New Consoles Help AMD Gain x86 Market Share

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If this console cycle is anything like the last one, this will be the gift that will keep on giving for AMD.

AMD grew its market share thanks to the millions of semi-custom x86 architecture chips it shipped for Microsoft’s Xbox One and Sony’s PlayStation 4 gaming consoles, said Dean McCarron, principal analyst at Mercury Research. Both game consoles, which have AMD’s x86 CPU and graphics cores, are expected to sell in the millions on launch in the coming weeks.
Click to expand...
 
Good for AMD I say. With all the extra green they will be getting, maybe they can keep stealing the thunder from Team Green a while longer :)
 
While I love Intel, I also love the fact that AMD has a new steady income coming in. Maybe in the future we will have super powerful APU's from AMD that are just mind blowing. They have the cash now to maybe do just that.
 
I think the real question is how profitable the console deal was for AMD. I just hope they really execute with Mantle.
 
I don't think it matters if they had a home run or not with the consoles. Money is money is money.

"Half of a grape is better than no watermelon at all"
 
I really have to wonder what nvidia was thinking not getting their hardware in any of the consoles. This is going to pay off for AMD not only in terms of money, but also in the sense that all games going forward are going to be designed primarily with AMD hardware in mind.
 
next gen it'll be nvidia, next gen amd, next nvidia..

i honestly think they rightfully take turns getting our money.
all about circulating that all mighty dollar.
 
Sedriss said:
Good for AMD I say. With all the extra green they will be getting, maybe they can keep stealing the thunder from Team Green a while longer :)
Click to expand...

You do know they're producing these chips at break-even for the marketing/propaganda value. Nvidia didn't want to swim in that sewer.
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
I really have to wonder what nvidia was thinking not getting their hardware in any of the consoles. This is going to pay off for AMD not only in terms of money, but also in the sense that all games going forward are going to be designed primarily with AMD hardware in mind.
Click to expand...

The only companies that will code for AMD hardware primarily are the ones who were already dedicated to the console market. With Intel and NVidia still dominating on the PC front (the article indicated that Intel gained market share on that front to almost 84%) this won't affect AMDs power base substantially. They need to move into the mobile space (Tablets/Smartphones) or into the set-top box space (DVRs, etc) to really substantially change the market dynamics. Video game consoles sell a fraction over their entire decade long life of what PCs and mobile devices sell in one year. AMD would be better served with trying to get exclusive deals with the Steambox or a major PC manufacturer (Apple, Lenovo, HP, etc). If they could get Lenovo and HP to abandon Intel it would be worth it to them (even if they had to lose money to do so). Video games won't substantially affect the market one way or the other.
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
I really have to wonder what nvidia was thinking not getting their hardware in any of the consoles. This is going to pay off for AMD not only in terms of money, but also in the sense that all games going forward are going to be designed primarily with AMD hardware in mind.
Click to expand...

The only time you heard about nVidia losing a bid is when it lost the original xBox console contract to AMD many years ago (ATi, then)--that's only because nVidia originally had the first xBox contract with Microsoft and there was no way they could avoid the publicity. nVidia managed to create bad blood with Microsoft before it even lost the contract by suing Microsoft in a dispute about chips. Microsoft paid up, but next contract period nVidia-in-xBox was history. nVidia mistakenly believed it had Microsoft over a barrel, and when proved wrong, the company adopted the same public posture it always adopts when it loses--sour grapes ("We didn't need it anyway!" Really, then why'd you bid, then?)

When nVidia bids on other major projects and loses--you won't necessarily ever hear about any of that at all. IMO, either nVidia & Intel did not bid for the Sony and Microsoft console contracts (which seems doubtful), or they both bid and both lost--twice, once with Microsoft and once with Sony. (Remember that until product announcements were made, neither Microsoft or Sony knew of the other company's new hardware. I read an interesting article about that--about how AMD pulled off "Mission: Impossible" in keeping both companies ignorant of what was happening with the other right up until the very end. That was a very neat hat trick.) IMO, neither nVidia or Intel has hardware equivalent to AMD's that it could have used to secure either contract. AMD won these bids with technology.


