AMD says PC gaming will benefit from next generation consoles

[Shawn Knight]

Next generation consoles from Microsoft and Sony are just around the bend. Many have forecasted their arrival as a blow to PC gaming but according to AMD’s Matt Skynner, that simply isn’t the case. Instead, he believes PC gamers will actually benefit from the arrival of the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.

During a recent interview with Forbes, Skynner said PC gaming is alive and well and it’s a segment that’s growing. Whenever new consoles are launched, it gives a boost to gaming overall. This time around, he said, because the architectures of the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 are similar, it makes it cheaper and easier for developers to create for consoles and the PC.

Skynner went on to suggest that gamers aren’t console or PC gamers. Instead, he believes gamers are gamers and any advance in one area helps things across the board.

That’s wishful thinking, especially coming from a company that has their hand in virtually every segment of gaming. Both Microsoft and Sony are using AMD silicon to power their next generation systems and there are already AMD GPUs inside the Xbox 360, the Wii and the Wii U. Oh, and let’s not forget that AMD is doing rather well on the PC graphics side as well.

Skynner also suggested that next generation games should run better on PCs powered by AMD hardware because those titles will also be optimized for AMD-powered consoles. That’s a pretty bold statement as Nvidia currently offers the fastest single GPU at this moment in time but who knows how things will play out once the new consoles arrive.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/54033-amd-says-pc-gaming-will-benefit-from-next-generation-consoles.html

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Oh, and let?s not forget that AMD is doing rather well on the PC graphics side as well.

Are they? AMD's stock is selling for $3 right now and their entire company is worth $2.7 billion. That's not a lot considering they lost $1.1 billion last year.

I'd like to know what kind of deal AMD made with Sony and MS. How much does AMD make on each console sold? It sounds great to have your chips in the consoles, but if they're only making a few bucks per console, then it's not helping them much.

I like AMD, I've used their processors more than Intel's when building PCs, but they always seem like they're the underdog. They can't hold a candle to Intel in the shrinking PC market, and Nvidia keeps passing them up with performance and efficiency. Hopefully the consoles will help them out a bit.

 

[Sniped_Ash]

No, actually, I'm a PC gamer. I prefer the keyboard and mouse when playing shootmans and like being able to mod games. The new consoles will help PC gaming because they are basically little PCs that are probably as powerful as a typical i5-2500 machine from a couple years ago instead of byzantine puzzle-boxes that can barely run modern games.

 

[hahahanoobs]

The new consoles will help PC gaming because they are basically little PCs that are probably as powerful as a typical i5-2500 machine from a couple years ago instead of byzantine puzzle-boxes that can barely run modern games.

LMAO... I needed that.

 

[ensabrenoir]

.....I think Amd is about to benefit (a small amount) from the next gen consoles.....pc gamers aren't console gamers... to a lot of pc purist... consoles are the ultimate heresy. Amd made a deal with the devil.

 

[dividebyzero]

Are they? AMD's stock is selling for $3 right now and their entire company is worth $2.7 billion. That's not a lot considering they lost $1.1 billion last year.

Their IP might be worth close to their market cap if you take into account the 64-bit extension to x86, although that doesn't show up in figures because the cross-license isn't transferrable to a potential buyer.
As per usual, AMD's excellent chip designers. engineers, and scientists are offset by a haphazard management easily distracted by shiny things. At least they are making some progress in that regard as they've now trimmed their Board of Directors headcount down to the same levels as Intel and Nvidia (10)

I'd like to know what kind of deal AMD made with Sony and MS. How much does AMD make on each console sold?

Round numbers? Bugger all. But then all the hard work (R&D) has been done, now it's just income- and given the development cycle of consoles they'll be collecting that revenue for the best part of a decade...at least.

 

[drjekel_mrhyde]

He's right. You'll be able to get games day one for all three. PC games just for PC's will be always better, but it's a step forward on getting more people to game on a PC than now. Only thing that's bad, all titles will be $60+

 

[Agyapas]

AMD was hurt by the ATI merger; they had to do a lot on deciding what direction their IP was to take with having both PC and GPU IPs, and had to struggle churning out the products they had then. Right now their focus appears to be on the unified architecture of both CPU and GPU, alongside unified shared memory, making it more energy efficient, bang-for-the-buck, and more open to programming advantages of OpenCL (among other things)

Notice Intel and NVIDIA being leaders in their respective turfs? That's because their Research & Development are primarily focused on their primary products (CPU & GPU, respectively). AMD cannot commit all resources on only one department - that will cripple the development of the other. That alone is an accomplishment for a company who actually doesn't need to top benchmark reviews and satisfy Frames-Per-Second fanatics. And they provide an alternative to Intel and NVIDIA, which is the reason why they are vital to consumers - without them, your entry-level Intel and NVIDIA products will be at an unfair double price markup (and you won't have a choice).

