The Future of Gaming is Android, Says Nvidia

[YardstickWHACK]

"Sounds like sour grapes to me. Android in its current form is just too clunky to be good for gaming."

Don't you mean, "Windows in its current..." Scannall?

 

[Mousemonkey]

Nvidia dident lose to AMD in the console bidding they said no. both Sony and MS ask'd Nvidia first and they said no.

Yes, when clients come knocking, you say no, everybody knows that. Likely they asked both (and I think there was MS / Sony rep interview saying so), and AMD offered the cheaper overall solution.

Sounds like the desperate words of the company that missed out on the cash cow that is both of the next gens that are now selling like crack in the hood.

Can either of you produce the numbers and financial records to back up your claims? Because unless you can it's just the nonsense of fanboys who know not of what they speak.

 

[antilycus]

along with NVIDIA GRID, Things like OUYA and OUYA2 will replace consoles... down the line when internet bandwidth can stay up for years on end without a system outage.

 

[antilycus]

take all the fanboi crap away and you'll always see the NVIDIA is the engineer of GPU tech and everyone else follows suit. NVIDIA also has immensly superior drivers compared to their competition. Intel is a disaster and AMD is ALWAYS playing catchup to pissed off gamers

 

[Wisecracker]

You mean, like this, MM ??

Nvidia's Q3 sales, revenue down from last year; outlook soft

Non-GAAP earnings were 26 cents per share on a revenue of $1.054 billion, down 12.5 percent year-over-year. EPS was down by a whopping 39.4 percent from the same quarter last year.

Would you like to discuss the stock buy-back program they are doing with Goldman-Sachs to prop-up their stock price ?

(How's it working? Hint: Not. Too. Good.)

 

[Mousemonkey]

You mean, like this, MM ??

Nvidia's Q3 sales, revenue down from last year; outlook soft

Non-GAAP earnings were 26 cents per share on a revenue of $1.054 billion, down 12.5 percent year-over-year. EPS was down by a whopping 39.4 percent from the same quarter last year.

Would you like to discuss the stock buy-back program they are doing with Goldman-Sachs to prop-up their stock price ?

(How's it working? Hint: Not. Too. Good.)

So how has that got anything to do with the consoles? How does that show whether they would have made or lost money by going with the consoles or not?

 

[husker]

Like the future of games is any single platform. The color of the future is purple, the number is the future is 630,649 and the weather forecast of the future is partly sunny with mild winds from the southwest. Yay, I'm a prognosticator.

 

[cmi86]

Nvidia dident lose to AMD in the console bidding they said no. both Sony and MS ask'd Nvidia first and they said no.

Yes, when clients come knocking, you say no, everybody knows that. Likely they asked both (and I think there was MS / Sony rep interview saying so), and AMD offered the cheaper overall solution.

Sounds like the desperate words of the company that missed out on the cash cow that is both of the next gens that are now selling like crack in the hood.

Can either of you produce the numbers and financial records to back up your claims? Because unless you can it's just the nonsense of fanboys who know not of what they speak.

Oh mousemonkey the strong and valiant defender of all that is green and blue. Do you really need mountains of documents to prove that a graphics company would want a piece of the 2 biggest graphics projects in the past decade... No that would just be silly and make way too much sense, no one would want a piece of that... Oh and it would be so like nvidia to come right out with the truth that they couldn't compete for the design... Because they aren't the type to lie about intentionally over pricing a card based on competition, boosting numbers, rigging benches... No never Nvidia is just the shining pinnacle of honesty... Its called common sense man. You can bet your @$$ that one of the biggest graphics makers on the plant would want a piece of next gen consoles, It's called making money.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Nvidia dident lose to AMD in the console bidding they said no. both Sony and MS ask'd Nvidia first and they said no.

Yes, when clients come knocking, you say no, everybody knows that. Likely they asked both (and I think there was MS / Sony rep interview saying so), and AMD offered the cheaper overall solution.

Sounds like the desperate words of the company that missed out on the cash cow that is both of the next gens that are now selling like crack in the hood.

Can either of you produce the numbers and financial records to back up your claims? Because unless you can it's just the nonsense of fanboys who know not of what they speak.

Oh mousemonkey the strong and valiant defender of all that is green and blue. Do you really need mountains of documents to prove that a graphics company would want a piece of the 2 biggest graphics projects in the past decade... No that would just be silly and make way too much sense, no one would want a piece of that... Oh and it would be so like nvidia to come right out with the truth that they couldn't compete for the design... Because they aren't the type to lie about intentionally over pricing a card based on competition, boosting numbers, rigging benches... No never Nvidia is just the shining pinnacle of honesty... Its called common sense man. You can bet your @$$ that one of the biggest graphics makers on the plant would want a piece of next gen consoles, It's called making money.