I think this analyst is mostly right, except for the part about AMD "moving away from x86". These consoles are 100% x86 technology--x86 according to AMD, that is. The success of these upcoming consoles will do much to correct the wrong thinking about x86 in general, namely that it is "dying." It's going to become clear to those poor folks too inexperienced to see it that Apple is the only company around with a vested interest in moving away from x86--and that's only because the company couldn't make it in the general computer markets even during periods of double-digit annual growth. Still, Apple has its 100% x86 Mac computer line, even though as usual Macs are a minor slice of the whole computer market. But Apple seems to be getting about as much back from the Mac as it puts into it these days, which isn't a lot. x86, though, isn't going anywhere, imo.
 
DPI said:
You do know they're producing these chips at break-even for the marketing/propaganda value. Nvidia didn't want to swim in that sewer.
Click to expand...

Do you know this for a fact?

And how would you calculate break even? You know how much slop there is in accounting practices even with GAAP?

Does that mean all production costs are covered and that's it?
So are we throwing costs of employees salaries, depreciation of long term assets, etc?

Because if that's the case, then the "sewer" is paying the bills and keeping the lights on, and employees paid, and that's a lot better than being in the hole and not paying the bills.
 
DPI said:
You do know they're producing these chips at break-even for the marketing/propaganda value. Nvidia didn't want to swim in that sewer.
Click to expand...

I see Nvidia fanbois are upset over the AMD owning the consoles and wanna poo poo on it....lol
 
GunzofNavarone said:
well if you want a world with no AMD and just nvidia products only... then this deal would upset you.
Click to expand...

Actually, the biggest benefit of this deal (regardless of whether Nvidia or AMD had won) is that this is finally the death knell for consoles and a precursor to a resurgence in PC gaming ... by the time the next console refresh rolls around in 10 years we will have 4K TVs firmly established (and digital delivery) and with an x86 architecture there is no reason that HTPCs from any company can't replace consoles finally (so that we can welcome our wayward gaming brethren back into the fold :) )
 
The benefit of the consoles for AMD is not the profit (if there is any), it's the fact they are partnered up with two very big players (MS & Sony) for the next 5-7 years.

That gives them leverage with lenders etc. Plus the extra coverage doesn't hurt at all to boost their profile with the markets.
 
daglesj said:
The benefit of the consoles for AMD is not the profit (if there is any), it's the fact they are partnered up with two very big players (MS & Sony) for the next 5-7 years.

That gives them leverage with lenders etc. Plus the extra coverage doesn't hurt at all to boost their profile with the markets.
Click to expand...

Uh Nintendo isn't exactly a small player either.
 
Skillz said:
Uh Nintendo isn't exactly a small player either.
Click to expand...

Hmm but not very big in the enterprise/business market and generally I feel the markets and analysts are viewing them as 'on the way down'.
 
daglesj said:
Hmm but not very big in the enterprise/business market and generally I feel the markets and analysts are viewing them as 'on the way down'.
Click to expand...

Actually apologies, I re-read and know where you are coming from now. Yes, a big three coup really.
 
Anything that helps keep AMD alive is good news. Though I think they need more than this.
 
It's not really clear how much of the 3.2% gain AMD got YoY was from the new consoles, but it's a pretty significant shift in x86 market share. That would amount to around 2.8 million more processors than AMD shipped in Q3'12.

I wonder how much the total x86 pie has grown from the console sales, fighting against a declining PC market.
 
kbrickley said:
Actually, the biggest benefit of this deal (regardless of whether Nvidia or AMD had won) is that this is finally the death knell for consoles and a precursor to a resurgence in PC gaming ... by the time the next console refresh rolls around in 10 years we will have 4K TVs firmly established (and digital delivery) and with an x86 architecture there is no reason that HTPCs from any company can't replace consoles finally (so that we can welcome our wayward gaming brethren back into the fold :) )
Click to expand...

The next console refresh in 10 years? Too many people here have been conditioned by an unusually long console generation. We'll be looking at Xbox Two and Playstation 5 within 5 years, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top