S|A : "Microsoft XBox Next will use an x86 AMD APU instead of PowerPC"

[georgec84]

AMD could use this kind of boost in business.

Just think that a year ago they were so close to striking a deal with Apple for their Macbooks. I think they lost the bid due to concerns about production.

 

[Centauri]

As an AMD stockholder, a deal with Apple/Nintendo/whoever would be a godsend...

 

[2is]

It's been a while, but if memory serves me, didn't MS go to AMD first for the original xbox, but AMD wasn't willing to play ball becuase of how much MS was willing to pay?

What that boils down to is not a whole lot of profit per processor sold. That said, it was a little different back then. MS wasn't established in the console market, and they were going up against the console king, Sony and AMD probably didn't think the volume would be enough to offset the low profit margins.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

As an AMD stockholder, a deal with Apple/Nintendo/whoever would be a godsend...

With how low AMD stock is going lately I've often contemplated buying some just because I can see some of their current moves paying off in the future. Decisions...

 

[Centauri]

I just bought more today, actually. Seems a safe bet that at this point, since all of the bad news for the year feels priced in already, recent downgrades included, and expectations are really low - anything resembling good news should result in a nice pop.

 

[SlowSpyder]

It's been a while, but if memory serves me, didn't MS go to AMD first for the original xbox, but AMD wasn't willing to play ball becuase of how much MS was willing to pay?

What that boils down to is not a whole lot of profit per processor sold. That said, it was a little different back then. MS wasn't established in the console market, and they were going up against the console king, Sony and AMD probably didn't think the volume would be enough to offset the low profit margins.

You also have to remember that in 2002 things were different. AMD had limitied capacity and was in a position of strength fighting Intel, or at least on par in regards to performance, and with the Athlon 64 right around the corner. It was a lot different back then, I can understand why AMD passed on a low margin part when they could use the capacity for things like A64 FX-51 chips that would sell at $999. Now AMD's highest priced chips is sub $200.

 

[Roland00Address]

It's been a while, but if memory serves me, didn't MS go to AMD first for the original xbox, but AMD wasn't willing to play ball becuase of how much MS was willing to pay?

What that boils down to is not a whole lot of profit per processor sold. That said, it was a little different back then. MS wasn't established in the console market, and they were going up against the console king, Sony and AMD probably didn't think the volume would be enough to offset the low profit margins.

AMD now is not the company it was in the late 90s to early 2000 (the first xbox was relased in 2001). Back then for them to make a cpu for the xbox they would not be able to make a cpu for a desktop for they were capacity constrained back then. To make xbox they would make less PCs.

AMD every since the AMD/Intel settlement in Nov 09 is now an Intellectual Property company. In March of 2012 they don't even have a foundry anymore. They can, will, and have (bravos) already made chips for other foundries besides Global Foundries.

Because of this the calculus of the situation has changed tremendously. There is no reason why AMD wouldn't want a contract deal with Microsoft for any contract deal will be (practically) free money for them. Selling xboxes will not mean less laptop and desktop sells for AMD, AMD chips now can now be made at Global Foundries, TSMC, Samsung, IBM, hell even Intel has expressed interest that sometime down the line allowing other customers to use their foundries (this way Intel can use up any excess capacity if they have any.)

AMD would want Microsoft's business. The better question is would Microsoft want to make a deal with AMD and use an x86 design for the entire chip or just gpu?

 

[Ajay]

The microarchitecture is definitely a hybrid, but the ISA is still strictly CISC. All the short instructions were used up years ago, so whenever they add new instructions (like AVX2) they have to use longer and longer instruction formats.

Thanks for the first response, it was very helpful - I've never stepped through x86 code using a hardware emulator - and, apparently, I've forgotten much of what I learned in my Computer Architecture class (~15 years ago!).

It seems to me that RISC chips have become more complex (visa vi ISAs) in response to such things as new media instructions and the handling of vector oriented code (with and essentially scalar architecture). AltiVec comes to mind with the PPC 970 (IIRC). IBM said it was one of the main limiting factors in scaling frequencies to the 3+GHz range at the time and would have preferred a reduced implementation. Sadly, the Jobs mob had to have it their way, even though it killed off a potentially successful uArch. I'd be interested in what the Power7 VSX ISA looks like, though, this is deviating substantially from the current thread. If you can hook me up on a good link, please PM me, otherwise I'll find it later.

Yes, I'm one of those who, do a degree, mourns the loss of PPC on the desktop (even though it was a good move for Apple) and the fact that we never got to see Alpha EV8 because Intel buried it in favor of Itanium.

 

[nenforcer]

This is why nVidia hired Bob Folstein, the former head of AMD / ATI embedded division who won them 3/3 console GPU wins and what looks like 2/3 CPU console wins for the eighth generation consoles.

 

[jpiniero]

It's been a while, but if memory serves me, didn't MS go to AMD first for the original xbox, but AMD wasn't willing to play ball becuase of how much MS was willing to pay?.

Certainly plausible. But AMD is kind of desperate now and is more willing to take what they can get. Why spend the bucks on a custom processor if AMD will do it for virtually no profit?

 

[Blitzvogel]

If I remember correctly, according to "Opening the Xbox", Intel undercut AMD's offer to provide I think it was either a K6-III or original Athlon. I think AMD did design the northbridge and it's integration with NV2A though (or something like that) and it was kept in the production Xbox. I need to take a look at the book again.

 

[ShintaiDK]

This is why nVidia hired Bob Folstein, the former head of AMD / ATI embedded division who won them 3/3 console GPU wins and what looks like 2/3 CPU console wins for the eighth generation consoles.

Console designs pays very little. Its usually a onetime fee of around 50million$. For Nintendo alot less.

 

[jpiniero]

Console designs pays very little. Its usually a onetime fee of around 50million$. For Nintendo alot less.

That kind of arrangement is going to be tough without AMD violating the treaty.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Console designs pays very little. Its usually a onetime fee of around 50million$. For Nintendo alot less.

Are you sure about that? I know I've read some AMD earnings comments that showed AMD was still getting royalties from console sales.

This SA thread also mentions console royalties, this is from Q2 of this year (consoles launched many years ago now).

It does look to be a very small piece of AMD's revenue overall, though. But, this is just for a low end GPU five years into the life cycles of the consoles. The contract may be structured so that as the parts become cheaper to make, AMD gets a smaller piece of the pie (if I remember right, that is what got Nvidia booted from working with MS on the next XBox, Nvidia refused to budge on GPU pricing throughout the life of the original XBox).

But, the above is just for a GPU. If AMD sells the CPU, GPU, and any chipset that will be used, the price they charge MS, Sony, and Nintendo may be justifiably a good deal higher. This could be a lot more significant for AMD.

 

[wlee15]

Console designs pays very little. Its usually a onetime fee of around 50million$. For Nintendo alot less.

There's also recurring royalties payment paid on a per-device scheme.

 

[pelov]

There's also recurring royalties payment paid on a per-device scheme.

Over the life of the console that money adds up to the hundreds of millions. For the Xbox 360 AMD took a one-time payment but for Nintendo's Wii they collected royalties off each console sold and they made a pretty penny too. He's got his rumors backwards.