Top
910°

AMD on the PS4: We gave it the hardware Nvidia couldn't

AMD came roaring into GDC 2013 with a vengeance. Not only did the chipmaker introduce its first branded line of dedicated cloud gaming graphics cards - the Radeon Sky Series - we got a taste of what it claims is the world's fastest GPU.
Attendees of a Tuesday night press conference saw the GPU, the Radeon HD 7990, make its first public appearance. Later, a set of 7990s powered EA's 17-minute introductory Battlefield 4 demo on the big screen.

Read Full Story >>
techradar.com
The story is too old to be commented.
iGAM3R-VIII1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

Well Nvidia got their heads stuck up their a** now. They probably aren't happy at Sony and AMD. Well they should of seen that coming, you can't just bash 2 companies and expect them to not get you back, *sigh* Nvidia.....

gaffyh1343d ago

This is a really great interview, lots of good details regarding the PS4's architecture.

Army_of_Darkness1343d ago

I think everyone realized that except for the hardcore nvidia pc fanboys..
They can trash talk and hate on the ps4 for now, but once it releases and we start seeing what developer can do with it, i will expect a little silence from them and return to their cave...

cayleee1343d ago Show
gaffyh1343d ago

@cayleee - Everyone knows you are a PC fanboy, but I'll reply to one part of your comment anyway. Component manufacturers almost always make a profit on what they are selling, and if anyone thinks that nVidia didn't make a profit from being in the PS3, they are just stupid. It might not have been an obscene profit, but it was a profit nonetheless.

Maybe get your head out of nVidia's ass and look at the situation as a whole and it's pretty clear that the nVidia comments are damage control from their side. There is NO WAY, that they didn't try and get in on the console business this gen. First and foremost they are a BUSINESS, and any money they can make is good for them and their shareholders.

R6ex1343d ago

"We gave it the hardware Nvidia couldn't"

Well, obviously! Nvidia's Project Denver sees the light of day only in late 2014 to early 2015.

beepbeepnmyjeep1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

@gaffyh - not defending anyone's argument, but if you look at revenue gained from Nvidia's venture with ps3, it was not all that great as most of the proceeds go to sony, nowhere on a ps3 do you see nvidia. Hence this is why the past year and a half or so we've seen Nvidia chasing desktop/workstation graphics. So with this information we can kind of conclude that Nvidia's plight of raising their noses at consoles this upcoming generation is justified; because if one goes into thinking a business will do anything for a dollar then you are wrong. AMD on the otherhand is starving for business, they have not had a leading graphics card on the market for almost two years between those two companies, with smaller margins, fewer employees, and more overhead this company was desperate for a contract no matter what the dollar amount. Just look at the reports given in a financial sense and you could easily conclude this, don't just run around with the argument : Oh Nvidia is bitter running their mouths, or AMD suck blah blah blah.

Tr10wn1343d ago

@Army_of_Darkness

Everyone knows Nvidia has more quality than Ati is really no secret that Sony went with AMD because it was cheaper for them and for us, while i don't like ATI i like AMD CPU's i hope this deal help them get out of their debts.

Gaming1011343d ago

The problem is, everyone is comparing the traditional x86 architecture of PC's to the PS4, and it's not an apples to apples comparison. The article outlines this rather well with the interview:

"For us, really by looking at that APU that we designed, you can't pull out individual components off it and hold it up and say, 'Yeah, this compares to X or Y.'

"It's that integration of the two, and especially with the amount of shared memory [8GB of GDDR5, 176GB/s raw memory bandwidth] that Sony has chosen to put on that machine, then you're going to be able to do so much more moving and sharing that data that you can address by both sides.

"It's more than just a CPU doing all these amazing calculations and a GPU doing calculations. We are now going to be able to move certain tasks between the two."

Devs, he said, will be able to push the console's capabilities beyond a traditional x86 PC architecture, and multithreading - being able to take advantage of all eight cores - is going "to become a huge deal for a lot of the big blockbuster games."

XBBONED1343d ago Show
rainslacker1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

Here's some food for thought, particularly for those saying it's just not worth it for NVidia.

If Nvidia only made a $5 net profit on each chip manufactured(probably low ball figure), then over the life of 80 million consoles(arguably an obtainable sales number) they would have made a profit equal to about 5% of their current worth.

Yeah, so not worth their time. I'm sure investors don't care about a 5% increase in profits. /s

Nitrox1342d ago

rainslacker-

Nvidia didn't technically say it wasn't worth it, they said they looked at the opportunity cost of competing to get into the console market, and the justification wasn't there. That's why they wanted more $$$ than Sony was willing to shell out, to shift the justification to a level they were more happy with.

