NVIDIA: PS4 Not Worth The Cost

I personally think nvidia gets greedy with their prices, rumor has it the next nexus 7 won't use a tegra setup. This I think is also why Sony went a different direction with PS4. They must like to burn bridges I know they did with MS.

Is that why the Microsoft's Zune HD had a Tegra chip in it and last year at CES when they launched Windows 8 RT they demonstrated it on a Tegra 3 tablet?

:rolleyes:
 
I asked in the Mobile Phones forum this question: Why aren't there a lot of Tegra and Intel Atom-based smartphones?
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1751361

Curiously, I have not seen any devices announced that use Tegra 4 outside of Nvidia. Most of the talk nowadays are Qualcomm's Snapdragon 600 and 800 SoCs and Samsung's Exynos 5. Apple, well, they're Apple and only their devices use the Ax line.

Tegra 4? Not any device I've heard or read recently that I can recall. You would think that an OEM would use it given it has a seemingly powerful GPU and some interesting features. But, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Majority of the Tegra 3 devices I've seen are in tablets and of course the Ouya. Smartphones? Not a whole lot. Tegra is like the Windows Phone 8 of the mobile SoC world-- not a lot of OEMs have it and not a large marketshare.

What is Nvidia doing wrong with Tegra where Qualcomm, Apple, and Samsung have succeeded in? Besides being late to market, slow, lack of LTE on chip, what else are they missing?

They can't make x86 processors because if I recall, they were denied licensing or was it they failed to purchase a company that makes x86 processors like Via? I don't remember the whole Nvidia-x86 situation now.

If they can't make it in the mobile market, then that leaves them with 3 options...
  • Manufacture their own Android tablet, smartphone, and gaming device (i.e.- Shield)
  • Desktop and workstation graphics cards
  • GPGPU compute server solutions (i.e.- Tesla

No LTE. They have no distinguishing feature in the phone SoC space, much like Intel. There's no reason to pick either one over Qualcomm for the higher end + LTE, and for devices w/o LTE it makes no sense to pay the nVidia/Intel premium if you're not getting anything special over the competition (who the hell needs x86 on a phone?)

The GPGPU/CUDA game has been fading away from nVidia in the consumer space but has risen steadily in HPC. Most consumer applications and products are openCL compliant while CUDA has faded away quite quickly -- in the mobile end where it has never even gotten off the ground.

The next Nexus looks to be using a Qualcomm SoC. Intel has decided to flood emerging markets with cheap Atoms, but that's not a sustainable business model for Intel given the low margins. Intel is going to have to face up against Qualcomm sooner or later, and it's questionable whether they'll be able to offer the same price-to-performance or an equally all-encompassing LTE. Qualcomm's newest global LTE announcement is something that pretty much assures their dominance throughout all of 2013 in the smartphone space.
 
Business don't aspire to be bottom feeders.
Console manufacturing, when is comes to profits, is bottom feeding.

MS, Sony and AMD will all be in the red for the next few years.

Not after they are done micro-transaction-ing people till they go crazy,

Things are going to change and I will be VERY surprised if PS4 plays used games when it releases. If M$ doesn't do used PS4 wont and then it is pay to play every time.
 
Is that why the Microsoft's Zune HD had a Tegra chip in it and last year at CES when they launched Windows 8 RT they demonstrated it on a Tegra 3 tablet?

:rolleyes:

Was taking about their douchebaggery with Xbox, the zune really made it too didn't it. Windows rt tablets do people buy those?

Anyway like I said before nvidia is just being belligerent about not being in any console and shield looks real dumb.
 
Well let's ask wall street who is making the smart decisions.

QjB0Du5.jpg
 
No LTE. They have no distinguishing feature in the phone SoC space, much like Intel. There's no reason to pick either one over Qualcomm for the higher end + LTE, and for devices w/o LTE it makes no sense to pay the nVidia/Intel premium if you're not getting anything special over the competition (who the hell needs x86 on a phone?)

It would probably explain why AMD has no planned smartphone APU at all. Maybe they were smart enough just to have their APUs available in tablets, ultrabooks, laptops and desktop PCs.

It doesn't make sense to enter a market heavily dominated by ARM-based SoCs and expect to succeed. It's damn near impossible now. Maybe 10 years ago, it'd would have been smarter to enter an x86 processor for a smartphone when the market wasn't filled with smartphone devices. Unfortunately, the technology for both a power-efficient mobile x86 processor and the mobile software (a good one at that) was not available then.

