RUMOR: Microsoft Interested in Buying AMD

[Dohc-WP]

It appears that the computing industry, as well as the gaming industry, may be headed for a tectonic shift of balance- a new rumor states that Microsoft is looking into purchasing CPU and GPU maker AMD a bid to revive its chip design operations. Apparently, Microsoft initiated the talks a few months ago, though it is unclear exactly what has come about from these.
Buying AMD would have multiple strategic advantages for Microsoft- on a larger, macro company wide basis, Microsoft would be able to custom tailor and design chips for its hardware, potentially integrating the software and hardware on its Lumia and Surface product lines far better; this may also provide Microsoft with a foot in the door as far as the future of the computing industry is concerned.

Moreover, Microsoft would also benefit greatly on the gaming front- analysts estimate that Microsoft pays roughly $100 for every Xbox One sold to AMD in royalties (the Xbox One utilizes an AMD SoC). Given the lifetime sales of Xbox One at around 12.6 million units, this means that Microsoft has already paid AMD around $1.26 billion for Xbox One chips. The acquisition of AMD could save it around a billion per year on Xbox One chips alone, which would come as a welcome break to the beleaguered gaming division that has traditionally struggled to stay in the black.

Presuming Microsoft wants to continue licensing out AMD chips, and not keep them completely in house (something that is a common practice in the industry, and also something that Microsoft is wont to do, given how it handled its acquisition of Minecraft last year), it would earn money from each PS4 or Wii U system that is sold in licensing, since both those systems utilize AMD SoCs as well; moreover, Microsoft would also have a direct stake in PC gaming, given AMD’s prominent position in the PC CPU and GPU market.

It sounds like it would be a very smart move on Microsoft’s part to acquire AMD, then, but there are other things that must be considered- for instance, the action may be viewed as anti competitive by Anti Trust commissions, and Microsoft already has enough trouble on that front. Moreover, Microsoft shares a very close relationship with chip maker Intel, and an acquisition of chief rival AMD is undoubtedly going to alienate them.

But still, it seems as though the pros might outweigh the cons. Whether or not the talks go through, the next few months promise to be very interesting.


Source: GamingBolt

 

[Solitude]

That would be very interesting indeed. AMD is falling so far behind and I can't help but feel that with Microsoft at the helm it would help AMD a lot. Plus with XBox Ones and PS4s both using AMD graphics chips... well it will lead to some interesting times.

 

[mottamort]

First ATI, now AMD...

 

[FarligOpptreden]

First ATI, now AMD...

Microsoft Radeon, HERE WE COME!

 

[Weasley]

if i was intel i would push for this simple reason is intel needs AMD around and microsoft can give amd the cash it needs to bring proper competition to the cpu market. At first might seem a bit anti competitive but I am sure with correct condition this can bring the needed competition in cpu market.

 

[Graal]

I don't see any way how this would be good. When was the last time Microsoft did something beneficial for gaming?

 

[Solitude]

I don't see any way how this would be good. When was the last time Microsoft did something beneficial for gaming?

Well for one there's the XBox One which serves as competition to the PS4, thus preventing a monopoly in the gaming console market.

Then there's DirectX 12.

There's the HoloLens which shows that Microsoft is experimenting with new technologies.

There's Visual Studio for which Microsoft has released a Community edition which is free to use and is now the default IDE for Unity, Unreal Engine 4 and Cocos2D.

And so forth.

 

[Mister 44]

Free copy of Minecraft with every Radeon card.

 

[DieGrootHammer]

This is very interesting news. I think this will be very good for all involved.

 

[GregRedd]

Fixed that for you

 

[Graal]

Well for one there's the XBox One which serves as competition to the PS4, thus preventing a monopoly in the gaming console market.

Then there's DirectX 12.

There's the HoloLens which shows that Microsoft is experimenting with new technologies.

There's Visual Studio for which Microsoft has released a Community edition which is free to use and is now the default IDE for Unity, Unreal Engine 4 and Cocos2D.

And so forth.

Sooo... the Xbox one that is ridiculously priced considering it ships with a bunch of features most people don't want, need or can't use and which is obviously losing the console war against the PS4.

Then DirectX 12, which will only be available with Windows 10, forcing gamers to once again use an OS that would have become irrelevant years ago had it not been for the fact that the gaming industry had largely ignored other operating systems, despite them being more viable.

Then HoloLens, which is very likely to be priced right out of the market for the average gamer, seeing as it is rumored to cost "significantly more than an Xbox One".

Then your last point about Visual Studio, which is pretty much the only good thing they've done for the gaming industry lately.

Overall, Microsoft has not been a good force for gaming over the last decade. If they buy out AMD I'll probably switch back to buying Nvidia products.

 

[Solitude]

When was the last time Microsoft did something beneficial for gaming?

