freebs2 said:
For their prospective probably while ps and xb move a lot of units, console chips have very thin margins compared to graphics cards and laptops gpus. Mind me, I don't have anything against AMD, but PS and Xbox use their chips not because they're superior to Nividia's but only because they're chepaer. |
Not only because it's cheaper. I guess both Sony and Microsoft doesn't really want to work with Nvidia at this point. Nvidia screwed both companies in the past. They screwed Microsoft with GPU prices for original Xbox which led to a lawsuit. And they made the worse GPU for PS3 than what was inside Xbox360 which came out a year before. I guess it costed more for Sony than X360 GPU as well.
| shikamaru317 said: This is just one of many reasons why I dislike Nvidia. Yes, it's kind of sad that it took a die shrink down to 7nm for AMD to match or slightly exceed Nvidia's 12nm GTX 2080, but that is no good reason for Nvidia to trashtalk AMD. I like people and companies who are humble instead of those that gloat and trashtalk. And this is just one reason why I dislike Nvidia, I also dislike them because of their practice of designing tech like PhysX and Hair Works specifically so that it will have trouble running on AMD cards, and then moneyhat developers into using that tech in their games, effectively handicapping AMD cards in those games (and the consoles since they use AMD APU's). It is one thing to moneyhat an optimization deal where a dev spends more time optimizing for your cards than for your competition's cards, both AMD and Nvidia do that, but it is another entirely to pay a dev to handicap the competition. It is because of underhanded tactics like that that I will never buy an Nvidia card again, even if they are technically superior to AMD cards in some ways. |
The same. This is the exact same reason I stopped buying Nvidia GPUs 6 years ago. I just don't feel like supporting such business practices.
shikamaru317 said:
It's possible that Xbox Scarlett Anaconda will use a cut down version of this with a few less cores and with GDDR6 instead of the more expensive HBM2 I suppose, but even then it might be too expensive. Radeon VII offers roughly RTX 2080 tier performance for $700, while the top end Navi GPU, the RX 380, will supposedly offer GTX 2070/Vega 64 tier performance for $250. That is a huge price difference, and I can't see MS having a massively higher launch price on Anaconda just to get a measly 15% performance advantage over PS5, at most Anaconda will be $100 more than PS5 imo. |
The price difference won't be the same as in retail. Not to say that the console GPUs will only be based on desktop counterparts, not be the exact same thing. Console manufacturers never pay retail prices for their chips. Otherwise we would never have seen a 400-500$ consoles. I also hope Microsoft won't go with Radeon VII for Scarlett. Choosing Navi even if it will be slightly less powerful would be a wiser choice as this GPU will have more new technologies that won't be present in Radeon VII
