AMD Bridges Gap Between PC, Next-Gen Consoles
AMD is blurring the lines between PC and consoles.
For PC gamers, the fact that the upcoming PlayStation 4 and Xbox One consoles use a custom-built APU developed by AMD – along with Sony and Microsoft for their respective consoles -- should be good news. The move is part of AMD's Unified Gaming Strategy which was revealed back in March, and the company says it is working with developers to write games that can run across PCs, mobile devices and through the cloud. No more of that "porting" crap.
AMD reportedly talked more about this strategy during Computex 2013 in Taipei last week, and will likely talk even more about it during E3 2013 (we'll be all over it too). The company hinted that there should be a better level of uniformity across all three platforms because they're based on x86 CPU and GPU cores – the current Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 use custom chips that are not x86-based.
That said, with the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and AMD Jaguar/Radeon-based desktops and notebooks, AMD and developers now have the opportunity to break the barriers that divide PC and consoles, to unite them into one playing field. Intel/Nvidia rigs can even participate to some degree although not as natively as AMD.
"If we can create a gaming experience on the console and client as well as in the cloud... we're going to build our brand, we're going to build our market share, we're going to win," said Matt Skynner, corporate vice president and general manager of the graphics division at AMD.
Lisa Su, senior vice president and general manager of AMD's Global Business Units, added that the company's next-generation PC processor, code-named Kaveri and its fastest to date which will ship to PC makers later this year, could also be a step forward in blurring the lines between PC and console although the results could be a few years out.
AMD's Kaveri will be the company's first chip based on the specification established by the AMD-led Heterogeneous System Architecture, or HSA. It aims to make applications portable across a number of devices including PC, tablet, smartphone and game console. The chip will also feature a new technology called Heterogeneous Uniform Memory Access, or hUMA, which allows CPUs and GPUs to have access to pooled memory resources in a system.
"It is absolutely the end goal to create a development ecosystem where first-party games will be written to the games consoles first ... but providing the capability to leverage that investment into PC market, into mobile form factors, into cloud. Definitely there's that desire," Su said.
She said AMD is working with developers to expand the number of applications compatible with HSA. Because games are typically built on PC first anyway, HSA can help broaden the number of applications that work with AMD-based chips across different devices (like PC/XB1/PS4). HSA will also act as a pivot to define the games and performance relative to the device, she said.
We're actually interested to hear what Intel and Nvidia – who currently don't have a presence in the console market -- has to say about the PC/console union via AMD.

Well a console is a one time investment of $500 not $2k+ each year. Add up the savings. The xbox 360 came out around in 2005 and cost $500. For the past 7 years you can play most of the mainstream games at playable resolutions. How you spend your money is your problem but spending $14k just to brag is pretty pointless. Also upgrading each year is pretty useless and a waste of money when my i5-3570 and gtx 670's in sli can run everything now on max at that 2560. I love seeing pc fanboys praising how they waste there money each year on pointless upgrades.
edit: Also 2 780s in sli is not the best money can buy. And for someone like you, why do you only play on one monitor if money is no object for you?
My BS sense is tingling. It also said that you don't have that kind of PC, judging by your previous posts.
EDIT: You people are correct about the year ago part, more like 6 months give or take. But I expect AMD's revenue to climb steadily. (and I don't actually own any stocks)
Well a console is a one time investment of $500 not $2k+ each year. Add up the savings. The xbox 360 came out around in 2005 and cost $500. For the past 7 years you can play most of the mainstream games at playable resolutions. How you spend your money is your problem but spending $14k just to brag is pretty pointless. Also upgrading each year is pretty useless and a waste of money when my i5-3570 and gtx 670's in sli can run everything now on max at that 2560. I love seeing pc fanboys praising how they waste there money each year on pointless upgrades.
edit: Also 2 780s in sli is not the best money can buy. And for someone like you, why do you only play on one monitor if money is no object for you?
My BS sense is tingling. It also said that you don't have that kind of PC, judging by your previous posts.
The best part of your comment is it has nothing at all to do with what the article states. The article is referencing the way code is handled and how there is no longer several different types of hardware game developers need to go across. I'm glad you get to tout how much money your spending (some, not including myself, would consider it Wasting) on your rig, which is grossly overpowered compared to what your using it for. This could ultimately make it easier for games to be created and theoretically make games cheaper overall.
I myself, have not owned a console since N64 (I purchased a used Xbox for time splitters 3 alone, purchasing no other games and it quickly was shelved). And can definitely see the benefits to consoles using unified hardware with PC. PC will always be the strongest in terms of raw computing power, but the software needs to be able to properly utilize that power (See Crysis 1 for proof).
PS there is no need to waste money on a top of the line gaming PC, after around $900-1000, diminishing returns kick in big time.
While still more expensive than a console, a gaming PC will be infinitely more functional, as you can not only game, you can do many other things, and when it comes to gaming, you have more versatility.
The PS3 controller, xbox 360 (and probably the 2013 xbox ) controller, mouse, keyboard, wii controller, and many others work on the PC. (in addition to mouse and keyboard for FPS games)
PC allows you to game the way you want, at the resolution you want, and that is something that the consoles cannot do.
Congratulations, you are the epitome of why so many people have such a hard time dealing with PC gamers. Your asinine gloating and sheer ignorance when it comes to smart investment in a gaming rig tarnishes the entire community. Please grow up a little.
Multiple studies over the years have proven against exactly what you have stated. Piracy on consoles is as rampant as it is on PCs, if not more.
They don't port games due to the fact it costs more money and time. Even then, there would still be a profit. To them, that profit usually isn't enough, although to me, a profit is a profit and it should be taken advantage of. Publishers are in it for the most profit along with the least amount of work, as is the rest of the world today (unfortunately).
You do realize trailing one-year performance for AMD is -31.3%, right?