Former AMD Exec Values Xbox One Deal at $3 Billion



+ Add a Comment


I'm a bit curious as to AMD's financial dealings, imagine it would make an interesting story. They have always been a solid company hardware wise, fanboyism aside they make decent products and they do have a ton of fans.

My gaming rig is all AMD based, so is my wife's so is several others I have built. They basically have a strangle hold on the console market controlling all three.

That markup on supplying the consoles can't be that bad if the three billion number is correct. So did AMD have a spree of bad spending? Overgrowth? Out of hand development cost on R&D?

When you hold nearly 40% of the discrete card market and are still going bankrupt, something is wrong on a fundamental business level.

Hopefully it get's sorted out, Intel and Nvidia with no competition would be a nightmare of slow innovation and even more over priced components. If you think Intel is over priced now, wait until they are they only game in town AND they know it.


Renegade Knight

They make good graphics cards. Their CPU's are lagging. Nothing they have can keep up with their own GPU's for gaming per a study I read looking into of the CPU even matters anymore. Turns out it does.



Actually I find that AMD did a great job at surviving with all the choices made. If it was any other company I have no doubt that they'd have gone bankrupt. I recommend that you read the book called Slingshot by Hector Ruiz, It is very insightful.



Yeah, Antitrust law probably helps a lot...


John Pombrio

This may not be the "savior" of AMD that it seems. WHY did AMD win these huge contracts? I am sure Intel was offered the same deal. Frankly, if I were MS and SONY, I would rather have "Intel inside" as AMD is on shaky ground and Intel has their own fabs.
AMD won because they had the lowest price. Low enough that they may not be making very much profit, if any, on the first iteration of the XBox One and the PS4. If another economic shock comes, won't MS and SONY be surprised if AMD went into bankruptcy?



I somehow disagree with your assessment on the subject. Let's put price aside for a moment and think about the products available to MS and Sony at the moment.

Intel = They have the best CPU that can pump out the best performance for any console. But they don't have the right GPU for the job.

Nvidia = They have a great GPU but they have no CPU.

AMD = They have great GPU and a good enough CPU to pair it with.

I think all in all this is about being able to provide a complete platform. A balanced product of CPU & GPU. And right now, it would seem that only AMD has a balanced product platform.


Renegade Knight

It's a good win for AMD. It could potentially give AMD the leg up they need to actually compete in the CPU arena like they used to do.

That said I agree but for different reasons. The Xbox One looks to be annoying gamers worse than Vista annoyed PC users. If Sony does the same AMD won't be quite as well off as they could have been if MS and Sony paid attention to their customers.



Except AMD effectively has to be around for if it went under, Intel would now have a monopoly on a sizable chunk in the computer market. Sure, Intel could claim that it's competing with ARM but I don't think the courts will buy that.



Or maybe it's because AMD's low-cost APUs dominate Intel's similarly priced offerings where graphics are concerned? Intel's great when you're doing work, but when it comes time to play, you need the muscle only AMD or nVidia can provide.



Exactly, AMD has the edge when it comes to the apu which is by no means a surprise because that's exactly what Hector Ruiz (former CEO of AMD) was aiming for when they bought ATI. If Intel had bought nvidia I have no doubt that we'd be seeing Intel chips in the next consoles. Thankfully nvidia isn't for sale :-)

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.