PS4 not worth the cost, says Nvidia

HonoredShadow · *Last edited by HonoredShadow; 03-14-2013 at 17:11.*

Chip-maker Nvidia didn't want to work with Sony "at the price those guys were willing to pay."

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/ps4-not-...tWorthTheCostS

Quote:

Nvidia passed on its hardware being used in the PlayStation 4 due to the "opportunity cost."

PlayStation 4: not powered by Nvidia.

"I'm sure there was a negotiation that went on," Tony Tamasi, Senior VP of content and technology at Nvidia told GameSpot, "and we came to the conclusion that we didn't want to do the business at the price those guys were willing to pay."

"Having been through the original Xbox and PS3, we understand the economics of [console development] and the tradeoffs."

Announced by Sony earlier this month, the upcoming PS4 is powered by rival chip-maker AMD. The company is also strongly rumoured to be behind the hardware of the next Xbox, but Nvidia does not appear to be troubled by the loss.

"We're building a whole bunch of stuff," continued Tamasi, "and we had to look at console business as an opportunity cost. If we say, did a console, what other piece of our business would we put on hold to chase after that?"

"In the end, you only have so many engineers and so much capability, and if you're going to go off and do chips for Sony or Microsoft, then that's probably a chip that you're not doing for some other portion of your business. And at least in the case of Sony and Nvidia, in terms of PS4, AMD has the business and Nvidia doesn't. We'll see how that plays out from a business perspective I guess. It's clearly not a technology thing."

AMD will be hoping that its PS4 business pays off, having recently fallen on hard times. Earlier this week it sold its Austin-based HQ for $164 million to raise cash, while a leading analyst called it "un-investable" following an operating loss of $131 million in its quarterly earnings report.

In Nvidia's latest earnings call, the company posted a profit of $174 million.

Sour grapes? They are out of the console race completely apart from their own dubious 'handheld'. Remember what happened between M$ and Nvidia with the original XBox? I personally think they are a little to smug and greedy.

I think AMD need the cash at the moment and I say good for them to come to an agreement with all 3 big names, which is in stark contrast to Nvidia!

WhiteLightning · 03-14-2013, 17:13 | posts: 20,608 | Location: Netherlands

totally agree, sounds really sour

HonoredShadow · *Last edited by HonoredShadow; 03-14-2013 at 17:20.*

Also I personally went from 2 x 5850's (which I had very few problems with driver wise) to 2 x 670's with some noticeable problems. Also I did this instead of staying with AMD because their drivers are meant to be better and for Physx.

Rolls have reversed since I bought these! So it's my fault guys! Nvidia drivers of late have got worse and AMD's have had a major kick up the back side in the last 6 months!

Physx is not well supported too. I would rather see open source library's supported more.

So the above article situation coupled with PC situation... not looking to good.

RoadKillNL · 03-14-2013, 17:30 | posts: 2,679 | Location: Netherlands

I went from AMD to nVidia and all problems went away!

yasamoka · 03-14-2013, 17:37 | posts: 1,170 | Location: Lebanon

Ummm what's up with Nvidia's mood these days?

harkinsteven · 03-14-2013, 17:39 | posts: 1,596 | Location: Ireland

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonoredShadow

Also I personally went from 2 x 5850's (which I had very few problems with driver wise) to 2 x 670's with some noticeable problems. Also I did this instead of staying with AMD because their drivers are meant to be better and for Physx.

Rolls have reversed since I bought these! So it's my fault guys! Nvidia drivers of late have got worse and AMD's have had a major kick up the back side in the last 6 months!

Physx is not well supported too. I would rather see open source library's supported more.

So the above article situation coupled with PC situation... not looking to good.

What are these mythical problems you speak off? Apart from TombRaider I have not had an issue with nvidia in almost 15 years. Maybe a few niggles here and there but not to the extent you claim. My cards run perfectly. Always have.

Denial · 03-14-2013, 17:41 | posts: 6,374 | Location: Above Earth in a Big Rocket Ship

How is this negative? It's written exactly how a business person would have written it. It's pretty obvious that AMD has lower cost parts than Nvidia and were willing to bid lower than Nvidia was.

What do you want the guy to come out and say "PS4 is going to be great because AMD is great and they did a great job with the chip in it!!!!1!1"

...

warlord · 03-14-2013, 17:51 | posts: 374

cry nvidia cry, they are just jealous, i don't care about that silly mood.

And as long as i see fan-boys having the nvidia's wannabe superb attitude i will support amd as strongly i can.

all hail to ps4. Long live the king.

SLI-756 · 03-14-2013, 17:53 | posts: 3,238 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by warlord

cry nvidia cry, they are just jealous, i don't care about that silly mood.

