I'm a big fan of competition in the graphics market, which is why what I am about to say pretty much sucks, but I'm an even bigger fan of factual reality and where rational musings lead me. It is what it is.
The stated strategy of AMD's United Gaming Strategy is to build out the infrastructure to facilitate rapid and easy porting between AMD based hardware in general and AMD HSA capable processors in particular. Currently that would include the Xbox One, PS4, AMD based PC hardware and a focus on upcoming HSA APU based PCs in particular. In the future it can be expected to include Steam Box.
Any game publisher's HOLY GRAIL is for all the platforms it supports being locked down and running on nearly identical, very easy to program for hardware, substantially minimizing the time, money and manpower to develop their games and port them to those platforms and maximizing their profits.
In other words a Unified Gaming Strategy. That is the vision AMD is presenting to developers and publishers - and what a compelling and seductive vision it is. Strategically there's nothing to lose and everything to gain by supporting that vision.
It is known AMD optimizations are occurring for EA/Dice/Frostbite Engine. The initial report indicated a contract that specified 'exclusive to AMD'. That has proven to be wrong, however it is entirely possible that, while there is no legal restriction involved, that rumor may have been based on the reality EA is locking Nvidia out for purely business reasons - it just doesn't want to spent the time, money and resources on optimizing for Nvidia when the PS4 and Xbox One are AMD HSA APUs and AMD is providing substantial support to facilitate cross porting between those platforms and it is at cross purposes with the longer term vision.
That Holy Grail is now WITHIN THEIR GRASP. Of course they are going gauge their actions to support that goal - PC gaming dominated by AMD HSA APUs and GPUs in locked down ecosystems (Steam Box, Steam Client, Origin etal) to go with the AMD HSA APU Xbox One and PS4.
With that in mind, from a purely business perspective, Nvidia would represent an impediment to realizing that vision. The quicker PC gaming moves to AMD HSA APUs, the better for the developers and publishers bottom line. At the end of the day the bottom line trumps all other considerations. Hence Crystal Dynamics locking Nvidia out of it's code until the game was released and EA's focus on AMD to the exclusion of Nvidia. It can be safely assumed those examples are not outliers.
To reach that Holy Grail, developers and publishers are now substantially incentivized to maximize optimization and support for AMD hardware and minimize optimization and support for competing hardware.
Rory Read has a track record of being a winner. That is manifesting here in a manner that is almost gruesome for Nvidia. Rory Read is flat out and ruthlessly going for the kill and all facts on the ground indicate he might do just that.
This is the situation Nvidia is currently facing.
Added to this is the reality HSA is far larger than just consoles and PC gaming. Adobe and Gaikai, among many others, are presenting Keynotes at AMD"s Nov. Developer Summit in which they will outline how they are implementing HSA and where they are going with it. If Adobe is making a decision HSA is a good bet to own the future of computing, what are the rest of the professional graphics players doing? If Sony/Gaikai is going with an HSA game streaming solution, what are the other player in that space looking at?
HSA is open standards based. It is designed to be cross platform and cross OS, truly open up the potential of GPGPUs and to be future proof. Neither Nvidia or Intel play in, or have any say in, the HSA space.
If Adobe and the rest of the professional graphics players decide HSA is where the future lies, where does that leave Nvidia?
If HSA becomes the preferred solution for game and application streaming, where does that leave GRID?
Not sure what, if anything, Nvidia can do at this point to turn this around. Decide to license their IP to generate future revenue streams perhaps.
One can only hope for the best.
The stated strategy of AMD's United Gaming Strategy is to build out the infrastructure to facilitate rapid and easy porting between AMD based hardware in general and AMD HSA capable processors in particular. Currently that would include the Xbox One, PS4, AMD based PC hardware and a focus on upcoming HSA APU based PCs in particular. In the future it can be expected to include Steam Box.
Any game publisher's HOLY GRAIL is for all the platforms it supports being locked down and running on nearly identical, very easy to program for hardware, substantially minimizing the time, money and manpower to develop their games and port them to those platforms and maximizing their profits.
In other words a Unified Gaming Strategy. That is the vision AMD is presenting to developers and publishers - and what a compelling and seductive vision it is. Strategically there's nothing to lose and everything to gain by supporting that vision.
It is known AMD optimizations are occurring for EA/Dice/Frostbite Engine. The initial report indicated a contract that specified 'exclusive to AMD'. That has proven to be wrong, however it is entirely possible that, while there is no legal restriction involved, that rumor may have been based on the reality EA is locking Nvidia out for purely business reasons - it just doesn't want to spent the time, money and resources on optimizing for Nvidia when the PS4 and Xbox One are AMD HSA APUs and AMD is providing substantial support to facilitate cross porting between those platforms and it is at cross purposes with the longer term vision.
That Holy Grail is now WITHIN THEIR GRASP. Of course they are going gauge their actions to support that goal - PC gaming dominated by AMD HSA APUs and GPUs in locked down ecosystems (Steam Box, Steam Client, Origin etal) to go with the AMD HSA APU Xbox One and PS4.
With that in mind, from a purely business perspective, Nvidia would represent an impediment to realizing that vision. The quicker PC gaming moves to AMD HSA APUs, the better for the developers and publishers bottom line. At the end of the day the bottom line trumps all other considerations. Hence Crystal Dynamics locking Nvidia out of it's code until the game was released and EA's focus on AMD to the exclusion of Nvidia. It can be safely assumed those examples are not outliers.
To reach that Holy Grail, developers and publishers are now substantially incentivized to maximize optimization and support for AMD hardware and minimize optimization and support for competing hardware.
Rory Read has a track record of being a winner. That is manifesting here in a manner that is almost gruesome for Nvidia. Rory Read is flat out and ruthlessly going for the kill and all facts on the ground indicate he might do just that.
This is the situation Nvidia is currently facing.
Added to this is the reality HSA is far larger than just consoles and PC gaming. Adobe and Gaikai, among many others, are presenting Keynotes at AMD"s Nov. Developer Summit in which they will outline how they are implementing HSA and where they are going with it. If Adobe is making a decision HSA is a good bet to own the future of computing, what are the rest of the professional graphics players doing? If Sony/Gaikai is going with an HSA game streaming solution, what are the other player in that space looking at?
HSA is open standards based. It is designed to be cross platform and cross OS, truly open up the potential of GPGPUs and to be future proof. Neither Nvidia or Intel play in, or have any say in, the HSA space.
If Adobe and the rest of the professional graphics players decide HSA is where the future lies, where does that leave Nvidia?
If HSA becomes the preferred solution for game and application streaming, where does that leave GRID?
Not sure what, if anything, Nvidia can do at this point to turn this around. Decide to license their IP to generate future revenue streams perhaps.
One can only hope for the best.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter