AMD: Xbox One deal worth over $3 Billion

[TerryMathews]

Though that thread is discussing the cross-licensing agreement in terms of a buyout which is not applicable in this case. (As well, it's all just postulation based on the 2001 agreement anyway.)

What really matters is this - even if the current agreement had some clause that would allow Intel to do so, would they attempt to block it on such a technicality as Microsoft/Sony ordering directly from the foundry and paying a royalty instead of having an AMD middle-man? Considering that all they'd accomplish is annoying all parties involved with no real impact since they'd just renegotiate and buy chips from AMD. Not to mention it'd likely draw the ire of governmental regulation.

No, what really matters is that AMD is going to structure ANY deal to satisfy their obligation to GloFo. To assume otherwise is foolish as it implies that AMD is not keenly aware of the penalties they are paying out to GloFo.

This whole derailment started off on the footing of "Microsoft would insist on TSMC." A number of reasons were cited why that couldn't or wouldn't be the case but the bottom line is the bottom line: it will cost AMD a lot more money to have that order go through TSMC than it will save Microsoft. I'm sure the pricing reflects that.

 

[sm625]

I cant imagine why anyone would buy a console when you

a) cant buy preowned games for it
b) cant rent games for it
c) cant take your game over to a friend's house and play it

c is the real killer of the console. This is just implied from a and b but I do not see how you can have c without a or b.

 

[TerryMathews]

I cant imagine why anyone would buy a console when you

a) cant buy preowned games for it
b) cant rent games for it
c) cant take your game over to a friend's house and play it

c is the real killer of the console. This is just implied from a and b but I do not see how you can have c without a or b.

Easy, the same way you deal with XBLA content today, take your profile with you and sign in on their box.

At least on XBL, you're issued two licenses:
1) gamertag
2) console (transferable via xbox.com)

 

[Dark Shroud]

I'm in MS's camp when it comes to services like Hotmail/Outlook.com/Skydrive. But I will not be buying an XBO if there is no free tier for online let alone using streaming services that I already pay for. I got rid of my 360 when it hit the RRoD and stuck with my launch 60GB PS3.

So I'll probably buy a PS4 since it will also be a 4K player in addition to blu-ray and all the streaming services. The only service I'm really missing on my PS3 HBO GO, hopefully the PS4 will have it.

Xfinity/Comcast or Tivo streaming apps would be golden.

I cant imagine why anyone would buy a console when you

a) cant buy preowned games for it
b) cant rent games for it
c) cant take your game over to a friend's house and play it

c is the real killer of the console. This is just implied from a and b but I do not see how you can have c without a or b.

Microsoft has already said that isn't true.

 

[steelodon]

im willing to bet both the PS4 and Xbox one outsell the PS3 and Xbox360 in global numbers. No idea about in N.A.

I agree. So kudos to AMD!

 

[erunion]

http://uk.gamespot.com/news/xbox-one-deal-with-amd-costs-over-3-billion-6408926

$600 million per year on the Xbox One alone seems like a lot of welcome money for AMD.

Xbox one is not going to have a 5 year life span. Double that and you'll be much closer. $300 million a year is more likely.

Trinity currently tops out at $130 so I have no idea why they think $60 is the ASP. Try $100 then redo the calculations, then factor in that China is set to unban consoles.

Now it would be really interesting to know how many console sales the $3 billion number is based on so we could get an idea of revenue per console. If we assume its 100 million consoles, that is only $30 per chip. 100 million consoles is a very realistic number, the consensus number is 400 million across all next gens. If we say microsoft gets 1/3 of that, 133 million, that makes it $22.5 each.

The math just doesn't back up these sky high ASP theories. (For reference, the Xbox 360 has sold 75 million)

 

[NTMBK]

A significant influx of cash from the consoles would help out alright. They are still due to pay $200m to GloFo for failing to make their Q4'12 wafer purchases-

The cash outflow for the $320M termination fee will spread over several quarters:
–
$80 million in Q4 2012
–
$40 million Q2 2013
–
$200 million in Q1 2014 (promissory note issued to GF)

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTY0MjcyfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

 

[ShintaiDK]

So I'll probably buy a PS4 since it will also be a 4K player in addition to blu-ray and all the streaming services.

The Xbox One can handle 4K as well. Just like my IB IGP for that matter.

 

[Dark Shroud]

The Xbox One can handle 4K as well. Just like my IB IGP for that matter.

I am aware of that, but like I said I'm not going to pay for XBL just to use streaming services.

I'm also hoping Sony updates the PS4 to support quad layer blu-ray since those are already in use in Japan. I'm not holding my breath for this feature.

 

[Ajay]

Xbox one is not going to have a 5 year life span. Double that and you'll be much closer. $300 million a year is more likely.



