ARM vs x86? for servers running programs probably optimised for x86? and your surprised intel with their better proccessing nodes & cpu arch are able to beat a ARM cpu?

Thats "ARM Cortex A57" designed by ARM btw, not AMD.

Still just useing ARM design cpu's from them, is going to be equal to nvidia's arm cpu designs.

This is why I think AMD can make a ARM based mobile chip thats as good as Nvidia.

Everyone that licences from ARM, can use their designs for the cpu's they make.

It becomes a matter of the gpu effeciency, which nvidia admittedly has the upperhand in.

However makeing use of HSA I believe AMD could make programs suited for HSA that run better on a mobil chip than Nvidia can.

Mind you these are decisions Nintendo had to make like 18-24 months ago. 

Nvidia had the Tegra line ... AMD had jack shit.

If this is the approach Nintendo wanted, Nvidia to me is clearly the better choice. 

Not only that but they also tend to get better performance per watt than AMD and better memory bandwidth usage, which is critical to a Nintendo device that needs to be portable. 

If Nvidia was willing to give Nintendo a big break on the hardware costs, then it was really a no brainer of a decision, the Tegra X1 can even run the Dolphin emulator reasonably well, which means it probably can take on Nintendo Virtual Console fairly easily since Nintendo I'm sure will be able to make a better emulator using official resources. 

In windows running directx 11. Things are differnt if your not running windows or dx11.

Things are differnt if you design software around it.

Thats why I mention HSA.

Do you know what it is?

Do you know how GPUs can accelerate certain tasks and do them much faster than a CPU? and use much less power?

So your CPU is idle, but your GPU is working at the task and does it faster than your cpu does.

But this isnt true for everything... some tasks, your cpu does better than your GPU.

For those tasks your CPU is active, and your GPU is idle.

So far that is the grunt of it, your useing half of it (cpu or gpu) and ignoreing the other part.

HSA is differnt.

Its a design thats intelligent, and does 1 task, but uses both gpu+cpu at the same time, splits a task and lets the cpu do the parts its good at, while the gpu does the parts its good at.

The results are speedups that are insane, and useing much less power.

My point was, and still is, that AMD could design a ARM based apu, that can compete with Nvidia if they are asked too.

I doubt they were asked to in the first place. 

Nintendo likely favors someone with actual experience for AMD to do that would incur research & development costs. All that stuff you said is nice, but it's hypothetical. Does AMD have an actual chip that Nintendo could use as of 18-24 months ago? I doubt it very much. 

Nvidia has the technology just sitting there ready to go in Tegra and Nintendo likely scored a very sweet price on it. 

AMD is overrated anyway in my books, it's very likely Nvidia has better engineers and designers in general simply because they can actually afford to pay their employees, whereas AMD is struggling to keep its head above water. The only real plus they had over Nvidia was that they charged less for console GPU/APUs, but if Nvidia was willing to give Nintendo a big break on the Tegra tech, then even that advantage went straight down the toilet for AMD. 

Nvidia is not some second rate company, they are the leading graphics technology company on the planet, and in many benchmarks they outperform AMD time and time again with equivalent priced GPUs. If Nvidia is the pick it's Nintendo that's likely the fortunate one because Tegra is just too powerful for what a tablet/phone user needs and that Nintendo was able to sneak in and get that tech for probably a low price. 

Exactly.  Not that I necessarily believe one rumor over the other, but for consistency's sake, it's either both slims (4) or neither (2), meaning there would still be one design win left to claim.

Not neccssarily, it's possible the XBox One redesign required so much work and R&D and perhaps even a new contract agreement that it's effectively a new semi-custom design because of one huge difference between the two devices -- that huge chunk of eSRAM on the GPU. There are also other changes to the XBox One S like an internal integrated power supply that would require probably a completely new type of cooling system. 

It's likely much simpler to die-shrink the PS4. There's no eSRAM, the power supply was already internal, etc. etc. etc. 

Die shrinks are not all equivalent. 

Though I suspect the third AMD design win is outside a gaming console. There are lots of rumors of Apple and AMD working together on something. 

I don't buy that.  Why wouldn't AMD just name the X1 Slim as their third when talking about their design wins?

Talking about design wins ahead of the fact of unveil is unusual in the first place. AMD does it because they are desperate to give their stockholders something to chew on because they are not doing very well financially. 

Unusual or not, they never actually mentioned any of their wins by name until they had been officially announced, upon which they weren't shy about revealing what they were.  XB1 Slim has been revealed for some time now.

AMD will always be behind Intel on fabrication. Always.

HSA is not a game changer.

nVidia also has Denver 2. nVidia like all other ARM licensee's also has access to HSA.