They're trying to make some major headway in the mobile market right now and didn't want to put various projects on hold to focus on console development. So maybe they looked at it like "Well, we can go for a 5% profit increase going the console route. Or... We can take a gamble on some of our own ideas and possibly see a significantly larger increase."

rainslacker1342d ago

I'm aware. Nvidia isn't one to slouch when it comes to trying to be a major player in any market they have an interest in.

Some people on here were just saying it isn't worth it for Nvidia based on their presumption that consoles don't return enough profit to make it worthwhile. I was just trying to put things in perspective.

Nvidia does make some really good products, and their reputation is really well deserved. That reputation does come at a cost though, and to me, if a comparable experience or tech can be offered cheaper to me then there is no reason to really hold on to brand loyalty.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1342d ago
IAmLee1343d ago

Tomorrows articles:
'Nvidia says PS4 is shit.'

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1343d ago ShowReplies(5)
DeadlyFire1343d ago

Well there is a reason why Microsoft turned away from NVIDIA after the Xbox and now Sony is doing the same after PS3.

Cueil1342d ago

NVidia is the reason that Microsoft had to stop making Xboxes in the first place a probably a reason why you don't have HDD in every console because of BC license for emulating the Nvidia chipset was built into the HDD price... they thought to highly of themselves and AMD has been angling in this direction for a while it was the Xbox that was there first APU... albeit with a different CPU... the original A8 model was AD3870WNGXBOX s/n Microsoft was a important partner in the development and distribution of the first ever APU. Just another example of competition being good for gamers.

fermcr1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

summarizing...

Nvidia had better graphics cards, but was more expensive, since it had to be a GPU from Nvidia and a 3rd party CPU (probably IBM). Nvidia didn't want to budge with their prices, so Sony went with ATI, witch is cheaper with the CPU and GPU all in one. Not as good as the Nvidia (+ 3rd party CPU) solution, but still a good solution and much cheaper.

Sony made a big mistake going with the Cell processor for the PS3, with losses of billions. Now they are going with a much cheaper solution and will most likely make a profit with every PS4 sold from the start.

Microsoft will probably take the same route.

dcbronco1343d ago

It's not about a cheaper solution. Nvidia has Tegra. That's an APU to a certain extent. What the article is mainly talking about is HSA. Nvidia doesn't have that. They are said to be working on it now for Tegra 5.

http://www.theinquirer.net/...

The AMD APU was just a lot better and cheaper than anything Nvidia could offer. They are bitter and scared because AMD is challenging them in every market and that will soon include phones and tablets. And with a better product.

ijust2good1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

We all know deep down Nvidia are hurting big time. It must be a bitch for Nvidia not to have any kind of an attention next gen.

CEO of Nvidia- Jen Huang was on stage during 2005 E3 PS3 reveal bragging about console power, he seemed the most excited person on the stage that time. He always did like the attention. Too bad he wont get any this time around. I guess he tried another way to seek the attention he craved with the project SHIELD. Yep, that will threaten console market lol.

start from 07.00
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Jen will certainly be gutted he wont be attending any E3 this year when next gen consoles gets full reveal.

ZombieNinjaPanda1343d ago

Because any company that is offering their products and services to another will talk trash about them at the time they're offering.

Logic fails majority of this website.

S2Killinit1343d ago

well to those who think that Nvidia didn't want, or didn't really need the console market, I gotta say, it seems like the way they are responding to it is saying otherwise. I'm actually more of a Nvidia guy than a AMD guy. I don't mind paying a little bit more for that little bit of extra security in knowing I've got a first rate item (not that AMD is bad).But I still gotta say, Nvidia didn't handle this very maturely.

hellvaguy1342d ago

And by "maturely" you do mean independent of their right to their own opinion? You mean they throw in a slight dig at sony for using cheaper parts then they would have used, (which may or may not be fact, again just their opinion), but as a devote sony zealot, the dig cut you deep.

Fanboys of all sides need to stop pretending that they know the "true motivation" of every company out there and that if they speak negatively about their cult company (wii.sony.ms), then obviously they are immature, hurtful, evil or w/e.

BABY-JEDI1342d ago

They should just let the games do the talking, anything else is just a waste of time IMO

TAURUS-5551342d ago

ive always loved AMD graphic cards so im glad the ps4 got it.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1342d ago
TheLyonKing1343d ago

I love a good tit for tat against companies.

knifefight1343d ago

Bruce Less vs. Chuck Norris...

King Kong vs. Godzilla...