Now it would be really interesting to know how many console sales the $3 billion number is based on so we could get an idea of revenue per console. If we assume its 100 million consoles, that is only $30 per chip. 100 million consoles is a very realistic number, the consensus number is 400 million across all next gens. If we say microsoft gets 1/3 of that, 133 million, that makes it $22.5 each.

The math just doesn't back up these sky high ASP theories. (For reference, the Xbox 360 has sold 75 million)

400M units is pretty damn optimistic!

In any case, AMD had some leverage on this deal both companies wanted multicore x86 designs with decent APU graphics (to run the general consumer UI and video) and a good low priced GPU. I think AMD is likely getting better margins than we think. OTOH, if they are not made at GFL, then AMD is paying into WSA and those margins probably disappear. At least they have a good revenue stream for supporting continuing OPEX and that will keep them out of bankruptcy and give them some room to maneuver as previously mentioned.

I'm leaning towards AMD's custom APUs generating some profits because it would explain why they've been able to hire some smart guys looking for a new challenge. Really successful people with long time industry experience don't move on to companies that look like they'll die. These where high level folks who were likely given the low-down on AMD's future and saw a real opportunity. IMHO.

 

[MisterMac]

Even if it's not fabbed @ GF for XB One - we have to assume AMD management atleast had basic business sense left and sold chips at a price where they'd make decent money.


If they reach 400M units - i'd wager AMD will have enough to go compete in the maintream bigcore and ultrabook market.

Here's the thing - I don't see Consoles sales doubling over a SHORTER lifespan than it's predecessor.
That's just too optimistic.

How many here has a tablet and a smartphone and a smarttv?
I don't think the eco-system itself will allow some 3rd party thing like PS\XB to... disrupt where the natural path lays.

And the natural path insists on SOC chips in everything - and a native communication over wifi with everything incl. your TV.

We can hope they sell alot - but those numbers just sound assinine given the scenario has dramaticly changed from 05\06.

 

[ShintaiDK]

There is no way they gonna ship 400M units. They might never even hit 150M over a 8 year timeline.

In 2012, less than 30 million consoles was shipped. And that includes Nintendo, the absolute best seller.

Consoles is currently in a limbo state. And they are on the path to slowly vanish, hence why specially MS tries so hard to make their console to not be a console.

Not to mention this trend:

 

[lamedude]

PS2 did 155 million over 13 years with weak competition. XBOne selling half that seems optimistic.

 

[fusion238]

AMD just announced their new Opteron X chips based on Jaguar techonology which will sell in the $60-$99 range. At highest density of 250+ APUs per server and an order of 100,000 Azure Xbox servers, would produce almost $2 Billion dollars for AMD.

"CHIP DESIGNER AMD has announced the details of its quad-core Kyoto server chips that will go up against Intel's Atom chips.

AMD's Kyoto chips will be branded as the Opteron X series and pitched at the rapidly growing microserver market. According to AMD, its latest Opteron x86 chips not only sport the same Jaguar x86 microarchitecture found in the chips powering Microsoft's Xbox One and Sony's PS4 consoles, but support more RAM and have a full-fledged Radeon HD 8000 branded GPU that supports OpenCL compute."

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...dcore-opteron-x-series-chips-for-microservers

 

[colonelciller]

Both XboxOne and PS4 will be practically SFF gaming HTPCs. They will offer next gen games + everything HTCP does for a price of a good notebook today (or cheaper than that).

will it play MKV files?
will it let me use the media player of my choosing for my home network accessible music collection?

 

[TerryMathews]

AMD just announced their new Opteron X chips based on Jaguar techonology which will sell in the $60-$99 range. At highest density of 250+ APUs per server and an order of 100,000 Azure Xbox servers, would produce almost $2 Billion dollars for AMD.

"CHIP DESIGNER AMD has announced the details of its quad-core Kyoto server chips that will go up against Intel's Atom chips.

AMD's Kyoto chips will be branded as the Opteron X series and pitched at the rapidly growing microserver market. According to AMD, its latest Opteron x86 chips not only sport the same Jaguar x86 microarchitecture found in the chips powering Microsoft's Xbox One and Sony's PS4 consoles, but support more RAM and have a full-fledged Radeon HD 8000 branded GPU that supports OpenCL compute."

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...dcore-opteron-x-series-chips-for-microservers

And there's the other shoe that makes the math make sense.

1) AMD slips a multi billion dollar deal.
2) Microsoft announces that they will have a cloud infrastructure containing the power of three XBOs for each one sold.
3) AMD announces a new blade processor based on the same tech that is in the XBO.

Step 4? Profit.

 

[ShintaiDK]

And there's the other shoe that makes the math make sense.

1) AMD slips a multi billion dollar deal.
2) Microsoft announces that they will have a cloud infrastructure containing the power of three XBOs for each one sold.
3) AMD announces a new blade processor based on the same tech that is in the XBO.

