Fusion Microsoft = graphics/gaming pwnage?

[spigzone]

This was triggered by a story I read in which Microsoft demonstrated a game on Win 7 phone/Zune, Xbox 360 and Windows that shared 90% of it's source code.

It occured to me AMD's upcoming Fusion platforms could provide a rather striking dovetail synergy with Microsoft's strategy.

I would give long odds AMD and Microsoft are in extremely close collaboration in developing Bulldozer and Northern Islands and the Fusion platforms that will be developed from them. It's a natural fit. Fusion can provide a common, highly scalable, highly energy efficient hardware platform able to supply a set of integrated, and very advanced, cpu/gpu solutions for all of Microsoft's hardware needs. A set of solutions neither Nvidia nor Intel will be able to supply. Microsoft could supply a set of platforms tuned to Fusion, which AMD has indicated will be it's focus in the future.


I can see, in three to four years, Windows 8, Windows 8 Phone, Xbox 720 and Fusion coalescing in a unique synergy that will be very difficult to compete with.

And game developers/publishers will absolutely love.

 

[heatlesssun]

You know I've been thinking the same thing. Windows and Windows Phones and the upcoming Courier all support .NET, Silverlight and XNA. There is a great opportunity to leverage all three platforms when developing applications.

There's some ideas that I'm kicking around that I'm working on for the Tablet PC that I'm looking to move to Windows 7 Phones.

 

[Sikkyu]

if AMD and Microsoft can pull it off then it would be something. that beng said there is no way to know if amd and microsoft are even talking about this.

AMD+ATI seems to be willing to please anyone for a reasnable price and doesnt cause alot of problems, no bitchyness of nvidia or wierd behind the back deals that intel does. they just need a bit more R&D to compete with intel. If they can get the preformace crown back, that plus ATI powered graphics and fusion could be something to behold.

 

[spigzone]

if AMD and Microsoft can pull it off then it would be something. that beng said there is no way to know if amd and microsoft are even talking about this.

Microsoft already closely coordinates with Intel, AMD/ATI and Nvidia when developing new Windows and DX iterations. This would be an added layer of coordination for Microsoft's Zune/Phone and Xbox platforms that would be AMD specific.

 

[heatlesssun]

Microsoft already closely coordinates with Intel, AMD/ATI and Nvidia when developing new Windows and DX iterations. This would be an added layer of coordination for Microsoft's Zune/Phone and Xbox platforms that would be AMD specific.

Microsoft isn't going to tie itself to ONLY to AMD as other vendors are doing the same types of things. That's part of the power in tools like .NET and Silverlight which are platform agnostic.

 

[spigzone]

Microsoft isn't going to tie itself to ONLY to AMD as other vendors are doing the same types of things. That's part of the power in tools like .NET and Silverlight which are platform agnostic.

Why not if AMD provides the most optimum solutions at the best prices?

It's too big to go away and not big enough to monopolize the market = they're stable + prices will remain competitive.

 

[JayteeBates]

Why not if AMD provides the most optimum solutions at the best prices?

Even if Bulldozer is the most optimum solution at every price point it would not be the majority of the installed base for years to come. MS makes an OS for the x86 platform not one x86 based vendor. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[spigzone]

Even if Bulldozer is the most optimum solution at every price point it would not be the majority of the installed base for years to come. MS makes an OS for the x86 platform not one x86 based vendor. It just doesn't make sense.

Installed base of what?

 

[heatlesssun]

Installed base of what?

The install base of ALL x86 capable machines.

 

[heatlesssun]

Why not if AMD provides the most optimum solutions at the best prices?

It's too big to go away and not big enough to monopolize the market = they're stable + prices will remain competitive.

Because AMD does something great and then the next day Intel or nVidia does something better. And actually Windows7 Phones are going to be powered by nVidia's Tegra 2 initially.

Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. They simply AREN'T going to tied themselves to hardware. It doesn't benefit them. Or their customers.

 

[spigzone]

Because AMD does something great and then the next day Intel or nVidia does something better. And actually Windows7 Phones are going to be powered by nVidia's Tegra 2 initially.

Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. They simply AREN'T going to tied themselves to hardware. It doesn't benefit them. Or their customers.

Tegra because that's what was available. In the future Fusion solutions will be available. AMD/Fusion has a far more assured and stable future than Nvidia/Tegra can dream of having. Nvidia could easily be out of business in two years, or bought out by someone when their stock tanks. The whole Fermi gamble was based on the uncertainty of Nvidia's future.

How is Microsoft just a SOFTWARE company when it sells it's own game console, media player and, soon, it's own phone? If all of it's platforms are on the same cpu/gpu architecture, how does that not benefit them? It provides an unparalleled cross fertilization synergy.

 

[heatlesssun]

Microsoft is a software company, make no mistake about that. Yes they do make the XBox but that's the exception, not the rule. They are gelting out of the media player business, they said that BEFORE the Zune HD was even launched and they AREN'T going to make a phone because they'd end up competing with their customers like HTC.