We're fans of AMD, that being said, we are passionate about which direction the company will be going for. Right now, it's not too shabby - their gaming support is as high as ever - think Never Settle Forever bundles, which NVIDIA is starting to try out with the Splinter Cell Blacklist and Arkham Origins titles - leveraging their PhysX capabilities (or would you prefer AMD filing for bankruptcy, doing massive downsizing, selling their IPs to Apple, etc.)

 

[godrilla]

Well if it's anything like the rumor of bf4 running on super duper ultra only 720p on medium settings on the more powerful console ps4 then I have a clear picture how big the gap already is and how far it will get with next generation of pc graphics launching soon with volcanic islands and Maxwell gpu in 1st half of 2014.

 

[GhostRyder]

They are right, now that consoles have really stepped up into being closer to PC's rather than being these Devices designed to be only workable in one environment. This will mean that designing for cross platforms all around to be much more simple compared to the past.

As for whether AMD is doing good or bad...Honestly they are going up, they have had a rough spell, but their GPU's are top notch and great values and they are taking their drivers to the next level. 5 Years ago, I rarely glanced in ATI/AMD's Direction when looking at video cards, now I cant help but always start in that direction.

PC gaming and console gaming is going to benefit from this greatly!

 

[dividebyzero]

Notice Intel and NVIDIA being leaders in their respective turfs? That's because their Research & Development are primarily focused on their primary products (CPU & GPU, respectively).

Very far from that simple...or not. The primary difference between Intel (and Nvidia) and AMD is that the former had/have a very clear idea of how they achieve growth. AMD has historically looked to other companies and then followed their lead. It was how they started (as a second source manufacturer) and how they have continued by and large.
Intel's strategy has always fallen into two distinct areas-
Firstly, to make money off every part of the market. It is no coincidence that Intel sells CPUs, GPGPUs, chipsets, consumer/pro motherboards, SSD's, and NICs amongst other hardware that has included DRAM (until the market made it a bulk commodity)- a reasonable idea of the breadth of Intel's products >>here<< to which you can add the upcoming MXC, numerous supporting software packages, and of course, compilers. You can see that Intel doesn't leave many stones unturned.
Secondly, a ruthless approach to litigation (see AT&T, Cyrix, Chips and Technologies, NEC, AMD, and pretty much any/every other company that treads on its turf).

Nvidia's approach is somewhat easier to fathom. Nvidia are just as much a software company as they are purveyors of hardware. What they have offered- for better or worse, amounts to a complete hardware + software ecosystem with continuous support...which for the majority of users, both consumer and professional, has more than a modicum of allure.

For what its worth, AMD have never been a software company- and likely never will. They provide the tools (the metaphorical hammer and nails), its up to a random assortment of third parties with varying degrees of enthusiasm, knowledge, and commitment to make use of those tools.

Unfortunately for AMD, more people prefer to move into a ready made house than build their own.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

It sounds great to have your chips in the consoles, but if they're only making a few bucks per console, then it's not helping them much.

I hate to disagree with you but a couple bucks per console doesn't sound bad. Wouldn't you like a couple of bucks from each of the millions of consoles sold? I wouldn't say no.

 

[Guest]

IMO it is a fact as the future consoles are based on PC hardware programmers will making games for PC's in general, so at the end its easier to bring out games for future consoles and the PC(with out to having to port the game) which can boost profits of the game developers.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

I hate to disagree with you but a couple bucks per console doesn't sound bad. Wouldn't you like a couple of bucks from each of the millions of consoles sold? I wouldn't say no

Well, that depends. According to AMD's income statement they lost $1.1 billion last year. That means if they make $5 on every Xbox or PS4 sold they'll need to sell 220 million units to turn that around. By comparison they've only ever sold like 30 million Xbox 360s and 30 million PS3s.

That huge loss looks like the combination of lower revenue and higher cost of goods, so perhaps the difference is all sitting in inventory inside consoles right now.

Now, I know there's a lot more they do than console chips, so hopefully they get AMD stickers on all the boxes of the consoles and they can get some marketing out of the deal.

