't have to hate any of these companies' competitors to like the other one.
Anyway, what gave AMD a big advantage as a player in both the high end CPU and GPU markets in getting all these console contracts is being able to put a solid CPU and CPU together on one die. It makes a lot of sense for all parties involved. They want to keep the price affordable and heat produced as low as possible.
It might not be as efficient as Intel chips, but it is cheaper because of it. And it might not be as powerful as an nVidia card, but it produces less heat and sucks less power because of this.
Go somewhere else with your blasphemy!!!
People here at N4G hate hearing logic, truth, and common sense.
yet they came up with that Project shield...oh the bitter irony!
Nvidia royally screwed over both MS AND Sony. Microsoft got screwed when they assumed the price of the graphics chip would drop over time in the first XBOX.It didn't. Nvidia then MILKED MS because they had no chip pricing reduction over the product life.
Sony got hurt by Nvidia when they asked them to build a xenos style processor for the ps3,(a shader model 4.0 type GPU). Nvidia said they cant do it before the launch of the ps3 and then gave sony an old GPU. Almost INSTANTLY after sony ordered those old gpu's, Nvidia released the G80 processor which is exactly what Sony wanted. Nvidia intentionally gimped the ps3's graphics card by selling them an inferior product at current market prices.
And that kiddies is why Nvidia won't be in any consoles for the time being.
keep in mind the PS3 GPU is made by nvidia and you have games like "the last of us" and games look better than x360 thanks to them in some part
also, the PS3 didnt suffered too much GPU overheat problems like the X360 had at launch, why? because the GPU is made by Nvidia.
stop being so sheep people, you only give a bad image to N4G.com
The PS3 had a much more well designed cooling system, MS crammed too much in the wrong places resulting in restricted air flow.
However, I just thought I'd point out, the main cause of YLOD in the PS3 was due to the lead free solder that they'd started using (something to do with green taxes), now lead free solder melts at a lower temperature than leaded solder. Although the PS3 never reached the required temp to turn the solder to a full liquid state, it did produce enough heat to weaken it from its fully solid state, couple this with the rapid cooling of the solder when the console was switched off, which in turn contributed to the solder 'cracking'. That's why re-flowing works so well, it melts the solder back into one whole lump.
So while the PS3 didn't suffer from overheating issues, heat was the cause of the solders problems. MS also used lead free solder in the 360. So both companies are at fault for not realising lead free solder melted at a lower temp :)
http://www.ihs.com/news/200...
The PS3 had a cooling system that was significantly more robust than the 360's. The PS3 was also a good deal larger to accommodate that cooling system.
Stop making up nonsense. No one ever said it wasn't a good company.
AMD needs all the business they can get.
http://arstechnica.com/busi...
They are going down hill so this is good for them.
get out more!!!!
for nvidia well they are jealous of AMD's success
they could have acted like IBM pure class but i guess they are still a small company compared to those giants
This whole statement was designed to set stockholders at ease. I am sure someone asked the top brass at NVIDIA "why didn't any NV GPU's appear in the next gen consoles."
Is NVIDIA supposed to be honest and say -- "well we do not have the capabilities to produce a CPU/GPU hybrid like AMD."
No they are going to polish a terd and say exactly what they did
The pc new sales have dropped 7% already from Q1 last year.
Their niche GPU days are almost over.
www.maximumpc.com/article/new s/idc_pc_shipments_declining_fa ster_anticipated2013
God bless u.
Sony couldn't afford Nvidia = "Nvidia are greedy"....said the Sony fanboy
Also, Nvidia are being asked why they didn't take up to offer, don't try and say they are coming out to whine about it...they are simply answering questions.
Gripple down there, 720 isn't getting mentioned because MS hasn't announced it yet. You think Nvidia are going to give away information from MS? That's called leaking. Whether or not Nvidia joined up with them is not confirmed, but the rumors which are likely accurate suggest they went with AMD too.
