PC Games are... surging.

Amd has gained a lot of publicity over its win in the console arena
Nv is now on a pr offensive

ere's an NVIDIA Interview on PC PowerPlay Magazine titled "The Sky Isn’t Falling," as it hears from NVIDIA's Tony Tamasi about graphics cards, who tells them: "It’s no longer possible for a console to be a better or more capable graphics platform than the PC." Surprisingly, he says one of the reasons for this is that the console giants don't have the cash to compete in this area:

By the time of the Xbox 360 and PS3, the consoles were on par with the PC. If you look inside those boxes, they’re both powered by graphics technology by AMD or NVIDIA, because by that time all the graphics innovation was being done by PC graphics companies. NVIDIA spends 1.5 billion US dollars per year on research and development in graphics, every year, and in the course of a console’s lifecycle we’ll spend over 10 billion dollars into graphics research. Sony and Microsoft simply can’t afford to spend that kind of money. They just don’t have the investment capacity to match the PC guys; we can do it thanks to economy of scale, as we sell hundreds of millions of chips, year after year.
http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/2013/09/nvidia-interview-the-sky-isnt-falling/
 
Amd has gained a lot of publicity over its win in the console arena
Nv is now on a pr offensive


http://www.pcpowerplay.com.au/2013/09/nvidia-interview-the-sky-isnt-falling/

I just read the interview and to be honest, it didn't seem like he was on a PR offensive at all.
He didn't compare nVidia to AMD even once and acknowledged the following:
(...) The most efficient architectures are from NVIDIA and AMD (...)

As for the rest, he seems to be honest and spot on in what he says:
- Next gen will not come more powerful than mid/high-end gaming PCs, unlike previous generations
- Next-gens use a very similar architecture to the PCs, but the PCs have an enormous advantage in power consumption, hence the gap
- Next-gens using x86 comes as a huge advantage to PC gaming in the long run.
 
Well at a minimum the new consoles are making me consider switching to Amd for my next graphics card. I've been with NVidia for years now, but with the console game makers coding and testing everything on Amd hardware makes wonder if going with an Amd gpu next time is the wiser choice.
 
Well at a minimum the new consoles are making me consider switching to Amd for my next graphics card. I've been with NVidia for years now, but with the console game makers coding and testing everything on Amd hardware makes wonder if going with an Amd gpu next time is the wiser choice.

I actually do wonder the same? I guess we have to watch the scene, before deciding, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Or are the console GPUs with their low level access so far away from PC GPUs that you cannot compare the code anyway and hence can't expect an effect?
 
I actually do wonder the same? I guess we have to watch the scene, before deciding, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Or are the console GPUs with their low level access so far away from PC GPUs that you cannot compare the code anyway and hence can't expect an effect?

Yeah I dunno...plus a lot of the Amd pc woes tended to be due to driver issues, and there's no guarantee that the Amd driver situation will improve. Hmm, might have to wait and see what pans out.
 
I'm more concerned with the other part of AMD the GCN tech may get a lot of use in consoles but jaguar isn't going to light up pc gaming rigs and bulldozer is still dead in the water.

They really need to get something out that's good in the cpu space.
 
Back
Top