Sooo... the Xbox one that is ridiculously priced considering it ships with a bunch of features most people don't want, need or can't use and which is obviously losing the console war against the PS4.

Yes the XBox One is definitely not beneficial to gaming. It would have been better if Microsoft never released the XBox One.

Then DirectX 12, which will only be available with Windows 10, forcing gamers to once again use an OS that would have become irrelevant years ago had it not been for the fact that the gaming industry had largely ignored other operating systems, despite them being more viable.

Microsoft provided the tools and the user base to easily create and play games on Windows. Hell, I used to work as a game developer. Back in the day Microsoft sent me Visual Studio from the States by plane because I didn't have the means to get it myself. Having had to make games on either Mac or Linux was a pain. Microsoft looked after its developer base. So it dominated the market. That's definitely not beneficial to gaming. No matter even if all its current initiatives in the gaming market. Did you know that every year they have huge competitions in Unity and Game Maker (maybe even Unreal, not sure) to help indies get into the market? Shame on you Microsoft! That's not beneficial at all!

Then HoloLens, which is very likely to be priced right out of the market for the average gamer, seeing as it is rumored to cost "significantly more than an Xbox One".

The average PC gamer has a PC that costs way more than the XBox One. Also, is it not beneficial that Microsoft is experimenting with new gaming technologies? Nope. How dare they? We must all game on cheap Linux boxes. Or what do you say Graal?

Then your last point about Visual Studio, which is pretty much the only good thing they've done for the gaming industry lately.

Wow, you have clearly missed everything Microsoft has done these last couple of years. And I know I won't be able to change your mind.

Overall, Microsoft has not been a good force for gaming over the last decade. If they buy out AMD I'll probably switch back to buying Nvidia products.

I don't know if you know that Microsoft got a new CEO a while back and that they changed the company around completely. The work that Microsoft has been doing for gaming over the last 2 years is phenomenal.

Sometimes we get dead set in our ways and really dislike something. Only to not realise when it changes for the better. I welcome you to go look at what Microsoft has done lately and to tell us how nothing has been beneficial. Eh and I can't help that but smile that you'd rather go to Nvidia. The same Nvidia who is using closed source technologies like Nvidia Gameworks to shut out AMD. Wheres AMD made something like Mantle and said Nvidia is welcome to use it.

I challenge you. Go read up about Microsoft and what they are doing these days.

 

[DieGrootHammer]

[MENTION=20]Solitude[/MENTION] I couldn't have said it better myself. I may be completely biased as I am a somewhat big Microsoft fanbooi, but there is no denying that Microsoft has in fact changed a lot to their business model in the last few years to be much more accommodating to gamers and gaming in general.

I can understand that people do not like Microsoft though. Their history isn't one that has given gamers any confidence, but the direction and choices they are making right now will be beneficial to us all. I say give them a chance.

 

[Avatar]

[MENTION=20]Solitude[/MENTION], [MENTION=9789]DieGrootHammer[/MENTION]: I'm no fanboy. In fact, I genuinely dislike MS. If my work software didn't run exclusively on Windows, I'd be running on Ubuntu, and the exclusivity is purely down to the fact that DX is a Windows exclusive. I'm biased, but waaaaaaaay against MS.

That said, I agree 100% with [MENTION=20]Solitude[/MENTION]. The development of DirectX has been the single biggest unifying push in game development, and it ensured that developing for PC is viable for console developer. Without it, we would've seen many more console exclusives! DX has had two main points of criticism against it: A) It's closed source, so no DX for Linux, and B) Some DX versions are tied to OS's. MS is looking at changing A soon, and B certainly doesn't hold back game development in any way.. in fact, it ensures that more people can enjoy game by holding up backwards compatibility!

Their XBone is also a great piece of kit. Priced well, and with innovative features that, while not everyone wants them, greatly moves to integrate the console in the living room. Also, ensuring that controllers worked on both PC and xbox did wonders for porting of games to pc. "Obviously losing the console war against the PS4"? [citation needed], buddy. Look at the E3 reactions.

 

[Graal]

The average PC gamer has a PC that costs way more than the XBox One. Also, is it not beneficial that Microsoft is experimenting with new gaming technologies? Nope. How dare they? We must all game on cheap Linux boxes. Or what do you say Graal?

The average PC gamer might have a PC that costs more than the Xbox one (though annual Steam hardware surveys strongly disagree) but how does that relate to whether the average PC gamer has the money to shell out on a piece of hardware that costs as much as a second PC? Just because the average person drives a car that costs way more than a Corsa Lite does not mean the average person can just afford to go out and buy a Corsa Lite.

It's all well and good to experiment with new technology, but it calls into question what benefits it really brings to the market when only the elite can afford it. The occulus rift faces that same issue and last I checked they were still scrambling to bring the price down as much as possible.