Edit- Saryk there is nothing at all negative about Sony or the Ps4 in my post. Again, as usual...im talking about Fanboys. Some people even see 'mid range gaming PC' as some type of offense, when a Mid tier is perfectly acceptable for next gen, because it is still very powerful. Mid range is the most common choice for PC gamers because it provides power for decent cost. 560 - 660 - 760 and Amd's gpus are almost always nearly on par with Nvidia when it comes to mid range cost effective GPU's these days
Again Dragonknight, they wouldn't be talking about it if they didn't keep getting questions asked about it in interviews. THey aren't just coming out making public statements for any reason, they are only answering questions.
Also...So what if it ses "Nvidia the way it's meant to be played" at the start? What does that have to do with anything? Is that the only thing you can come up with regarding your outlandish statement that Nvidia...a hardware company with the best support for their GPU's and gaming...have somehow " because it just seems as if they're straying from the focus on games". I mean what are you talking about? It's not up to Nvidia on who make games. They are just a hardware company.
Microsoft CAN afford Nvidia, but we all know Microsoft want maximized profits instead of a powerful system, Sony have had it bad these last couple of years, it's understandable if they don't want to go with Nvidia due to cost, MS have no excuse.
Their entire stance is riddled with damage control.
It all comes down to choice and opinion however. Just as any piece of tech does.
But instead, I feel Nvidia had their own agenda. How they thought that selling Sony a crappy GPU would warrant them another round in the next gen. Honestly I feel like it was deliberate considering the 360 was out for a year already. The bottleneck was there from the get go.
So ya, Sony is gonna treat Nvidia like a ex wife that cheated on them, throw the beotch to the curb, and find a company like AMD who appreciates Sony's business. Also, Sony have actually learned from past experiences and are nurturing their business model.
The ps3 was a humbling experience. I'm glad that they got rid of that hoe Nvidia. Tell Nvidia to try to sabotage someone elses careers. Like their own. I'm glad that AMD is gonna beable to put their quality products in the next gen machines. They are of high quality at a fraction of the cost. Nvidia are the gold diggin whores in gaming. You made your bed now lay in it
Give me a break.
You can't even criticize Microsoft either so what's your point exactly?
A pot calling a kettle black...seriously...
The media keeps interviewing them about it, it's not them speaking out of nowhere.
Nvidia lost business in more than one way.
At the same time, Nvidia cannot offer a package like the APU used in the PS4 so even if Nvidia was willing to design portions of the console at a cheaper rate, someone else would need to design the CPU so it would be less cost effective for Sony.
Sony wanted the PS4 to be based off an x86 architecture not ARM.
The point behind the PS4 is to make the hardware as similar to PCs as possible that way PC developers wont have any issues porting their games over.
Simply put, the PS4 APU more closely resembles what AMD was already working on for desktops and laptops. Nvidia would have to start from scratch designing an ARM SoC for a console.
let's face it they are crying that no console will support them
Both Ms and Sony could easily afford Nvidia development, but they would have to transfer cost the development onto the consumer. Why should Sony and Ms pay a premium price to satisfy a greedy company, while discouraging consumers.
Apparently Sony was flip-flopping between Nvidia,AMD,Cell 2.0 and even Intel(Larrabee).MS on the other hand always had just one architecture in mind.
just go with stupid.
They need to lose more revenue so intel can buy them out and use their gpu patents in their cpus.
They aren't just answering questions here, they are spitting fire....otherwise they would simply answer, "well, unfortunately we couldn't come to any arrangement with Sony, so maybe we can come to an arrangement with PS5, or PSVita 2".
Just a very meticulous & clean statement about press that contains no acid in the words, or the like.
Nvidia's "answer" to this question seems unprofessional, nasty & bitter towards Sony, & consoles in general.
You see, Sony has designed & manufactured all types or hardware (including there joint design & development of the Cell Chip), so, I'm sure Sony are pretty aware of the costs of these things, & seeing they are going with pretty much, off the shelf tech, then it makes sense that Sony want to get these things for the lowest price possible, as they have to put 60,000 other parts in the damn thing, each of which costs moolah.
