http://news.mydrivers.com/1/257/257433.htm

NVIDIA：我们故意不去掺和PS42013-03-15 09:11:30 11084 人阅读 作者：上方文Q 编辑：上方文Q [复制链接] [爆料] 评论(223)

三大新主机中，任天堂Wii U用了AMD GPU，索尼PS4更是用了全新的统一寻址APU，微软也极可能采纳APU，AMD将因此实现全面统治，那么NVIDIA干啥去了？要知道他们曾经也是对主机激情无限的。这次完全毫无踪影，是实力，还是其它什么缘故？
近日，NVIDIA方面终于打破沉默，解释了自己为何无缘新主机，给出的说法是故意放弃了为PS4研发SoC处理器，因为这样赚不到太多的钱，不值得去做。
NVIDIA内容与技术高级副总裁Tony Tamasi在接受媒体采访时称：“我可以保证，(索尼和NVIDIA)是有过谈判的。我们最终的结论是，以那些家伙愿意支付的价钱，我们不想做这笔买卖。”
他又进一步解释说：“我们参与过第一代Xbox和PS3，理解(为主机开发芯片)经济性和代价。我们在做很多很多东西，不得不牺牲掉主机业务这个机会。要我说，如果去为主机服务，那我们的其它业务又有哪些该停下来去为它让路呢？”
“说到底，你也就这么多工程师，这么点能力，如果再分神去为索尼或微软开发芯片，那么很可能其它业务需要的芯片就做不了了。至少在索尼和NVIDIA的问题上，我是说PS4，AMD去参与了，NVIDIA没有。我想我们必须从业绩的角度去看待它。这显然与技术无关。”
说了这么多，也有几分道理，但此时此刻发表这种言论，总给人一种吐酸水的感觉，毕竟是对手拿到了全方位的合作，而你没有。退一步来说，Tony Tamasi反复强调为主机开发芯片会耽搁其它生意，这固然不错，但也会带来很多好处，NVIDIA纵然算不上巨头企业，规模也不算小，拉出一帮人开发个新的芯片并没有那么捉襟见肘。
如果非要从技术上找原因，那就是NVIDIA还没有自己的CPU处理器，只能提供单独的GPU而没有完整的解决方案。虽然基于ARM架构的丹佛工程也搞了很多年，但还要一段时间才能看到成果，这代主机是等不及了。AMD则不同，惟一一家同时有独立CPU、GPU还有融合APU的厂商。
说到底，恐怕还是NVIDIA已经看不上主机游戏市场，而是把更多精力转向了Tegra和移动游戏上。君不见，这两年NVIDIA对于PC游戏的宣传与合作已经大大削弱，反倒是AMD抢去了风头，尤其是《古墓丽影9》更可见一斑。
AMD经过几轮重组和裁员之后，开发资源的调配能力恐怕更不如NVIDIA，结果赢得了三大主机厂商的一致青睐，这恐怕真的和技术无关。虽然这会让AMD投入大量人力物力财力，也不见的一定能赚得盆满钵满，但长期好处也是显而易见的：一来APU融合理念赢得了游戏巨头的认可和青睐，而这早已经是AMD长期发展的主线之一；二来开发商在做游戏的时候肯定会优先考虑为AMD GPU/APU进行定制和优化，势必推动AMD显卡的发展。
不管怎么说，这一切只是大家选择了不同的路子而已。

PS4独占游戏：《杀戮地带：阴影坠落》

整理器0.9

引用:

原帖由 olong 于 2013-3-16 00:32 发表
简单的说就是，这点小钱，黄老板才看不上眼呢

是的 撑死就2亿多的销量，还是n年后的。

引用:

原帖由 jow 于 2013-3-16 01:49 发表
ps4才发布几天，这sb公司已经出来刷了两次存在感了

之前一次

引用:

　今天，nVidida宣布索尼的PS4主机将获得PhysX和APEX软件开发套件（SDK）的支持。
　　nVidida公司的PhysX产品经理Mike Skolones说：“强大的物理技术对于良好的游戏体验非常重要，而多平台的支持对于开发者来说也是极为关键的。PS4主机有了PhysX和APEX的支持，就可以为消费者们带来更优秀的游戏。”
　　游戏设计者可以利用PhysX和APEX技术，为游戏设计加入碰撞检测、模拟各种人体运动、服饰、水流、粒子系统和更广泛的跨平台支持（包括桌面PC、游戏主机、手机和掌机设备）等元素。

nvidia继续刷存在感

Nvidia compares PS4 specs to a 'low-end CPU'
It's PlayStation 4 vs PC gaming rigs, and the gloves have come off
http://www.techradar.com/us/news ... low-end-cpu-1138051

