Comment by coder543

Comment by coder543 4 days ago

I think changing from AMD GPUs to Nvidia GPUs by itself has a good chance of breaking backwards compatibility with how low level and custom Sony's GPU API apparently is, so the CPU core architecture would just be a secondary concern.

I was not saying Sony should switch to Nvidia, just pointing out that it is objectively incorrect to say that AMD is the only option for consoles when the most popular console today does not rely on AMD.

I also fully believe Intel could scale up an integrated Battlemage to meet Sony's needs, but is it worth the break in compatibility? Is it worth the added risk when Intel's 13th and 14th gen CPUs have had such publicly documented stability issues? I believe the answer to both questions is "probably not."

qwytw 3 days ago

> incorrect to say that AMD is the only option for consoles

It's a bit of an apples to oranges comparison though, even if all 3 devices are technically consoles. The Switch is basically a tablet with controllers attached and a tablet/phone CPU while PS5/Xbox are just custom build PCs.

Reply View 6 replies

coder543 3 days ago

The only reason I can see that it would matter that the Switch is a low-end console is if you think Nvidia is incapable of building something higher end. Are you saying that Nvidia couldn't make more powerful hardware for a high end console? Otherwise, the Switch just demonstrates to me that Nvidia is willing to form the right partnership, and reliably supply the same chips for long periods of time.
I'm certain Nvidia would have no trouble doing a high end console, customized to Microsoft and/or Sony's exacting specs... for the right price.

Reply View | 5 replies
- qwytw 3 days ago
  
  > Are you saying that Nvidia couldn't make more powerful hardware for a high end console?
  Hard to say. It tooks Qualcomm years make something that was superior to standard ARM designs. GPU is of course another matter.
  > I'm certain Nvidia would have no trouble doing a high end console,
  The last mobile/consumer CPU (based on their own core) that they have released came out in 2015 and they have been using off the shelf ARM core designs for their embedded and server stuff. Wouldn't they be effectively be starting from scratch?
  I'm sure they could achieve that in a few years but do you think it would take them significantly less time that it did Apple or Qualcomm?
  > Nvidia is incapable of building something higher end
  I think it depends more on what Nintendo is willing to pay, I doubt they really want a "high-end" chip.
  
  Reply View | 4 replies
  
  coder543 3 days ago
  
  > I think it depends more on what Nintendo is willing to pay, I doubt they really want a "high-end" chip.
  In this thread, we were talking about what Sony and Microsoft would want for successors to the PS5 and XSX, not Nintendo. Nintendo was just a convenient demonstration that Nvidia is clearly willing to partner with console makers like Sony and Microsoft.
  > Hard to say. It tooks Qualcomm years make something that was superior to standard ARM designs.
  > The last mobile CPU
  I wasn't talking about Nvidia custom designing an ARM core, although they have done that in the past, and again, this wouldn't be mobile hardware. Nvidia is using very powerful ARM cores in their Grace CPU today. They have plenty of experience with the off-the-shelf ARM cores, which are very likely good enough for modern consoles.
  
  Reply View | 3 replies