So, get over it Nvidia, & stop defending them Nvidia fanboys, as maybe next gen. Sony's PS5 will go with a Nvidia product.
On Nvidia they are butthurt because Sony rejected them for the lower cost but very efficient AMD.
In my opinion, the best video card maker right now is NVIDIA
but it will be interesting to see the new wave of games and see how they perform on a amd pc setup, vs a nvidia set up, ie a game designed with consoles in mind
Nvidia are such cry babies it's not even funny anymore ! =.=
Besides,yea Nvidia are being a sore child about the PS4,all this so called "facts" weren't their when they attached their equipment onto the PS3,that's hypocrisy.
I would really like for you to show me an AMD/ATI setup that can out perform an intel/nvidia setup. I've had them all and Nvidia is just easier to deal with as far as drivers go and my Intel chip is smoking fast.
I don't like the way they keep crying to the media about not being involved with the next gen consoles, but they weren't looking at the long haul I guess. IMO it hurts Nvidia in the long run not being included in over 150 million consoles. I don't see how that can ever be a loss.
Their acting like a jealouse girlfriend dumped after the first date.
Honestly, this is the feeling that I've been getting from Nvidia lately. They just keep on releasing statements like this trying to justify their reasoning. All of which sound kind of bitter. If you don't care, then just shut up about it already.
PS4 AMD = 399 USD
SONY wants a more cheaper launch console.
360 uses AMD and PS3 uses NVIDIA, in multiplatform games works better 360 and It's more cheap.
just because NVIDIA made it clear that the PS4 won't be a super computer all you fanboys bash every NVIDIA related article..
This is some funny shit right here.
I won't be buying their stuff anymore
AMD for me
Same could be said about you Sony guys. Look up and down this comment section for proof of that.
Nvidia said that there wasn't much of a profit to be made with low end specs and that they would be losing out on other more current and future opportunities if they did go with Sony.
So you are way off. Sony had to choose AMD because Nvidia said NO they didn't want to be apart of the PS4.
Sony didn't want to pay Nvidia. That's all it boils down to. Nvidia would have gladly taken Sonys money if Sony would have been willing to pay. Now since Sony didn't go with them, Nvidia is upset. We all know what happen when someone doesn't get their way... They throw a temper tantrum. Which is exactly what Nvidia is doing.
Don't worry they will compare KZ4, GT, and Uncharted to pc games, just like when they compare PS3 exclusives to PCs games.
I don't ever remember them doing that with Gears or Halo :)
like a girl says that i dumped the guy coz the relationship was not moving forward but in reality that guy had tapped that and moved on
Look at their statment after statment, such as Ps4 not being powerful enough,really!!
i bet their new upcoming gaming box or whatever is more powerful than the PS4....NOT!!
nvidia has always been the leading graphics chip producer, with amd second.
hahaha this sony site just keeps getting funnier and funnier by the day man, I love it
what the hell XD
"So because nVIDIA didn't side with ps4 now nvidia is bad"
who said that ? can't you read ?
there's every few days an article on n4g where your dear nVIDIA cries because sony didn't want to pay them more.
we have seen PS4 games and they look great.
so yeah, troll more haha
@ iNFAMOUZ1:
no, nvidia isn't bad, but they're acting a little too butthurt over this not using nvidia for the PS4 thing.
I have an amd gpu, intel processor and Kingston ram.
I went for each part due to price/performance.
Nvidia's gpu in the PS3 isn't the reason for the better looking exclusives on PS3 then 360, it's the cell that done most of the hard work.
But it seems like Nvidia have an axe to grind, shield will fail so hard, will be worse then pspgo. They should stop now before release.
Titan will need to come down to $499 for good sales, $1000 for a gpu is just rofl.
Glad PS4 doesn't have Tegra chip at its heart. That thing is extremely over-hyped by Nvidia.