Bob Feldstein, who previously worked for AMD, has revealed the valuation of the Xbox One deal between AMD and Microsoft.
haha..that made my day. but yeah, intel's probably upset over amd's involvement with the ps4 and x1.
Why would Intel be upset?
Why wouldn't they be? No mater how much money Intel has I very much doubt they would pass up this kind of opportunity if it was offered to them.
Yeah, Intel dominates the CPU market, while consoles use AMD hardware for GPUs, not CPUs. It's Nvidia who should be :'[, but they won't stop. They're catering to the PC market and any advantages AMD has in the next-gen console cycle they will most definitely counter with driver support which is truly far superior than AMD's.
This isn't profit, this is the upfront cost on investment. Intel would lose money wasting fab space on low profit chips for consoles.
That amount is more than 2 Sony office buildings that sold in Japan and NY, but micro still struggle to match the PS4's number crunchers.
@Letros It's also for expertise in designing and making the chips. Microsoft has a huge team of it's own, but they have worked closely with AMD for a long time now. Plus I think this deal goes beyond the Xbox One. I believe MS is going to make their own chips for Surface and their other devices. Just like Apple and Samsung are doing. The first Surface was just like the first Xbox, off the shelf parts. The next versions will be more custom parts. Plus the financial support and the technology gleamed from doing these custom projects will make AMD a stronger company going forward. The PS4 APU they plan to release is evidence of that. Nvidia and Intl wish they could have more of that market. It is the future market, not the desktop market. And they are not the leaders in it. You have to focus on five or ten years down the road, not the way it is today. Haswell won't save Intel. Their stock has dropped 50% because everybody really paying attention knows Intel is in a bad position.
NYC_Gamer - That's 3 Billion that could have been theirs instead. I'd find it rather impossible to scoff at 3 billion dollars.
Intel made a Q1 revenue of $12.6bn. $3bn is a lot but how much of that is profit? guys at Intel definitely aren't sad, I mean, I'm pretty sure investors didn't show their displeasure at the fact that AMD stole some of Intel's business. the money would be great, but I'm sure they can live without
torchic - I'm sure investors would prefer the maximum turn around for their money, additional profits from the $3 billion would have been accepted with open arms. I don't doubt they could live without, but they've invested for a reason, and that was to make as much money as possible.
@famoussasjohn I agree that investors would like maximum profits, but how much of that $3bn does Intel actually see? out of the $12bn Q1 revenue only $2bn was profit. I'm arguing the magnitude of the profit, if any. but you are right in saying they would've welcomed any profit, even if it was $1.
Oh, my bad.. I meant to say nvidia... :/ ..I honestly don't know why intel popped into my head.
Well Intel makes CPUs primarily. NVIDIA makes GPUs primarily. AMD makes both primarily. Its a business advantage for them at the moment. NVIDIA is taking up ARM for CPU/GPU combo chips, but that doesn't compare to x86 yet. Intel is using its own integrated graphics cores in its chips and they have never been known greatly for GPU tech. So AMD is the best general solution for x86 + GPUs for the consoles. So if Its a $3 billion deal with Microsoft. How big of a deal was made with Sony for a greater APU than Microsoft's?
so that is why intel is butthurt
Intel and Nvidia are partners...i would say both companies are upset and angry that Sony and MS slammed the door on them. This type of investment will pay off in the long run for MS and wouldn't surprised if they announce a partnership.
doubt sony and ms slammed the door on them. didnt nvidia fuck over ms regarding producing the first xbox, isnt that why they rushed the 360? either way I dont think nvidia could even provide cheap enough graphics card catered for the console business
How much of that is actual profit for AMD then?
More than everyones money combined here..
I should hope so, they're a multinational company. That doesn't really answer my question though.
Then google it and see if you find the answere that your looking for..
How about you talk to someone else, because you're as much help as a chocolate teapot.
Why are you talking to your chocolate tea pot? Put the chocolates down and bing it!
PS4 Fanboys acting like PS4 is that much more powerful then Xbox One. While the gap is actually thinner then Xbox 360 vs PS3. Even with the gap in performance Microsoft actually made Halo 4 and Forza 4 look on par with their Sony counterparts even better in the case of forza 4. Halo 4 looked as good as Killzone 3. Forza 4 looked better then Gran turismo 5.
There are still people defending the Xbox One? Damn.
You think suddenly those 70 million fans are now at PS4? lol That's the thing about fanboys. They'll look past anything wrong with the console to buy it anyways. I am an Xbox Fan (not fanboy there is a difference) The only problem i have with the Xbox One is that it requires 24hour Online checks. Unless thats not the case when the disc is inserted. Then i don't have any problem with it. It can do everything the PS4 can and much more. Day One buy for me. 1 Superman > 4 humans It only does everything.
@gildarts Enjoy watching your reality shows and soaps on the box that does everything. Lol
Right I thought by now after the xbox reveal they would jump ship but I guess these dame xbots going to ride it out to the end. DUMB A$$$$$ES!!!!!!
I predict that your post will have about 60 more disagrees in another 30 minutes....lol The hate is great with the fanboys here. At the end of the day both consoles are on par with each other where it counts. It's so funny that people thought the same thing about cell and look who dropped the cell...lol P.S. Be prepared to be lose one of those bubbles...lol
Actually the difference in power is a little over 50% for next gen. 1.84(PS4)/1.2 (TFLOPS) Last Gen, the 360 had a 36% GPU power advantage (if only counting GFLOPS for GPU). 240(360)/176 (GFlops) Architecture differences aside, based on raw power the 360 gpu was stronger but a lot of the time the PS3 exclusives graphics were either on par or exceeded 360 counterparts. This was probably due to the Cell which went under utilized with many multiplat games. So no, the gap isn't thinner this time around. It's wider.
They will just ignore the facts like they always do. It wont be until these consoles are on the shelf. Just wait for them to start doing game comparisons and its permanently PS4 beats the xbox. Not just because of frame rate drops but draw distance, AA, AI and all the other things that make a difference in how a game looks and feels. Its also not just the GPU but the Extra 2gb of RAM spare and also being GDDR5.
You're a fanboy. Stop hiding. I can smell you.
Gildarts you are high. Killzone was the standard for fps on consoles for graphics. Native 720p vsynced 30 fps with all the extra particle effects. Digital Foundary has even said so. GT5 says it all stop embarresing yourself
But the best selling game in the world is call of duty and it's not a graphical power house at all!!!
Im not talking sales. I'm talking 1080p. lighting etc etc. Forza is not in the same catagory graphically. Art syle maybe of opinion not graphics.
Ok You enjoy yours and I'll enjoy mines. Opinions matters!!!
Uh....No. The Cell Processor on the PS3 cost Sony over $2Billion in development alone. There's no way this low-power, customized CPU costs that much. Somebody is delusional here. EDIT: Oh, they are valuing this over the systems lifecycle? Well, this makes it more believable but still a little far-fetched.
Keeps AMD in the game so fair play to them...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.