"Compared to gaming PCs, the PS4 specs are in the neighborhood of a low-end CPU, and a low- to mid-range GPU side," said Nvidia's Tony Tamasi to TechRadar.
"If the PS4 ships in December as Sony indicated, it will only offer about half the performance of a GTX680 GPU (based on GFLOPS and texture), which launched in March 2012, more than a year and a half ago."


[ 本帖最后由 DVDRiP 于 2013-3-16 12:45 编辑 ]

Nvidia gave AMD the PS4 because console margins are terrible


http://www.extremetech.com/gamin ... argins-are-terrible

Consoles have historically been seen as banner products for the companies that manufacture or design their hardware. Nvidia’s original Xbox win was a sizable windfall for the company in 2002-2003 and the GPU designs of the Xbox 360 and PS3 (built by AMD and Nvidia respectively) were topics of intense discussion when those consoles were new and exciting.

Given these upsides, it might seem odd that Nvidia apparently walked away from the negotiating table with Sony on the PS4. It isn’t. While there’s some marketing upside from game enthusiasts, GPU manufacturers don’t get top billing (or typically, any billing whatsoever) on console titles. There’s no lengthy logo crawl or joint marketing. Sony isn’t selling the “Sovidia PS4″, it’s the Sony PS4, period.

Then there’s the margin question. Nvidia’s 10-K filing for fiscal year 2003 (that’s calendar year 2002) states that the company made 23% of its total $1.9B revenue, or roughly $400M, on Xbox sales. That’s profits for one year — the original Xbox went on to sell some 24 million consoles worldwide. Nvidia and MS eventually signed an agreement that reduced the cost Microsoft paid for Xbox hardware, but this figure gives us a starting point to work with.

Fast forward to the PS3 and its RSX graphics. Two years ago, in January 2011, Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang told reporters that the Sony-Nvidia deal had earned Nvidia $500M in royalties since 2004. The total number of shipped PS3 consoles by March, 2011 stood at 50 million according to data from the NPD group. Half a billion is nothing to sneeze at, but the numbers imply that NV agreed to much smaller margins on the PS3 than it managed to lock in on the Xbox.


A small Sony segue

One of the most persistent rumors about next-generation consoles like the PS4 is that both Sony and Microsoft wanted to avoid the bloodbath that occurred in 2005-2006. Both companies took three-digit losses on a per-unit basis. Sony’s losses were worse than Microsoft’s, despite the PS3′s higher price tag ($499 and $599 as compared to the Xbox 360′s $299 and $399). Going in to the PS3 launch, Sony executives were hilariously arrogant, with print-ready quotes like “The next generation doesn’t start until we say it does.” When asked about the price, then-CEO Ken Kutaragi memorably declared that the company wanted consumers to think to themselves “I will work more hours to buy one. We want people to feel they want it, irrespective of anything else.”

We don’t know when Sony and Nvidia sat down to talk about the PS4, but the Sony’s market position had changed drastically by 2010-2011. The PSP Go was moribund, smartphone sales were rising, and the PlayStation 3 — despite costing far more than Microsoft’s Xbox 360 — had only recently begun to make a profit. Total development and marketing costs on the PS3 from the 2004 Nvidia deal to that time were still deeply in the red.

From Sony’s perspective, a number of the gambles it took on Cell, Blu-ray, and on high-margin Nvidia hardware, simply hadn’t paid off. Yes, the system was selling well, and yes, it had boosted the adoption of Blu-ray, but the advent of streaming video and the initial war between Blu-ray and HD-DVD had slowed the new standard’s adoption rate.

The PS3 was a massive gamble. It combined multiple cutting-edge technologies, a specialized processor core, an entire PS2 (for hardware-provided backward compatibility), and an integrated wireless solution at the high end. In the long run, that gamble didn’t work. An analysis by Ben Cousins, a 13-year game-industry veteran, writing for Kotaku, shows the profits and losses for Sony’s gaming division from 2004 through the end of 2011. His figures and graphs are available for perusal.