Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD's Xbox One Deal Valued at $3+ Billion USD

By - Source: Gamechup | B 27 comments

AMD is making big bucks off the Xbox One alone.

Bob Feldstein, the current VP of Technology Licensing at Nvidia, served as ATI's VP of Engineering and its VP of Strategic Development from 1994 until 2006 when AMD acquired the company. For the next seven years, he served as AMD's VP of Business Development, and then he joined Nvidia in July 2012. That said, he has some knowledge about what's going on inside AMD.

According to his LinkedIn profile, AMD's involvement with the Xbox One console is valued to be worth more than $3 billion USD. He also acknowledges that AMD has provided a custom silicon solution for Microsoft for the Xbox One, a game console and entertainment device cramming into "one" form factor.

"My involvement was focused on business management and supply agreement negotiations," he states. "This required the coordination of multiple functional teams within AMD, as well as regular customer meetings with leadership teams responsible for handling the challenges of complex, multi-year deals. This project is valued at $3+B."

He also talks about the PlayStation 4 that was revealed to the public on February 20. Unfortunately, he doesn't provide any financial worth on the project, but he's less vague with the Sony console, and talks about the Jaguar cores and Radeon graphics.

"The Sony PlayStation game console is powered by a semi-custom AMD APU," he states. "This processor is a single-chip custom processor, with eight x86-64 AMD Jaguar CPU cores and a 1.84 TFLOPS next-gen AMD Radeon based graphics engine supported by 8 GB DDR5 memory. AMD silicon will be a key enabler for the next generation of gaming experiences through this partnership with Sony, who has built the largest installed base of game consoles in existence today."

If anything, the two posts clearly show that AMD is playing a big part in the next-generation console wave. The Nintendo Wii U isn't quite as AMD-focused, featuring an IBM PowerPC 750-based three-core Espresso" chip clocked at 1.2 GHz, and an AMD Radeon "Latte" 550 MHz GPU with a built-in eDRAM cache.

Display 27 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 26 Hide
    yobobjm , May 29, 2013 6:46 AM
    This is exactly what AMD needs right now. Good for them, I didn't want to see AMD go away.
  • 15 Hide
    blubbey , May 29, 2013 6:12 AM
    So the consoles are probably worth ~$5 billion or more to AMD then. That's massive, hopefully consumers will see the benefits in the coming years.
Other Comments
  • 1 Hide
    dexpedition , May 29, 2013 6:05 AM
    Here is the price of the new Xbox One (around 300$) http://www.noshitshurlock.com/xbox-one-price-leaked/
  • 3 Hide
    bustapr , May 29, 2013 6:08 AM
    quite the PR the new VP of business developement of Nvidia is giving to his old company/main competitor.
  • 15 Hide
    blubbey , May 29, 2013 6:12 AM
    So the consoles are probably worth ~$5 billion or more to AMD then. That's massive, hopefully consumers will see the benefits in the coming years.
  • -4 Hide
    The_Trutherizer , May 29, 2013 6:31 AM
    @blubbey: it does not mean much for the consumer if AMD alone does well. AMD, NVidia and Intel and all the other cpu/gpu/apu manufacturers must do well for the consumer to benefit. The moment a big corporate smells the word 'monopoly' they raise their prices, innovation slows down and the consumer loses. That's just the way it works.
  • 2 Hide
    cknobman , May 29, 2013 6:40 AM
    @The_Trutherizer: Right now I care more about the value of my AMD stock than anything else. The next gen consoles meaning billions to AMD means the value of my AMD stock going up. :) 
  • 26 Hide
    yobobjm , May 29, 2013 6:46 AM
    This is exactly what AMD needs right now. Good for them, I didn't want to see AMD go away.
  • 4 Hide
    SchizoFrog , May 29, 2013 6:55 AM
    It may be 'valued' at that, but value does not mean revenue and values can changes over night on a new forecast prediction. This also does not talk about profits. AMD has had billions of trade over the last few years but the key issue is that while it has had a massive turnover it has been losing money hand over fist. All this means nothing until the consoles are a huge success and AMD start putting some cash in the bank.
  • 7 Hide
    Someone Somewhere , May 29, 2013 6:56 AM
    Nice. Plus, given they are behind both of the two main consoles, even if one does poorly the other will likely do better.
    Let's hope they get back near Intel again. Because I'm sick of this more power, less performance irritation.
  • 7 Hide
    blubbey , May 29, 2013 6:57 AM
    Quote:
    @blubbey: it does not mean much for the consumer if AMD alone does well. AMD, NVidia and Intel and all the other cpu/gpu/apu manufacturers must do well for the consumer to benefit. The moment a big corporate smells the word 'monopoly' they raise their prices, innovation slows down and the consumer loses. That's just the way it works.


