Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 197 posts

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#21

Post by Scramblejams »

janice1999 wrote: post #9
bangaladore wrote: post #5

Maybe I'm misinformed, but I could never see Intel getting this contract. AMD has extensive experience with high-performing APUs, something Intel, at least in my memory, does not have. The chips on modern high-end consoles are supposed to compete with GPUs, not with integrated graphics. Does Intel even have any offerings that would indicate they could accomplish this? Intel has ARC, which presumably could be put in a…

Intel has Battlemage [1]. Presumably that would be the basis of the console APU. Their iGPU performance is actually getting good now. [2] [1] https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/graphics-cards/embargo-no-p... [2] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/lunar-lake-i...

> Their iGPU performance is actually getting good now.

I've only been waiting for Intel to ship a compelling iGPU since, I dunno, their "Extreme Graphics" in 2001? What on earth have their iGPU teams been doing over there for the last 20+ years?

I guess the OEMs were blinkered enough not to demand it, and Intel management was blinkered enough not to see the upside on their own.

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#22

Post by pinewurst »

coder543 wrote: post #18
pknomad wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto. AMD also reliably delivered on CPUs for the past 2 iterations of both Xbox and PS. AMD feels like the only choice for consoles at this point.

Well, Nvidia has powered a much more popular console... the Nintendo Switch, and Nvidia looks set to power the Switch 2 when it launches next year. So, AMD is clearly not the only choice.

That's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Switch is lower price, lower performance by design and used, even originally, a mature NVIDIA SoC, not really a custom.

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#23

Post by adastra22 »

janice1999 wrote: post #9
bangaladore wrote: post #5

Maybe I'm misinformed, but I could never see Intel getting this contract. AMD has extensive experience with high-performing APUs, something Intel, at least in my memory, does not have. The chips on modern high-end consoles are supposed to compete with GPUs, not with integrated graphics. Does Intel even have any offerings that would indicate they could accomplish this? Intel has ARC, which presumably could be put in a…

Intel has Battlemage [1]. Presumably that would be the basis of the console APU. Their iGPU performance is actually getting good now. [2] [1] https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/graphics-cards/embargo-no-p... [2] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/lunar-lake-i...

Intel’s absolute best integrated GPU being roughly comparable to a lower end model from the competition is not “getting good.”

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#24

Post by wmf »

ChocolateGod wrote: post #13
epolanski wrote: post #6

Not sure the title has the right framing. It's hard to compete with AMD which is the only tech company to offer both x86 and a solid GPU technology that comes with it. On top of that you have backwards compatibility woes and the uncertainty around Intel being able to deliver on its foundry. All in all, this win would've been a great deal for Intel's foundry in PR, but money wise those were never going to be huge sums…

> both x86 and a solid GPU technology that comes with it If only Project Denver had kept its original goal

Transmeta and Denver never had great performance. If you want an x86 CPU it's so much safer to go with AMD.

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#25

Post by snitty »

whalesalad wrote: post #19

Intel hasn't made a console CPU/GPU since... the original Xbox? AMD has done: Gamecube, Wii, Xbox 360 (gpu, not cpu), Xbox one, PS4, PS5 ...

Just to clarify, GameCube and Wii CPU was an IBM PowerPC chip. GPU was ATI in both, later acquired by AMD.

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#26

Post by mastazi »

According to the writer everything in tech is AI. It bothers me and makes it difficult to take the article seriously.

> Similar to how big tech companies like Google and Amazon rely on outside vendors to help design and manufacture custom AI chips

> Having missed the first wave of the AI boom dominated by Nvidia and AMD, Intel reported a disastrous second quarter in August.

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#27

Post by mey »

whalesalad wrote: post #19

Intel hasn't made a console CPU/GPU since... the original Xbox? AMD has done: Gamecube, Wii, Xbox 360 (gpu, not cpu), Xbox one, PS4, PS5 ...

The Steamdeck is an AMD APU (potentially originally developed for Magic Leap), and several follow on portable PC handhelds using AMD Z1 apus. https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/handhelds/ryzen-z...

Re: Intel lost the Sony Playstation business to AMD

#29

Post by christkv »

snitty wrote: post #25
whalesalad wrote: post #19

Intel hasn't made a console CPU/GPU since... the original Xbox? AMD has done: Gamecube, Wii, Xbox 360 (gpu, not cpu), Xbox one, PS4, PS5 ...

Just to clarify, GameCube and Wii CPU was an IBM PowerPC chip. GPU was ATI in both, later acquired by AMD.

I think GameCube GPU was ArtX bought by ATI then ATI bought by AMD.
Post reply on HN