Step 4? Profit.

Its all Xeons tho. And the key point is virtualization. Its 300000 virtualized servers, not physical. Its marketing at work again. There might not be more than 15000 servers. Just like Xbox360 got today.

 

[TerryMathews]

Its all Xeons tho. And the key point is virtualization. Its 300000 virtualized servers, not physical. Its marketing at work again. There might not be more than 15000 servers. Just like Xbox360 got today.

I have not seen Microsoft confirm who is powering their cloud. Link?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I have not seen Microsoft confirm who is powering their cloud. Link?

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/home/features/big-compute/

Also for regular VMs they specify a virtual CPU to be equal to a 1.6Ghz Xeon. Benchmarks also confirms this.

Lucas-Lehmer math calculations. Multithread version uses Parallel.For implementation

Core i7 3770K (4 cores x 3.5GHz) (Win 8)
SINGLETHREADED (17 primary numbers): 11676 ms (11.6 secs.)
MULTITHREADED (17 primary numbers): 2816 ms (2.8 secs.)

AMD FX 6100 (6 cores x 3.3 Ghz) (Win 7 w upd)
SINGLETHREADED (17 primary numbers): 48758 ms
MULTITHREADED (17 primary numbers): 16486 ms

Azure Large VM (4 cores x 1.6 GHZ) (Win S 2008)
SINGLETHREADED (17 primary numbers): 37275 ms
MULTITHREADED 17 primary numbers): 10118 ms

Azure Extra Large VM (8 cores x 1.6 GHZ) (Win S 2008)
SINGLETHREADED (17 primary numbers): 36232 ms
MULTITHREADED (17 primary numbers): 6498 m

The performance in this benchmark easily exclude AMD.

You might have the options of be able to find some Atoms/Bobcat whatever in the XSmall option. Since its only said to be the performance of a 1Ghz Xeon there. However, the XSmall is a shared core. So I doubt its Atom/Bobcat.

 

[TerryMathews]

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/home/features/big-compute/

Also for regular VMs they specify a virtual CPU to be equal to a 1.6Ghz Xeon. Benchmarks also confirms this.



The performance in this benchmark easily exclude AMD.

You might have the options of be able to find some Atoms/Bobcat whatever in the XSmall option. Since its only said to be the performance of a 1Ghz Xeon there. However, the XSmall is a shared core. So I doubt its Atom/Bobcat.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-in-theory-can-xbox-one-cloud-transform-gaming leads me to believe that this cloud isn't Azure.

 

[Ajay]

Its all Xeons tho. And the key point is virtualization. Its 300000 virtualized servers, not physical. Its marketing at work again. There might not be more than 15000 servers. Just like Xbox360 got today.

I doubt it will be Xeons. Developers are not going to like writing their code for two very different targets; the required QA would be a real risk in meeting deadlines. IMHO.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I doubt it will be Xeons. Developers are not going to like writing their code for two very different targets; the required QA would be a real risk in meeting deadlines. IMHO.

I dont think I understand you. Are you trying to say the consoles and the servers will run the same code? Are the current 15000 Xbox360 servers PowerPC?

 

[Ajay]

I dont think I understand you. Are you trying to say the consoles and the servers will run the same code? Are the current 15000 Xbox360 servers PowerPC?

First the second question - I don't know (doubt it though), but the servers aren't providing compute services for the games. The code shared by the console and the server 'world" (networks service, object state updates/persistence, etc.) are probably very portable C/C++ code.

As the the first question, compute code is much less generic. If optimized for the APU, it will likely run poorly on a Xeon and visa versa. So, there would be a higher investment in getting the most out of both platforms so that the servers actually produce a value added for the console. Now, if MS offers development resources for the server side for a very low cost or for free, that would be a different story.

 

[Abwx]

For example, back in 2005 Microsoft spent around $105 on custom triple-core IBM Power chip in Xbox 360 as well as around $140 on ATI R500 graphics sub-system. Sony initially paid $89 for the Cell processor and $129 got Nvidia RSX graphics engine inside the PS3. Keeping in mind that the AMD chips inside the PS4 and Xbox One feature eight x86 cores, advanced graphics adapter, sophisticated memory controller as well as plethora of custom logic, it is illogical to charge for them less than AMD charges for its mainstream APUs that hardly offer similar performance in games. As a result, the price that AMD should be getting will likely be north from $100 in at least 2013 – 2014 timeframe.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...for_Every_SoC_for_Next_Gen_Game_Consoles.html

 

[Phynaz]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...for_Every_SoC_for_Next_Gen_Game_Consoles.html

Here's the original source (where nobody says anything about AMD getting $100 a chip).

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...x-prospects-even-on-muted-uptake/?mod=BOLBlog