    Considering how big Intel are (much bigger than AMD) and that Nvidia are doing pretty well, I doubt this will mean AMD leaves both of them in the dust. This will not even be close to a monopoly, in fact Intel are much closer to one than AMD (anti-trust law suit because Intel were essentially paying manufacturers to choose them over AMD some time ago)... yeah. Not even close. AMD laid off about thousands of people last year or something so this is a good thing for you and I.
  • 6 Hide
    greghome , May 29, 2013 8:07 AM
    Buying ATI finally paid off, 6 billion gone, now 6 billion back in one go :) 
  • 0 Hide
    jryder , May 29, 2013 8:13 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    @blubbey: it does not mean much for the consumer if AMD alone does well. AMD, NVidia and Intel and all the other cpu/gpu/apu manufacturers must do well for the consumer to benefit. The moment a big corporate smells the word 'monopoly' they raise their prices, innovation slows down and the consumer loses. That's just the way it works.


    Considering how big Intel are (much bigger than AMD) and that Nvidia are doing pretty well, I doubt this will mean AMD leaves both of them in the dust. This will not even be close to a monopoly, in fact Intel are much closer to one than AMD (anti-trust law suit because Intel were essentially paying manufacturers to choose them over AMD some time ago)... yeah. Not even close. AMD laid off about thousands of people last year or something so this is a good thing for you and I.


    Sorry to be a grammar Nazi, but a company is treated as a singular entity (a legal "person"). So you should say, "considering how big Intel is . . .."
  • 4 Hide
    rohitbaran , May 29, 2013 8:54 AM
    Well, there goes nVidia's claim of the consoles not being significant anymore. I guess grapes are sour!
  • -8 Hide
    internetlad , May 29, 2013 9:49 AM
    This was a match made in heaven. A company with no money that produces low-priced outdated chips pairing up with a company that has too much money and produces overpriced, outdated console gaming systems.
  • -2 Hide
    LordConrad , May 29, 2013 10:00 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    @blubbey: it does not mean much for the consumer if AMD alone does well. AMD, NVidia and Intel and all the other cpu/gpu/apu manufacturers must do well for the consumer to benefit. The moment a big corporate smells the word 'monopoly' they raise their prices, innovation slows down and the consumer loses. That's just the way it works.


    Considering how big Intel are (much bigger than AMD) and that Nvidia are doing pretty well, I doubt this will mean AMD leaves both of them in the dust. This will not even be close to a monopoly, in fact Intel are much closer to one than AMD (anti-trust law suit because Intel were essentially paying manufacturers to choose them over AMD some time ago)... yeah. Not even close. AMD laid off about thousands of people last year or something so this is a good thing for you and I.


    Sorry to be a grammar Nazi, but a company is treated as a singular entity (a legal "person"). So you should say, "considering how big Intel is . . .."

    You are correct. I see this grammatical mistake quite often. I'm guessing that this is correct grammar in whatever country they live in, but I still find it annoying.
  • -2 Hide
    yhikum , May 29, 2013 10:10 AM
    Is this a healthy news for competitors of AMD to see that they miss out on deal? Provided both Intel and Nvidia, however big they are, not able to settle a deal for two separate consoles? Certainly a step in better direction of planning and business for AMD.
    Looking back at stock value and past involvement in developing consoles, business decisions to provide AMD architecture were correct and beneficial. This recent news shows it to be correct once again.
    @internetlad
    Clearly you have distorted image of AMD as company that produces wide variety of chips on this planet we call Earth. Now, if you would think Intel is big company, I have enlightening news for you. Have you heard of Qualcomm and Foxconn? These two companies produce every chip there is, unless a chip is being made in private lab.
  • -1 Hide
    jwcalla , May 29, 2013 11:04 AM
    Quote:

    You are correct. I see this grammatical mistake quite often. I'm guessing that this is correct grammar in whatever country they live in, but I still find it annoying.


    It's correct grammar in Britain, where they use the word "are". So I don't think it's a grammatical mistake any less than "favour" or "theatre" would be spelling mistakes.
  • 1 Hide
    RazberyBandit , May 29, 2013 11:11 AM
    Quote:
    You are correct. I see this grammatical mistake quite often. I'm guessing that this is correct grammar in whatever country they live in, but I still find it annoying.


    The use of plural verbs with singular terms is not all that uncommon in British English slang, but usage frequency does not make it correct. Jane and I once had a back-and-forth about it. She explained how she ran into this issue quite often during her early writings for Tom's UK/IRL, elaborating that she was "smacked upside the head" for making this same mistake. (To TH-UK: Don't smack Jane!)
  • 2 Hide
    m32 , May 29, 2013 11:12 AM
    The guy was allowed to say that? I'd rather talk about what AMD makes per chip, but that is none of my business.
  • 0 Hide
    jack1982 , May 29, 2013 11:18 AM
    That's the contract that Nvidia was trying to make off was too unimportant for them to waste their time on - apparently it was beneath their dignity to work on such "low-end" hardware.
  • -1 Hide
    noblerabbit , May 29, 2013 11:27 AM
    so I guess this means that AMD will be laying off 5,000 in the coming months, right?
Display more comments