Intel doesn't ignore it anymore, but NVIDIA is in the comfort world with Nintendo Switch. However, and both are bigger than Lisa Su's company, this is the generation that brings the cat to the water.
Why do CPUs and GPUs always come from AMD on PS5 and Xbox Series X?
There are many reasons to look into these often difficult business decisions. To this we must add previous experiences between the three authorities, where for example we have already seen the relationship between Microsoft and NVIDIA on the first Xbox and the problems he needed to deal with Redmond to compete with SONY.
Therefore, we will separate this article from several points of development independently to try to underst and the specific reasons for the companies mentioned.
Cost
If consoles have something for each generation that goes out, it's the direct cost of the producers that is beyond repair. SONY and Microsoft have come here several times to sell their hearts at a bargain price or even if they have lost, they have to compensate for payment services or accessories for each loss.
The cost per component makes the difference between a user buying one console or another, because in a sense, the price will always be higher. For both companies to choose two chips instead of one, the only option they can reach would be to raise the final cost of the console even further.
Also, if we're talking that one of the two chips will come from Intel or NVIDIA, then the price difference from AMD will be huge. So, depending on pure cost, one chip is better than two, and it is preferable to choose AMD and its prices than Intel and theirs, because those of Lisa Su can play at lower grades and earn less, while Intel has marked a few benefits of -chip each not too broken.
Properties
NVIDIA is out of this category due to the null performance on CPUs due to the lack of patents on the X86, so it all comes down to AMD vs Intel. At this stage, AMD is currently fully functional in Zen 2 and GPU architecture, while still behind NVIDIA, it's in the same position as before Intel.
Therefore, the selection criteria are clear. If we add to this the previous developer experience from the previous console generation, it adds more points. It's a situation that all developers say is easy to work with AMD chips and its platform, something like SONY with Cell
Therefore, the ease and convenience of coding by developers is also a factor to consider within the premises and evidence that AMD is at the right stage.
Doing what you love
Neither Intel nor NVIDIA will use the vast majority of material, personal and financial resources to take the smallest cake for profit. In terms of what is described in the cost section, finding a company that designs the IP you like and your needs without having to go up a price is only available to those who have the need to do so.
Neither Intel nor NVIDIA will play that strategy as they want a higher markup of profits made and the number of chips sold does not compensate them because the number of those selling in their products is higher than that of comfort.
The only thing is SONY and Microsoft they would accept the basis of an existing chip, where the conversion is small and with this Intel or NVIDIA investment allows cost. Similar to what Nintendo did with its switch, when the console circled the SoC and not the other way around.
The danger
In AMD, the operational risk in the sector is far greater in terms of selling consoles much worse than expected. The price of the same will go up and even though the sale will pass over time it will stabilize and it is time to add numbers.
Many are unwilling to spend 500 euros or more on a device that will be used in less than half a year because of the many uses it covers, where the internet is paid monthly and games are more expensive than PCs, where the keys can be found for less money.
Intel and NVIDIA won't risk the sale of consoles in many SONY and Microsoft branding forecasts, because as we've noted, the margins are low. AMD has already stated at the time that receiving benefits is enough for them in the long run, so two different approaches that once again put Lisa Su as the only compulsory option.
Table of Contents