Plus its not about what works for Microsoft, its about what works for its customers and Intel is a big part of what works for Microsoft's customers still.

I go back to what I said before. How would tying Microsoft's software to the fortunes of another company HELP Microsoft in the LONG RUN? AMD might be the best today, but Intel might be the best tomorrow and somebody else the day after that.

There's just no benefit to anyone with where you're going and its not even necessary really. With the nature of .NET and Silverlight Microsoft can support unique vendor features without tying everything to those platforms. At higher levels of abstraction where the average .NET and Silverlight developer would be working most of the time, they shouldn't even be aware of lower level hardware support that's not universal. That's just not smart development for general distribution software.

 

[Hornet]

Why not if AMD provides the most optimum solutions at the best prices?

It's too big to go away and not big enough to monopolize the market = they're stable + prices will remain competitive.

You mean you want all gamers to be tied to AMD only, with no competition from Intel and nVidia

You forgot the fact that there are users who are willing to spend premium price on a intel platform to get the highest performance money can buy. So you cannot claim that just because AMD provides optimum solutions at best price, that makes everyone wants it.

Forcing AMD solution upon all gamers is not a bright idea

 

[spigzone]

You mean you want all gamers to be tied to AMD only, with no competition from Intel and nVidia

Computer games will still work on all hardware, as they do now. It does, however, mean game developers are more likely to optimize their computer gaming code for AMD's graphics architecture if that optimization applies across three gaming platforms and optimizing for Nvidia's graphics architecture doesn't. It's an insurmountable advantage AMD's 86 liscense provides over Nvidia when dealing with Microsoft.

 

[XMAN245]

Tegra because that's what was available. In the future Fusion solutions will be available. AMD/Fusion has a far more assured and stable future than Nvidia/Tegra can dream of having. Nvidia could easily be out of business in two years, or bought out by someone when their stock tanks. The whole Fermi gamble was based on the uncertainty of Nvidia's future.

How is Microsoft just a SOFTWARE company when it sells it's own game console, media player and, soon, it's own phone? If all of it's platforms are on the same cpu/gpu architecture, how does that not benefit them? It provides an unparalleled cross fertilization synergy.

Still ranting about how Nvidia, Tegra and Ion are all going to die I see. Somethings never change.

Computer games will still work on all hardware, as they do now. It does, however, mean game developers are more likely to optimize their computer gaming code for AMD's graphics architecture if that optimization applies across three gaming platforms and optimizing for Nvidia's graphics architecture doesn't. It's an insurmountable advantage AMD's 86 liscense provides over Nvidia when dealing with Microsoft.

Man, you need to stop while you are ahead, or in this case, behind. Its really no wonder you got banned from B3D. All you do is talk reteric, how Nvidia is going to fail and how AMD/ATI is going to take over the world.

 

[heatlesssun]

Computer games will still work on all hardware, as they do now. It does, however, mean game developers are more likely to optimize their computer gaming code for AMD's graphics architecture if that optimization applies across three gaming platforms and optimizing for Nvidia's graphics architecture doesn't. It's an insurmountable advantage AMD's 86 liscense provides over Nvidia when dealing with Microsoft.

Once again this makes little sense from an application software perspective. These kinds of optimizations just aren't going to be added to the VAST majority of applications and games unless these technologies are nearly universal. It's much better to take advantage of these types of things at a lower level.

AMD could go out business tomorrow as well, it's not swimming in cash itself.

 

[XMAN245]

AMD could go out business tomorrow as well, it's not swimming in cash itself.

Funny you mention that. They finally had a Quater where they were in the Black, after 4 years of being in the red. Ho they do manage to stay open for business is amazing tho. Never knew of a company til now that could amass such large quanities of debt for so long and still remain open for business, buy other companies without ever filing for bankruptcy.

 

[spigzone]

Microsoft is a software company, make no mistake about that. Yes they do make the XBox but that's the exception, not the rule. They are gelting out of the media player business, they said that BEFORE the Zune HD was even launched and they AREN'T going to make a phone because they'd end up competing with their customers like HTC.

Plus its not about what works for Microsoft, its about what works for its customers and Intel is a big part of what works for Microsoft's customers still.

I go back to what I said before. How would tying Microsoft's software to the fortunes of another company HELP Microsoft in the LONG RUN? AMD might be the best today, but Intel might be the best tomorrow and somebody else the day after that.

The phones will be manufactured to Microsoft's specifications and run on Microsoft's software. They will be thought of as Microsoft phones no matter who manufactures them or which phone company carries them.

Of course it's about what works for Microsoft. Intel being a 'customer' of Microsoft Windows or Enterprise software is entirely separate from Microsofts Xbox and Phone business. Intel MAY be involved in them, but there is no NEED for them to be involved.