Well let's ask wall street who is making the smart decisions.

QjB0Du5.jpg

From the looks of it, neither, since both are below 0% from September 2012 onward.

AMD has made more worse decisions in its history than Nvidia, but a lot of that has to do with past CEOs and mis-management within the company. Hopefully, AMD is making a smarter decision when shifting their focus onto server and mobile products.
 
Well let's ask wall street who is making the smart decisions.

Hello. You must be someone who has never heard of investment bubbles and people getting wiped out because of them.
 
Does anyone remember the last time Nvidia was involved in a gaming console?
 
AMD better hope they get something out of this because they have nothing left to sell. They already lost their foundry, mobile division and even the house they live in. The only thing left is to sell off is their GPU division. Honestly I would be shocked if they make it until the end of next year.

As for the PS4 it won't be out for awhile and it will be years before we know what impact (if any) it has.
 
Does anyone remember the last time Nvidia was involved in a gaming console?

Yeah, the PS3 had an NVIDIA GPU.
Soooo, that means that they are still providing chips to Sony for existing PS3 models being sold.
 
The only time you can "dump" successfully is when you have lots of cash reserves. And it's illegal.

If dumping (deliberately selling goods at under production costs to crush a competitor) was legal, iPhones would be $99 right now so Apple could eliminate competitors, then they would raise it back up.

Are you seriously not aware of the fact that console manufacturers unload consoles at a loss with the intention of making it up on the ecosystem? :confused: This is common practice and has been for many years. Particularly in the case of the PS3.

It's not conjecture.
 
Well let's ask wall street who is making the smart decisions.

QjB0Du5.jpg
... 'Not sure if serious' gif goes here or perhaps a Joker 'why so serious' gif?

Is that why the Microsoft's Zune HD had a Tegra chip in it and last year at CES when they launched Windows 8 RT they demonstrated it on a Tegra 3 tablet?

:rolleyes:
O-M-G like the Zune-HD a product known for being .... well its a Zune.... had an Tegra chip in it? Woahhh. What's the Zune-HD mostly do? Play videos and music? Wow the Tegra chip is capable of playing HD videos AND music? You don't say!!

All sarcasim aside, a lot of chips can play 720p video that I wouldn't want to see put into PS3 including some DX9 cards from way back in the late 90s/early 2000s. Personally, I'm happy that both console manufacturers have gone the route of PC-based hardware. Now, I am a bit curious to see what the .... pirating/warez community is going to be able to make happen.

I know at times, there are a lot of specific choices made regarding a game being single-platform. IE. I can't play some FF games on some xbox platforms. Of course, the warez community when Windows Vista was new and only Windows Vista had DX10, a lot of DX10 only titles were not playable on Windows XP. As a warez community was fairly anti-vista for a while, it came up with community mods to make DX10 games playable on Windows XP. If you can ...artifically force DX10 into Windows XP, I wonder if you could 'force' a ps4-only x86 hardware based FF game to run on a Windows 7/8/9 machine.

It seems to be like it is theoretically possible assuming all the libraries/supporting software the PS3 uses could be emulated on the PC. I think the 'hard part' would be having the game not crash each time it tried to award an achievement/trophy. I could see that being 'cracked' though. Like the emulated system returning a 'already unlocked' exception everytime an achievement was earned to keep the game running. It at least seems substantially more probable than a PS3 game/emulation running on a PC.
 
O-M-G like the Zune-HD a product known for being .... well its a Zune.... had an Tegra chip in it? Woahhh. What's the Zune-HD mostly do? Play videos and music? Wow the Tegra chip is capable of playing HD videos AND music? You don't say!!

Someone had made up a story about NVIDIA burning their bridge to Microsoft with the XBOX. I pointed out how Microsoft has kept using NVIDIA chips.

I know people hate when facts are used to prove a point.
 
Sounds like nvidia is a bit sour at Amd.

lol, I've never seen so much NVIDIA hate and AMD love in one thread.
Seriously, I like AMD's products, but even this thread of AMD-lovey-dovey-ness is starting to make me hate AMD.

Normally threads are all about how much AMD sux and Intel is ftw.
This thread is like the anti-thesis to all of those other threads! :eek:
 
I agree that Tamasi is probably making excuses. Passing up a new opportunity as PC graphics cards sales continue to decline and nvidia failing to capture more ARM business doesn't make much sense.

IMO, nvidia was never really in the running anyway. It didn't/doesn't have a complete solution for the product. That's a much larger issue than not getting enough royalties.
 
Back
Top