No?
It's low opportunity cost revenue.
No?then that segment needs an overhaul
Why do you want to know about my suggestions? As if you're going to relay them over to AMD.What are your suggestions? I don't get it, really. They ought not sell IP to Sony and Microsoft in the future because revenue went down in the 4th year? I really don't see any other solution that makes Radeon group more money for the same R&D expenditure.
AMD needs RDNA for client products. The Radeon division has a higher operating margin than the Ryzen group. Should they stop making Ryzen products too? They licensed Zen 2 to Sony and Microsoft too and I'm not sure how they account for that.Why do you want to know about my suggestions? As if you're going to relay them over to AMD.
Since this is the second time you've asked, and since AMD seems content with the earnings from the IP they develop and are used by others, maybe they should wind down the consumer gaming GPU division and become to MSFT and Sony what Imagination Technologies was to Apple.
If 5 years into the console cycle your gaming segment is still getting obliterated by "lower PS5 sales", maybe it is time to reconsider the long term prospects in that segment.
Microsoft seems possible with Nvidia or Qualcomm. But Microsoft seems irrelevant in the console space.I wonder if Qualcomm will be a contender for PS6 and the next Xbox? Certainly for PS6, but with Microsoft supporting ARM they've got all the pieces in place, even the emulator to run previous Xbox code. A modern Qualcomm CPU would be faster enough than what's in the current gen consoles the x86 emulation overhead won't matter.
the answer is no, it's AMD or NV, other vendors have no GPU IP worth mentioning.I wonder if Qualcomm will be a contender for PS6 and the next Xbox? Certainly for PS6, but with Microsoft supporting ARM they've got all the pieces in place, even the emulator to run previous Xbox code. A modern Qualcomm CPU would be faster enough than what's in the current gen consoles the x86 emulation overhead won't matter.
It's the exact opposite of what you state. The gaming segment is not being "obliterated" by now lower PS5 sales, the gaming segment for most of PS5's lifetime was staying afloat thanks to PS5's overall great sales. This is a credit to AMD's console business and shows how far AMD's consumer dGPU business still needs to go to rival that.If 5 years into the console cycle your gaming segment is still getting obliterated by "lower PS5 sales", maybe it is time to reconsider the long term prospects in that segment.
AMD already is developing the IP primarily for two areas not included in the gaming segment: iGPUs for the client segment (which as other have pointed out is faring worse than the gaming segment) and Instinct for the data center segment (which is now bigger than the client segment ever has been).Since AMD seems content with the earnings from the IP they develop and are used by others, maybe they should wind down the consumer gaming GPU division and become to MSFT and Sony what Imagination Technologies was to Apple.
Yes, if you ignore all of the costs associated with producing something then it's always free money....AMD already is developing the IP primarily for two areas not included in the gaming segment: iGPUs for the client segment (which as other have pointed out is faring worse than the gaming segment) and Instinct for the data center segment (which is now bigger than the client segment ever has been).
Reusing the IP for semi custom business is free money on top of that. Licensing out the IP for use in Samsung chips is free money on top of that.
Why do you want to know about my suggestions? As if you're going to relay them over to AMD.
Since this is the second time you've asked, and since AMD seems content with the earnings from the IP they develop and are used by others, maybe they should wind down the consumer gaming GPU division and become to MSFT and Sony what Imagination Technologies was to Apple.
Yea, it's AMD for Xbox & PlayStation with Nvidia for Switch for the next gen. After that, I guess it depends on how the ARM to x86 Emulation does in the next 4-5 years & if Microsoft even has a console anymore.the answer is no, it's AMD or NV, other vendors have no GPU IP worth mentioning.
Plus backcompat and crossgen antics require x86.
That's never going to happen for consoles, they will either go back to arm/risc/powerpc or they won't.After that, I guess it depends on how the ARM to x86 Emulation does in the next 4-5 years
That's Sony's, Microsoft's and Samsung's problem though, they are paying AMD to design and produce something. AMD isn't lifting any finger for them without being paid for that. That's what semi custom business is all about. That's also why you see chip designs in semi custom (or anything close to them) that AMD doesn't sell itself.Yes, if you ignore all of the costs associated with producing something then it's always free money....
TSMC has increased prices like what, 4 times in the last few years?!
Exactly, they are paying AMD to produce the APUs...soThat's Sony's, Microsoft's and Samsung's problem though, they are paying AMD to design and produce something.
Exactly, they are paying AMD to produce the APUs...so
common sense would say that sony/ms made a deal for so and so many units at a certain price, if the cost of production goes up it's not sony/ms problem, it's amds.
Exactly, they are paying AMD to produce the APUs...so
common sense would say that sony/ms made a deal for so and so many units at a certain price, if the cost of production goes up it's not sony/ms problem, it's amds.
You would have to have insider knowledge to make a different claim, you would have to look at the actual contract.
AMD design them, MS/Sony get them manufactured.
To add to this, due to the cross licensing agreement with Intel regarding x86 AMD has to get these chips manufactured themselves. But it's pretty clear AMD is being little more than a middleman between Sony/Microsoft and TSMC.It s AMD that get them manufactured since it s in their financial numbers, they stated that they had lower revenue for this segment due to declining consoles sales (semicustom).
It s AMD that get them manufactured since it s in their financial numbers, they stated that they had lower revenue for this segment due to declining consoles sales (semicustom).
The PO for the wafers might come from AMD but that is just a direct order from MS/Sony.
Sony / MS set the manufacturing amounts.
Lower revenue is obvious, x $ per unit, fewer units manufactured = lower revenue. That is how royalties tend to work.
What exactly would the bull case be though, Intel imploding?
No. It don't have this power their PC silicon. Only Apple, which didn't care about them haves the performance(specially CPU) for this.A modern Qualcomm CPU would be faster enough than what's in the current gen consoles the x86 emulation overhead won't matter.