Slashdot Mirror


Nvidia Walked Away From PS4 Hardware Negotiations

An anonymous reader writes "Tony Tamsai, Nvidia's senior vice president of content and technology, has said that providing hardware for use in the PlayStation 4 was on the table, but they walked away. Having provided chips for use in both the PS3 and the original Xbox, that decision doesn't come without experience. Nvidia didn't want to commit to producing hardware at the cost Sony was willing to pay. They also considered that by accepting a PS4 contract, they wouldn't have the resources to do something else in another sector. In other words, the PS4 is not a lucrative enough platform to consider when high-end graphics cards and the Tegra line of chips hold so much more revenue potential."

4 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder how much of the 'opportunity cost/things we could have been working on instead' factor has to do with the fact that AMD is simply in a tighter spot than Nvidia, and how much it has to do with the fact that AMD already makes CPU/GPU combination packages(and seems interested in making more), while Nvidia has nothing of that sort except their 'Tegra', which might be a snappy mobile part; but is fundamentally punching in a different weight class(if nothing else, Sony's plans for 8GBs of RAM get a lot uglier on a 32-bit architecture. Yes, ARM also has something PAE-like; but PAE is mostly a hack that makes running multiple independent programs on a 32 bit system with more than 4GB of RAM palatable, not something you'd want to design a game engine around.)

    This isn't to say that Nvidia couldn't have done it(heck, what would buying VIA cost these days?); but Nvidia would need, essentially, an entire new flavor of product line for this job, while AMD, whether they call it this or not, is punching out a modestly customized APU, which almost certainly shares substantially with the ones that they sell for PCs.

  2. Re:Console margins can't be good by Luthair · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't really true, both the Xbox 360 and the Wii run AMD (well ATI) GPUs

  3. Bullshit by DarthVain · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Considering AMD are producing the CPU chips for both platforms, and the the GPU as well, it isn't surprising that nVidia "walked" away. This is the eventual benefit of AMD buying ATI, in that they can produce both now. I have no doubt that AMD either have special consideration or simply could offer a better bid than nVidia could.

    Regardless of the profit, this would be a big feather in AMD's cap. AKA "We produce both the CPU and GPU of all modern game consoles, don't you want to buy our chips?". Also in the bigger scheme of things, if you get game developers in such numbers making games for YOUR video card on millions and millions of consoles for all games, which are ported to say PC, what do you think those games will be optimized for? AMD. Which will look better? AMD. This is something that is going to change things in a pretty large way over the next 10 years.

    nVidia should have paid money to be a part of this if only to prevent their rival in AMD from doing so. Perhaps they didn't have the money. More likely they think they have something that will make a difference. I doubt it.

    I'm not fired, I quit is the sentiment I feel about nVidia's statement...

  4. Re:Wonder what they told MS by MBCook · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can you? One of the reasons the original XBox was pulled off the market as soon as the 360 came out (and no slim was ever made) was because nVidia reportedly refused to do a die shrink or combine dies, etc. So MS was left with a big, hot, expensive chip while Sony was able to shrink theirs and lower their costs dramatically.

    MS might still hold a grudge on that one.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.