 

[Gopal Bhat]

I hate to disagree with you but a couple bucks per console doesn't sound bad. Wouldn't you like a couple of bucks from each of the millions of consoles sold? I wouldn't say no

Well, that depends. According to AMD's income statement they lost $1.1 billion last year. That means if they make $5 on every Xbox or PS4 sold they'll need to sell 220 million units to turn that around. By comparison they've only ever sold like 30 million Xbox 360s and 30 million PS3s.

That huge loss looks like the combination of lower revenue and higher cost of goods, so perhaps the difference is all sitting in inventory inside consoles right now.

Now, I know there's a lot more they do than console chips, so hopefully they get AMD stickers on all the boxes of the consoles and they can get some marketing out of the deal.

There have been a lot more consoles than that sold this generation.

Here's the total number sold since launch:

Wii = 100 Million
XBOX 360 = 78 Million
PS3 = 79 Million
Wii U = 3.5 Million (pathetic)

So quite a healthy amount of money to be made for them this generation, especially since they're powering all 3 next gen systems.

 

[Guest]

Oh please, as if Bulldozer was a smash hit.
This is hilarious. AMD Fanboys need to pull their head out of their asses.

 

[Guest]

Apparently the comment system doesn't like to allow you to reply directly, but the above comment was in reply to the AMD fanboy dividebyzero's inane comment:

As per usual, AMD's excellent chip designers. engineers, and scientists are offset by a haphazard management easily distracted by shiny things

P.S. I wouldn't defend the old manegement at AMD but the engineers are hardly without fault. The notion that they are hapless chickens at the terror of the corrupt bosses is a fantasy that suits the mind of an AMD fanboy or a failed AMD engineer.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Well, that depends. According to AMD's income statement they lost $1.1 billion last year. That means if they make $5 on every Xbox or PS4 sold they'll need to sell 220 million units to turn that around. By comparison they've only ever sold like 30 million Xbox 360s and 30 million PS3s.

That huge loss looks like the combination of lower revenue and higher cost of goods, so perhaps the difference is all sitting in inventory inside consoles right now.

Now, I know there's a lot more they do than console chips, so hopefully they get AMD stickers on all the boxes of the consoles and they can get some marketing out of the deal.

I fully understand what you're saying but their GPU division has always been more profitable than their CPU division. Having AMD CPU's & GPU's in every console can't hurt their bottom line.

 

[amstech]

To quote the hybrid from Battlestar Galactica:
"All this has happened before, and all this will happen again"

Listen, everytime new consoles release thier hardware looks decent... for a moment. Games will cross-platform easier and visually look similar unless the PC user has an extreme rig or plays at an extreme resolution.
But GPU's get outdated fast. Real fast. The PS3 and Xbox processors were very able years after thier release but the 256MB GPU's can only do so much even with top notch engineering. (Although I still can't believe how good Halo 4 looked.)
In 2 years, when a 512bit 8GB RAM GTX 980 releases and crushes everything in its sight (I know its not true just spouting an example), consoles will be old again and cross-platform issues will start back up when newer tech and features available on PC is not available on console.

 

[Guest]

You would think that yet were is my PC copy of Grand Theft Auto 5?

 

[MrBungle]

No, actually, I'm a PC gamer. I prefer the keyboard and mouse when playing shootmans and like being able to mod games. The new consoles will help PC gaming because they are basically little PCs that are probably as powerful as a typical i5-2500 machine from a couple years ago instead of byzantine puzzle-boxes that can barely run modern games.

I think you're giving the CPU in those things far too much credit...

Both the PS4 and XBOne CPUs are based on AMD's jaguar core and operate at 1.8 and 1.6GHz respectively... A 4 core 1.5GHz jaguar scores a pathetic 1.5 points in Cinebench 11.5... granted the consoles have 8 cores and would score around 3 but that's still pretty sad.. (the aging i5 2500 scores 5.42 at stock clocks) Single threaded performance of jaguar at 1.5Ghz is roughly equivalent to an ancient 3.0GHz pentium 4.

Here's the benchmarks if you want to see for yourself:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6974/amd-kabini-review/3

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_2500k_and_core_i7_2600k_review,14.html

http://www.cbscores.com/

 

[Namtrooper]

I have to agree with the article in the sense that titles being ported should be much easier and I feel quite comfortable with an xbox or ps remote. But consoles will still have exclusivity and most of the times the titles are ported to pc at a reduced price.
For me that's fine since I dont mind waiting. I have more than enough stuff in general to keep me occupied. Gaming and otherwise.

 

[Namtrooper]

By the way im drunk and texting from my cell. Pardon the grammar