By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Soundwave said:
Stefan51278 said:

Yeah, that chip does cost 38$ to mass produce. No, it doesn't just cost 38$. Apple iterated this chip for years, invested millions after millions and sold a alot of predecessor-chips to customers to get where they are at the moment. No way Nintendo could buy this chip with that high perfomance/low-power for 38$ per chip ;)



 

PowerVR is looking to put an even more powerful 16-core version of this chip (7900) which is getting into XBox One territory full stop (800 GFLOPS) into cheap Android set-top boxes. 

I don't think these chips cost that much money and Apple is not the only vendor for them. Nvidia has a comparable chip too (the Tegra X1) which has been sold in a micro-console for a year already and that costs $199.99 with 3GB RAM and a fat profit margin. 

These chips are cheap. I think AMD could give Nintendo something similar if they wanted and AMD has very low margins (that's why they get all the console contracts). 

 

Maybe some cheap chip with 8 little cpu-cores and standard-arm-design, but Apple's A9X is none of that. That is a highly power-efficient-chip and not easy to get for Nintendo. It's not just pure random that an more expensive Intel-CPU with four Cores burns an AMD with eight Cores. Today it is more important for Chips what energy they use than which perfomance they have.

What also would be needed for X86 in the home console and ARM in the Handheld is a really good development-kit. Developers which didn't want to port games to the Wii U for having the PowerPC-CPU won't applaud for porting their code to two CPU-Architectures