Nor does the cpu/gpu landscape remotely resemble a "today, tomorrow, day after that" reality. AMD is going to have an edge over Intel for YEARS with it's Fusion solutions. Intel simply isn't remotely competitive with the graphics half of the equation. And Nvidia has NO cpu half.

As I said before, AMD/Fusion isn't going anywhere, nor is it a monopoly. There's no reason for Microsoft to not 'tie' themselves to AMD's Fusion architecture for the time being when it helps both companies be more competitive. Microsoft with Xbox and it's phone play and AMD get's a platform partner to fight in the mobile chip space. It's win win.

 

[XMAN245]

The phones will be manufactured to Microsoft's specifications and run on Microsoft's software. They will be thought of as Microsoft phones no matter who manufactures them or which phone company carries them.

Of course it's about what works for Microsoft. Intel being a 'customer' of Microsoft Windows or Enterprise software is entirely seperate from Microsofts Xbox and Phone business. Intel MAY be involved in them, but there is no NEED for them to be involved.

Nor does the cpu/gpu landscape remotely resemble a "today, tomorrow, day after that" reality. AMD is going to have an edge over Intel for YEARS with it's Fusion solutions. Intel simply isn't remotely competitive with the graphics half of the equation. And Nvidia has NO cpu half.

They really dont need one as Tegra2 has been shown to do what an ARM processor can do and in alot of cases, better. And unless MS makes a Phone the size of a mini tablet(who the fuck would buy that) no way you'll see an AMD CPU/GPU Fusion core in a phone. To big and would require some serious cooling.

 

[heatlesssun]

The phones will be manufactured to Microsoft's specifications and run on Microsoft's software. They will be thought of as Microsoft phones no matter who manufactures them or which phone company carries them.

This really isn't how it works. Sure Microsoft is telling its partners what they MUST do for its phones but not all that they could. Microsoft is just defining baselines, not telling its partners how to make phones.

Nor does the cpu/gpu landscape remotely resemble a "today, tomorrow, day after that" reality. AMD is going to have an edge over Intel for YEARS with it's Fusion solutions. Intel simply isn't remotely competitive with the graphics half of the equation. And Nvidia has NO cpu half.

This is at best wishful thinking. How the hell does anyone know how future and unreleased technology from AMD compares to that of Intel or nVidia?

Do you have benchmarks for things that don't currently exist?

 

[XMAN245]

This really isn't how it works. Sure Microsoft is telling its partners what they MUST do for its phones but not all that they could. Microsoft is just defining baselines, not telling its partners how to make phones.




This is at best wishful thinking. How the hell does anyone know how future and unreleased technology from AMD compares to that of Intel or nVidia?

Do you have benchmarks for things that don't currently exist?

No, but he has his uber 9000 AMD/ATI tell all crystal ball.

 

[spigzone]

AMD could go out business tomorrow as well, it's not swimming in cash itself.

Grasping at straws.

AMD's graphics division IS swimming in cash right now.

 

[XMAN245]

Grasping at straws.

AMD's graphics division IS swimming in cash right now.

ATI will not be able to keep AMD afloat on its own and his statement is no different than your about Nvidia failing in 2 years strawman.

 

[heatlesssun]

Grasping at straws.

AMD's graphics division IS swimming in cash right now.

But what about the CPU? You need that for Fusion. And whatever cash any part of AMD might be swimming is a proud compared to the ocean Intel is swimming in.

 

[spigzone]

This really isn't how it works. Sure Microsoft is telling its partners what they MUST do for its phones but not all that they could. Microsoft is just defining baselines, not telling its partners how to make phones.

This is at best wishful thinking. How the hell does anyone know how future and unreleased technology from AMD compares to that of Intel or nVidia?

Do you have benchmarks for things that don't currently exist?

You've lost me. I don't understand.

 

[spigzone]

But what about the CPU? You need that for Fusion. And whatever cash any part of AMD might be swimming is a proud compared to the ocean Intel is swimming in.

I don't know what you're getting at. What does AMD's graphics division swimming in cash have to do with AMD not having a CPU for Fusion?

That 'ocean' of cash intel is swimming in didn't result in a competitive Larrabee product.

Intel is still years behind AMD/ATI in graphics.

 

[XMAN245]

I don't know what the H you're saying. What does AMD's graphics division swimming in cash have to do with AMD not having a CPU for Fusion? Which is nonsense in any case.

And that 'ocean' of cash intel is swimming in didn't do squat for their Larrabee effort.

Intel is still years behind AMD/ATI in graphics.

Entry lvl got a whole lot closer there pal. Intels i3 with integrated GPU out does AMD/ATIs and Nvidia's lowend solutions. You seriously need to check your data.

 

[spigzone]

Entry lvl got a whole lot closer there pal. Intels i3 with integrated GPU out does AMD/ATIs and Nvidia's lowend solutions. You seriously need to check your data.

AMD's Llano fusion chips won't be coming out until 2011.

 

[heatlesssun]

Oh well, thanks for the troll.