Well they had the consoles before and felt that they didn't make enough to cover development costs hence why they turned them down this time, that's common sense, something you need to look into if you are going to ignore documented evidence.

 

[alextheblue]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD had all of the building blocks already, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

 

[Mousemonkey]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

 

[cmi86]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver. They missed the train and now they are salty, simple as that. Look at all the articles about nvidia bashing consoles, saying this that and the other thing are the future and investing into alternative gaming platforms (steam box aka wanna be console) right after AMD was selected for next gens, the writing is on the wall whether or not you choose to acknowledge it is up to you.

 

[Mousemonkey]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver, simple as that.

So somehow your opinion is fact but the reading of various articles and news is drinking the Kool aid huh?

 

[cmi86]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver, simple as that.

So somehow your opinion is fact but the reading of various articles and news is drinking the Kool aid huh?

NO it's called common sense and understanding business practices. Whether or not you choose based on your own brand preferences to believe a very very unlikely scenario (nvidia never even tried for some reason, maybe they don't like money...) over one that makes perfect sense from both common sense and business aspects (of course they tried but failed and admitting so right before your biggest rivals launch would be tantamount to beating ones self in the face with a hammer) is entirely up to you.

 

[Mousemonkey]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver, simple as that.

So somehow your opinion is fact but the reading of various articles and news is drinking the Kool aid huh?

NO it's called common sense and understanding business practices. Whether or not you choose based on your own brand preferences to believe a very very unlikely scenario (nvidia never even tried for some reason, maybe they don't like money...) over one that makes perfect sense from both common sense and business aspects (of course they tried but failed and admitting so right before your biggest rivals launch would be tantamount beating ones self in the face with a hammer) is entirely up to you.

I'll choose based on past events and things that have been said and done if you choose based on scenarios you've made up in your head then so be it, if that's what helps you sleep at night.

 

[cmi86]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver, simple as that.

So somehow your opinion is fact but the reading of various articles and news is drinking the Kool aid huh?

NO it's called common sense and understanding business practices. Whether or not you choose based on your own brand preferences to believe a very very unlikely scenario (nvidia never even tried for some reason, maybe they don't like money...) over one that makes perfect sense from both common sense and business aspects (of course they tried but failed and admitting so right before your biggest rivals launch would be tantamount beating ones self in the face with a hammer) is entirely up to you.

I'll choose based on past events and things that have been said and done if you choose based on scenarios you've made up in your head then so be it, if that's what helps you sleep at night.

Oh do you always believe whatever your told ?? Nixon wasn't a crook... Clinton never had sexual relations with that woman... Koni just loves children and it has nothing to do with child warfare and Rob Ford doesn't smoke crack...Cmon man stop acting like an idiot sheep and read past the lines, use a little common sense to formulate a logical opinion that actually makes sense based on the information around you and isn't entirely based on your flagrant bias for a company that has lied to it's customers so many times in the past I can't keep track. Lets use our big boy thinking caps and Look at what actually makes sense here.

Your Theory: The biggest graphics company in the world wanted absolutely nothing to do with the 2 biggest graphics related projects/cash cows for the next decade to come. They saw the one time RD costs as too great to justify the 10 years of steady returns on this project. They instead found it more fiscally beneficial to invest in constantly developing projects that are are drop in a bucket compared the financial return scale of XBOX 1 and PS4 such as steam boxes and other little gimmick wanna be linux based consoles that will never amount to anything.

My logic: The biggest graphics company in the world wanted everything to do with this project. They saw the one time R&D investment for a 10 year profit return (based on life span of previous gen consoles) as a golden cash cow. They submitted a design and it was rejected because it was not on par with what the system designers were looking for. Nvidia was smart here and decided against publishing anything having to do with their involvement in this project as it would make them look inferior and unable to compete when compared to AMD who had just secured the XB1/PS4 contracts and had a new generation of desktop GPU's dropping in the 1 market segment nvidia has any dominance anymore. Now instead of admitting defeat nvidia just makes snide remarks about the inferiority of consoles and touts basically anything as the future of gaming (anything not housing an AMD APU of course)

Read between the lines a little bit. The logical common sense scenario is staring you dead in the face while you sip you tasty cup of kool aid. Or of course you could read this just like you have the rest of this discussion with your eyes closed, ears plugged screaming nananananananana. I don't understand how the obligation you feel to nvidia is powerful enough to make you blatantly ignore common sense, I really don't.