And as long as i see fan-boys having the nvidia's wannabe superb attitude i will support amd as strongly i can.

all hail to ps4. Long live the king.

please take the consoles, have no interest in them personally, faster AMD dies and takes all her fanboys with her the better.

dr.noob · 03-14-2013, 18:00 | posts: 1,160 | Location: Portugal

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

...faster AMD dies and takes all her fanboys with her the better.

k1net1cs · 03-14-2013, 18:01 | posts: 3,364

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonoredShadow

Sour grapes? They are out of the console race completely apart from their own dubious 'handheld'. Remember what happened between M$ and Nvidia with the original XBox? I personally think they are a little to smug and greedy.

I think AMD need the cash at the moment and I say good for them to come to an agreement with all 3 big names, which is in stark contrast to Nvidia!

Apart from being interpreted as mostly a sore loser's reply, I actually somewhat agree with him regarding (manufacturing) capability.

AMD have been diversifying its business by rebranding RAM stick, RAM disk software, and lately the (rumored?) SSD.
These things don't really impact anything much because AMD just have to buy its components from somewhere else; at least manufacturing cost (and risk) isn't something that needs to be thought about.
But the deals with the consoles' big three are really going to test AMD's..well, GF's, manufacturing capability to provide the chips.

Nvidia already have a sizable business on Tesla and, to a lesser extent, Tegra (apart from their core desktop & mobile graphics), and probably wouldn't want to risk a disagreeable ROI on the prices the console makers are offering.
Probably also due to Nvidia (currently) isn't exactly hurting for money.
AMD, on the other hand...

In any case, good luck to AMD.
If this whole console deal thing is working for them, then maybe they can funnel more funds on support rather than marketing.

Wanny · *Last edited by Wanny; 03-14-2013 at 18:04.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonoredShadow

Also I personally went from 2 x 5850's (which I had very few problems with driver wise) to 2 x 670's with some noticeable problems. Also I did this instead of staying with AMD because their drivers are meant to be better and for Physx.

Rolls have reversed since I bought these! So it's my fault guys! Nvidia drivers of late have got worse and AMD's have had a major kick up the back side in the last 6 months!

Physx is not well supported too. I would rather see open source library's supported more.

So the above article situation coupled with PC situation... not looking to good.

Then you'll switch back to AMD and you'll say the same goddamn thing but you will swap Nvidia/AMD.

ZzZZzz

HonoredShadow · *Last edited by HonoredShadow; 03-14-2013 at 18:19.*

So I added my personal opinion to how things actually went for me with various cards/drivers and I get attacked? No need. I thought this site was better than this...

Any way back on topic.

EDIT: @ k1net1cs. Some good points made here.

Rich_Guy · 03-14-2013, 18:45 | posts: 6,744 | Location: UK

Oh dear

Loophole35 · *Last edited by Loophole35; 03-14-2013 at 18:56.*

Nvidia sounds a bit butthurt on this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denial

How is this negative? It's written exactly how a business person would have written it. It's pretty obvious that AMD has lower cost parts than Nvidia and were willing to bid lower than Nvidia was.

What do you want the guy to come out and say "PS4 is going to be great because AMD is great and they did a great job with the chip in it!!!!1!1"

...

This is the quote that is unprofessional

Quote:

We'll see how that plays out from a business perspective I guess. It's clearly not a technology thing."

eclap · 03-14-2013, 18:51 | posts: 18,982 | Location: Hampshire UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by yasamoka

Ummm what's up with Nvidia's mood these days?

yeah, they seem to be butthurt. first the TR PR fiasco and now this.

Lane · *Last edited by Lane; 03-14-2013 at 19:35.*

I dont think they are butthurt, just they do their marketing ( like any company will do ).

It was certainly more easy and less costly in R&D for AMD to use as base for the hardware, their own APU ( CPU + GPU ) for the next console generation, Instead of Nvidia who have been surely able to use a GK106 as base, but who will have need a lot of R&D on the CPU side specifically for thoses new consoles ( i dont think they will have use a Tegra4 lol ). Remember the Cell cores used before, many was complain, starting by the developpers.

AMD had an excellent base ready with their own hardware stuffs. The choice was not hard to made. Without speaking about all the compatibility and similitude with the PC developpement, library etc.. a lot more easy for the developpers.

On the point Tamasi is explaining something clearly logic: if they need to developp from scratch a CPU who can be used with their GPU, they will have need put a lot of peoples on it. And this have a big costs.

On the other hand, AMD have all the technology with their APU ready.

Denial · 03-14-2013, 19:19 | posts: 6,374 | Location: Above Earth in a Big Rocket Ship

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loophole35

Nvidia sounds a bit butthurt on this.

This is the quote that is unprofessional

But it's not a technology thing? And I don't see how it's unprofessional? To me it's pretty clear that the PS4 was targeting a fairly low price point relative to past console launches. They weren't shopping for the best technology, they were shopping for the lowest price per performance, which is how AMD has been competing for years now.

It's like you ask the guy his opinion, he gives it to you in a fairly reasonable matter -- gives all the logic and reason behind the choice "OMG BUTTHURT".

This is probably why you don't hear more behind the scenes news, people are too polarized.

Reddoguk · *Last edited by Reddoguk; 03-14-2013 at 20:39.*

What's wrong with people.

Nvidia isn't going to sell chips for peanuts.