Sometimes we get dead set in our ways and really dislike something. Only to not realise when it changes for the better. I welcome you to go look at what Microsoft has done lately and to tell us how nothing has been beneficial.

Maybe it's the fact that they've held the PC gaming market in a chokehold for years? Using proprietary techs, they've enjoyed a monopoly on the PC gaming market for decades. If they truly cared about the gaming market, they'd stop monopolizing it. Except they won't because if people no longer needed to use Windows for most of their gaming, there would probably be a mass exodus of people who ditch it in favor of Linux. Many gamers simply use Windows at this point because there's very little viable alternatives. But let's wait and see if the new Vulkan API is viable and we might just see a much better adoption rate of the Linux operating system among gamers anyway.

Eh and I can't help that but smile that you'd rather go to Nvidia. The same Nvidia who is using closed source technologies like Nvidia Gameworks to shut out AMD. Wheres AMD made something like Mantle and said Nvidia is welcome to use it.

Oh? I wasn't aware that Microsoft intended to make their DirectX 12 API open-source so that it could be more easily ported to Linux and MacOS. How nice of them. It's not like DirectX is the reason Windows is the most-used gaming OS today. I am aware of Nvidia's shady tactics, which is the main reason I am an AMD supporter. But, I'd much rather support Nvidia than an AMD run under MS.

But fair enough. Let's have this discussion again five years or so and see if Microsoft has really been the positive force in gaming you claim them to be. Only time will tell, after all.

 

[Avatar]

Using proprietary techs, they've enjoyed a monopoly on the PC gaming market for decades. If they truly cared about the gaming market, they'd stop monopolizing it.

Providing a better product != monopolizing.

 

[PsychoFish]

Unfortunately it's hit and miss when it comes to MS and bringing things to market.

DX is not going open source, there are OpenSource APIs for DX:
SlimDX which an open source library for DirectX programming on the .NET Framework
SharpDX which is an open source project delivering the full DirectX API for .NET on all Windows platforms, allowing the development of high performance game, 2D and 3D graphics rendering as well as real-time sound applications
Windows API CodePack for .NET Framework, which is an open source library from Microsoft.

The key here is that Open Source != Linux

What MS wants is for more developers to use DX on Windows based Operating Systems. Unless MS magically creates DirectX for Linux (open source or proprietary software) you won't see a major shift. MS knows very well that if major titles can be released on non-MS controlled operating systems they will lose a significant portion of the non-corporate desktop market share.

I strongly suspect that MS will probably kill off Mantle immediately after they acquire (if they acquire) AMD. This will essentially still leave us with the DirectX vs OpenGL situation we have now. Yes there are other competing technologies, and i'm not even mentioning them as they are simply not mature enough or used widely enough to be a remote threat to anything but themselves.

If MS acquire AMD it will also leave Intel in a very sticky situation as essentially their main and major OS vendor now has control over their biggest rival. This will also upset the nVidia balance and we will most likely start seeing talks between Intel and nVidia to partner up (or even merge operations). All in all this (an Intel/nVidia marriage) will even further polarize the hardware space.

 

[Solitude]

[MENTION=6600]PsychoFish[/MENTION] Mantle was already discontinued in March.

 

[GregRedd]

I ain't getting involved in this yay-MS / nay-MS debate, it just not worth it. Just a couple of thoughts though, as a bona-fide "average PC gamer" type.

...though annual Steam hardware surveys strongly disagree...

Basing anything other than broad generics on the Steam surveys is a little disingenuous. It's an opt-in methodology and I sincerely doubt the stats are absolutely representative of the 75-million Steam users. I for one have a PC that cost significantly more than the price of a XB1 + PS4 combined, and Steam don't have my system specs included in their surveys.

...If they truly cared about the gaming market, they'd stop monopolizing it. Except they won't because if people no longer needed to use Windows for most of their gaming...

They care about the gaming market share, as they should. They are a corporate company, not an altruistic open-source developer. Anyone who thinks MS are evil because they don't give their products away "because that's the right thing to do" and fight to dominate markets wherever they can, is living in an utopian fantasyland. Go ask MS shareholders if they have a problem with the company monopolising markets. And then go ask Opel to give a Corsa Lite to every deserving family that needs reliable transport and tell them to stop trying to monopolise the sub-compact car market in developing countries. Think the response you're going to get will be similar.

...there would probably be a mass exodus of people who ditch it in favor of Linux...

Pretty speculative there. Linux supporters (nothing wrong with them, I know and like many) have been saying much the same for many years. I sincerely doubt there ever be a "mass exodus" to Linux regardless of how good, bad, or ugly MS becomes in the future. Let's check back in those 5 years time to see how many disgruntled gamers have moved over to the penguin side of things.