Mr. T. vs. Rocky Balboa...

And now, the grandest of all superfights...

NVIDIA VERSUS AMD!!!! :o

popcorn.gif

rezzah1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

Lee.

Edit:

If "Less" was meant to imply Bruce Lee being lesser to Chuck Norris, know that Bruce kicked his ***.

AJ Hartley1343d ago

Theres even a vid of chuck saying theres no comparison at all that bruce would anhilate him.

Diver1342d ago

@rezzah

Bruce Lee action star

Chuck Norris full contact world champion. Bruce asked him to appear in the movie. So basically rigged, fake outcome that would have gone differently in the real world. Something nvidia is learning the hard way.

specialguest1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

Despite the fact that there was a lame movie where King Kong beats Godzilla, Godzilla would've acually crushed King Kong like an ant. Godzilla is the size of a tall building. King Kong climbs buildings and fell to his death.

http://www.geekstir.com/wp-...

e-p-ayeaH1343d ago

no love for Rocky vs Drago?

Auron1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

Bruce Lee killed Chuck Norris watch way of the dragon. Lee is a Legend.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

strickers1343d ago

I love Bruce but he never competed. Chuck said he would have done well. He praised him. However , Chuck was 7 times CONSECUTIVE World champ. Don't dismiss him because Bruce made better movies and was more charming .

Ritsujun1342d ago

knifefight vs. gunfight
You lose.

knifefight1342d ago

Ritsujun vs. Ritsurin.

Now we're both 0 and 1.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1342d ago
The_Infected1343d ago (Edited 1343d ago )

"Devs, he said, will be able to push the console's capabilities beyond a traditional x86 PC architecture, and multithreading - being able to take advantage of all eight cores - is going "to become a huge deal for a lot of the big blockbuster games."

Sounds very good for Developers.

clintagious6501343d ago

Exactly, I dont see how ppl cant see that. U see devs pushing the ps3/360 even further now even late in their life cycle. If games like god of war ascension, gears of war judgement, the last of us, two souls, red dead redemption, mass effect & many other titles can look this great on these old hardware what makes ppl think they wont be able to push it even further with even better hardware.

I give console devs more credit then pc only devs when it comes to pushing hardware to its limits because with the limited specs they have to work with, they show in these 7 year old hardware. Even with a $2000 swooped up gaming pc, if crysis is all u can pull off, that is not that impressive for all that money u spend every few months for upgrades. Nothing against pc gamers, I just feel that its not worth spending all that money if pc devs cant even push all of that power out of those high end pc's.

Ravenor1343d ago

Who is upgrading every few months? I really wish this myth would die, it's getting beyond ridiculous.

I'm happy that you feel it isn't worth it to you, but for things like Planetside 2, The Witcher, Battlefield, Red Orchestra 2 and other games big and small I'm perfectly happy with my "investment" in a PC, just like I'm perfectly happy with my PS3 and 360.

This goes the same for PC only people ragging on console owners, just STOP. Being so divisive makes this place eye gougingly painful to read.

Athonline1342d ago

As a software developer (not in gaming):
PC games devs aren't any lazier than console devs -in fact they have to do some extra coding, such as objects destruction for memory freeing.

The problem with PCs is their main advantage: being an open system.

When you test a PC software, even a game, you have the following issues:
-Is it Windows or multi-OS? If the second, libraries compatibility, etc..
-Luck of "proper" testing unit.

In a PC you usually program and test your code in the "worst" machine possible, to make sure it meets the minimum requirements set to you by the project manager. If it works then you get "greedy" and start adding features -in case of games: graphics- for higher computers. However you can't test your code in every possible system out there, limiting your testing to 2-3 configurations. Personally I got a 2000 pounds laptop for coding, work and gaming and yet I am "forced" by my manager to test in an old Core 2 Due machine and a first-gen Nehalem Core i5.

This is why Macs, which are essentially closed systems perform well. I found Blizzard games on a Mac perform better than on Windows or even some newer games still work on older macs. In my office we usually "fight" who is going to do the Mac porting. It is harder to program (XCode is a pain), but the computer configurations available are mostly available for us for de-bugging.

What I am saying is that consoles got a min and max hardware requirements to meet at the same time. PCs only got a min, set by your marketing and consulting teams. You can't max out a PC technically, but due to time and resources constrains you can't really go a lot further than your minimum requirements build.

mcstorm1343d ago

IM glad AMD are making the chip and ide rather AMD make it for all 3 than NVIDIA just because AMD are finding it hard in the market because of Intel and NVIDIA making alto with there processors.