They obviously have worked out the profit margins and realised it aint worth it.

They would rather invest their money in other ventures and gain larger margins, i mean who wouldn't.

It's just common sense. Seems to be lacking on this thread though.

IPlayNaked · 03-14-2013, 19:31 | posts: 6,559

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denial

But it's not a technology thing? And I don't see how it's unprofessional? To me it's pretty clear that the PS4 was targeting a fairly low price point relative to past console launches. They weren't shopping for the best technology, they were shopping for the lowest price per performance, which is how AMD has been competing for years now.

It's like you ask the guy his opinion, he gives it to you in a fairly reasonable matter -- gives all the logic and reason behind the choice "OMG BUTTHURT".

This is probably why you don't hear more behind the scenes news, people are too polarized.

I think the problem is the writer. In a vacuum, this does seem "butthurt" like "Oh Nvidia released a statement about how butthurt they are, boohoo". But then you have to realize the article is written by a third party journalist. Given that, the statement takes on a whole new light when you frame it as a response to a question, something like "How does Nvidia feel about not getting a contract for any of the next generation consoles?"

When you see it as a response to that, it feels less like butthurt.

DireBadger · 03-14-2013, 19:43 | posts: 237 | Location: Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by warlord

cry nvidia cry, they are just jealous, i don't care about that silly mood.

And as long as i see fan-boys having the nvidia's wannabe superb attitude i will support amd as strongly i can.

all hail to ps4. Long live the king.

More likely that Sony and Microsoft were offering crumbs for hardware and Nvidia declined to supply them. AMD on the other hand are making loss after loss and will take whatever they can get.

DAWG1 · 03-14-2013, 20:05 | posts: 44 | Location: Georgia, U.S.A

Could be just an excuse but I can understand the thought process by nvidia. I have owned and operated my own construction business for 25 years. I can't work as cheap as some other contractors and know I lose jobs because of that. However, I am not going to sacrifice the quality of my product just to compete at a lower price point.

It's a matter of deciding where you want your place in the market to be and doing business accordingly. Just my two cents....

sykozis · 03-14-2013, 20:09 | posts: 13,636 | Location: US East Coast

Does anyone outside of AMD and NVidia even know for a fact that NVidia was actually approached for this? It's quite possible that Sony or MS (whoever actually started development first) approached AMD directly without NVidia being involved at any point and this guy is simply stating what he THINKS happened without actually knowing any real details (which is the feeling I get from his statement). It's generally cheaper to buy CPU and GPU from the same vendor when they can offer it as a single package....which makes AMD's APUs rather attractive for a console. NVidia doesn't have an x86 license, whereas AMD does. This means either NVidia would have to acquire a license for x86 or development a specialized RISC processor (which they are licensed for). That would increase cost dramatically.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonoredShadow

So I added my personal opinion to how things actually went for me with various cards/drivers and I get attacked? No need. I thought this site was better than this...

This has been an on-going trend over the last year. If your opinion doesn't follow that of the majority, for any reason, you get attacked.

IPlayNaked · 03-14-2013, 20:16 | posts: 6,559

Quote:

Originally Posted by sykozis

Does anyone outside of AMD and NVidia even know for a fact that NVidia was actually approached for this? It's quite possible that Sony or MS (whoever actually started development first) approached AMD directly without NVidia being involved at any point and this guy is simply stating what he THINKS happened without actually knowing any real details (which is the feeling I get from his statement). It's generally cheaper to buy CPU and GPU from the same vendor when they can offer it as a single package....which makes AMD's APUs rather attractive for a console. NVidia doesn't have an x86 license, whereas AMD does. This means either NVidia would have to acquire a license for x86 or development a specialized RISC processor (which they are licensed for). That would increase cost dramatically.....

This has been an on-going trend over the last year. If your opinion doesn't follow that of the majority, for any reason, you get attacked.

I'm sure there were talks. You essentially have two graphics choices. Three if you count intel, which you don't. You don't just ignore one of them. You at least see what they're willing to do.

eclap · 03-14-2013, 20:30 | posts: 18,982 | Location: Hampshire UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by sykozis

Does anyone outside of AMD and NVidia even know for a fact that NVidia was actually approached for this? It's quite possible that Sony or MS (whoever actually started development first) approached AMD directly without NVidia being involved at any point and this guy is simply stating what he THINKS happened without actually knowing any real details (which is the feeling I get from his statement). It's generally cheaper to buy CPU and GPU from the same vendor when they can offer it as a single package....which makes AMD's APUs rather attractive for a console. NVidia doesn't have an x86 license, whereas AMD does. This means either NVidia would have to acquire a license for x86 or development a specialized RISC processor (which they are licensed for). That would increase cost dramatically.....

This has been an on-going trend over the last year. If your opinion doesn't follow that of the majority, for any reason, you get attacked.

yeah, he talks nonsense. He doesn't know whether nvidia were approached, yet he said they turned it down because these guys wouldn't pay them enough. hence why people see this unprofessional and as if they're butthurt.