 

[Mousemonkey]

What are you talking about Mousemonkey? WHAT development costs? Their previous Console chips were practically off-the-shelf designs. The development costs were being sunk into their PC graphics regardless. They were caught off guard this time around because both Sony and MS wanted a simpler unified design. They just couldn't compete with AMD in terms of timeframe and cost. AMD all the building blocks ready, so they were able to pull off an affordable semi-custom design in a timely fashion.

I'm talking about the reasons given by Nvidia, if you have a problem with that then maybe you should contact them and ask for an explanation.

That is the point we are trying to make is that there will likely be no explanation. Nvidia is not the type of company to just come straight out with their failures and mistakes. Admitting they could not compete with AMD on XB1/PS4
would be CORPORATE SUICIDE especially just a short time before their main competitor in the desktop graphics segment is going to release a new generation (that hit nvidia so hard it made them drastically price slash their entire line up and release a no holds barred GK 110 just to stay relevant) I feel that common sense dictates my explanation for why they didn't admit their failure makes a whole lot more sense then actually believing that they didn't even bother to submit a design... c'mon man put down the kool aid, you honestly believe that??? XBOX and Sony wanted something nvidia wasn't ready to deliver, simple as that.

So somehow your opinion is fact but the reading of various articles and news is drinking the Kool aid huh?

NO it's called common sense and understanding business practices. Whether or not you choose based on your own brand preferences to believe a very very unlikely scenario (nvidia never even tried for some reason, maybe they don't like money...) over one that makes perfect sense from both common sense and business aspects (of course they tried but failed and admitting so right before your biggest rivals launch would be tantamount beating ones self in the face with a hammer) is entirely up to you.

I'll choose based on past events and things that have been said and done if you choose based on scenarios you've made up in your head then so be it, if that's what helps you sleep at night.

Oh do you always believe whatever your told ?? Nixon wasn't a crook... Clinton never had sexual relations with that woman... Koni just loves children and it has nothing to do with child warfare and Rob Ford doesn't smoke crack...Cmon man stop acting like an idiot sheep and read past the lines, use a little common sense to formulate a logical opinion that actually makes sense based on the information around you and isn't entirely based on your flagrant bias for a company that has lied to it's customers so many times in the past I can't keep track. Lets use our big boy thinking caps and Look at what actually makes sense here.

Your Theory: The biggest graphics company in the world wanted absolutely nothing to do with the 2 biggest graphics related projects/cash cows for the next decade to come. They saw the one time RD costs as too great to justify the 10 years of steady returns on this project. They instead found it more fiscally beneficial to invest in constantly developing projects that are are drop in a bucket compared the financial return scale of XBOX 1 and PS4 such as steam boxes and other little gimmick wanna be linux based consoles that will never amount to anything.

My logic: The biggest graphics company in the world wanted everything to do with this project. They saw the one time R&D investment for a 10 year profit return (based on life span of previous gen consoles) as a golden cash cow. They submitted a design and it was rejected because it was not on par with what the system designers were looking for. Nvidia was smart here and decided against publishing anything having to do with their involvement in this project as it would make them look inferior and unable to compete when compared to AMD who had just secured the XB1/PS4 contracts and had a new generation of desktop GPU's dropping in the 1 market segment nvidia has any dominance anymore. Now instead of admitting defeat nvidia just makes snide remarks about the inferiority of consoles and touts basically anything as the future of gaming (anything not housing an AMD APU of course)

Read between the lines a little bit. The logical common sense scenario is staring you dead in the face while you sip you tasty cup of kool aid. Or of course you could read this just like you have the rest of this discussion with your eyes closed, ears plugged screaming nananananananana. I don't understand how the obligation you feel to nvidia is powerful enough to make you blatantly ignore common sense, I really don't.

So because I don't subscribe to your theories that's worthy of an insult is it?

 

[teh_chem]

So because I don't subscribe to your theories that's worthy of an insult is it?

If you all are going to say the others' opinion is wrong in this little internet fight, you really should disable catenation/nesting of replies in your profile (or delete the nested replies that have been shown before you hit the "Answer" button...). No one needs to see the same post quoted a billion times over again.

 

[Mousemonkey]

So because I don't subscribe to your theories that's worthy of an insult is it?

If you all are going to say the others' opinion is wrong in this little internet fight, you really should disable catenation/nesting of replies in your profile (or delete the nested replies that have been shown before you hit the "Answer" button...). No one needs to see the same post quoted a billion times over again.

I didn't have anything to do with the new layout so I just hit the edit button and I didn't say that the opinion of others is wrong, I said I don't subscribe to it.