Microsoft Partners with AMD for Next-gen Xbox Hardware

[Nomad76]

Microsoft has confirmed it's developing a next-gen Xbox console with AMD as Xbox president Sarah Bond shared this news in a 60-second YouTube video promising to offer "an Xbox experience not tied to one store or limited to a single device." Bond announced Microsoft is teaming up with AMD for a "strategic multi-year partnership." This collaboration will involve co-engineering silicon "across a range of devices, including our next-generation Xbox consoles for your living room and your hands." The two companies will also join forces to build the next generation of Xbox Cloud Gaming. Microsoft is making it crystal clear that its next-gen Xbox platform will focus on multiple devices and won't be tied to its own store for games.

"This is all about creating a gaming platform that stays with you so you can enjoy the games you like on different devices wherever you want—giving you an Xbox experience not restricted to one store or linked to a single device," Bond explains. "That's why we're working with the Windows team to make sure Windows becomes the top platform for gaming". This comes right after Microsoft announcement of its partnership with ASUS to roll out two Xbox Ally handhelds in the coming months. These devices will feature a new full-screen Xbox interface running on Windows allowing Xbox Ally devices to access other platforms like Steam.



Update Jun 19th: AMD comments on Microsoft partnership (YouTube video included)

Complete statement of Sarah Bond, Xbox president on Microsoft's next-gen Xbox hardware:

At Xbox our vision is for you to play the games you want with the people you want, anywhere you want. That's why we're investing in our next-generation hardware lineup, across console, handheld, PC, cloud, and accessories. I'm thrilled to share we've established a strategic multi-year partnership with AMD to co-engineer silicon across a portfolio of devices, including our next-generation Xbox consoles in your living room and in your hands. Together with AMD we're advancing the state of art in gaming silicon to deliver the next generation of graphics innovation, to unlock a deeper level of visual quality and immersive gameplay and player experiences enhanced with the power of AI. All while maintaining compatibility with your existing library of Xbox games. This is all about building you a gaming platform that's always with you, so you can play the games you want across devices anywhere you want, delivering you an Xbox experience not locked to a single store or tied to one device. That's why we're working closely with the Windows team to ensure that Windows is the number one platform for gaming. The next-generation of Xbox is coming to life and this is just the beginning, we can't wait to show you what's next.

AMD CEO Dr. Lisa Su says in a newly released YouTube video that the new Microsoft partnership advances a "bold shared vision" for gaming with "seamless gameplay across any screen." AMD will move beyond just building Xbox chips to creating a "full roadmap of gaming optimized chips" combining Ryzen and Radeon for consoles, handhelds, PCs, and cloud gaming. The ecosystem will feature full backwards compatibility and use AI to improve rendering and graphics. Su emphasized that AMD and Microsoft are "building the future of immersive gaming" to bring this technology to gamers everywhere.

Here's the full video:

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[dir_d]

Really interested in an XBox OS like what they made for the Ally but for Desktops.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Interesting, I wonder how well a pc like Xbox with a big apu would do with entry level pc gaming getting so expensive it could be a good time for a standalone pc box assuming they can give ample vram and closer to mid range performance. I have my doubts with silicon getting so expensive.

 

[Vya Domus]

To no one's surprise.

 

[LastDudeALive]

Bummer. I'd really like an Nvidia console and/or handheld beyond the Switch 2. Microsoft's already working hard on getting Windows on ARM with Qualcomm and Nvidia releasing mobile chipsets, so software wouldn't be a huge issue for next-gen consoles. And having the efficiency advantage of ARM and Nvidia would be a distinguishing factor over the PS6.

I wonder if Nintendo has an exclusivity deal for Nvidia consoles, or if AMD's desperateness ability to deliver value at a low cost for stakeholders was the deciding factor.

 

[AnotherReader]

To no one's surprise.

Weren't quite a few people proclaiming the end of Xbox?

Bummer. I'd really like an Nvidia console and/or handheld beyond the Switch 2. Microsoft's already working hard on getting Windows on ARM with Qualcomm and Nvidia releasing mobile chipsets, so software wouldn't be a huge issue for next-gen consoles. And having the efficiency advantage of ARM and Nvidia would be a distinguishing factor over the PS6.

I wonder if Nintendo has an exclusivity deal for Nvidia consoles, or if AMD's desperateness ability to deliver value at a low cost for stakeholders was the deciding factor.

Backward compatibility is an important consideration for sticking with x86. As for efficiency, Nvidia isn't significantly more efficient than AMD any longer.

 

[john_]

Devices, devices, devices. Living room and handhelds. AMD should send a big basket of flowers to Valve. It's the development of Valve's SOC that gave them this new market. If AMD hasn't entered the market the time they did, Nvidia with Mediatek could be the ones grabbing it in a year from now or two.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Backward compatibility is an important consideration for sticking with x86. As for efficiency, Nvidia isn't significantly more efficient than AMD any longer.

On top of there is no way in hell Nvidia would do it without decent margins the whole reason they dropped out post PS3 which wasn't a very good gpu vs the AMD equipped X360 anyways.

Switch only works becuase Nintendo can use very low end hardware that is nearly a half decade old the soc was literally ready in 2022 and on a samsung process nobody is using.

 

[colossusrageblack]

Bummer. I'd really like an Nvidia console and/or handheld beyond the Switch 2. Microsoft's already working hard on getting Windows on ARM with Qualcomm and Nvidia releasing mobile chipsets, so software wouldn't be a huge issue for next-gen consoles. And having the efficiency advantage of ARM and Nvidia would be a distinguishing factor over the PS6.

I wonder if Nintendo has an exclusivity deal for Nvidia consoles, or if AMD's desperateness ability to deliver value at a low cost for stakeholders was the deciding factor.

I don't think it matters anymore that it doesn't use an Nvidia GPU. With FSR 4, Nvidia's DLSS advantage has all but disappeared. Yes it's still ahead of the curve by a bit and there's certainly more support. But for a console, developers can now focus in on making the game look and perform as good as NVidia's offerings. If anything, I'm hoping AMD and Microsoft bring CPU performance up to par, that's been the bottleneck in games since the previous gen. Slow CPUs have prevented developers from bringing their games to life. Graphics are basically going nowhere these days, so CPU performance should be at the forefront of the next gen.

 

[john_]

To no one's surprise.

MS is constantly losing when having comparable hardware with SONY. I was thinking this time they could try Nvidia, to differentiate themselves. That way they could push Windows on ARM more aggressively, having games being natively developed on the ARM platform. Maybe Nvidia was offering only two options. A pathetic SOC but with a somewhat acceptable price and a very good one, but with a very high price tag. Or maybe MS thought that AMD was fine as an option. AMD did fixed upscaling and Raytracing performance(ironically thanks to SONY), so they probably are still a good option for consoles, or in consoles maybe Nvidia'a feature set isn't that much important.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I don't think it matters anymore that it doesn't use an Nvidia GPU. With FSR 4, Nvidia's DLSS advantage has all but disappeared. Yes it's still ahead of the curve by a bit and there's certainly more support. But for a console, developers can now focus in on making the game look and perform as good as NVidia's offerings. If anything, I'm hoping AMD and Microsoft bring CPU performance up to par, that's been the bottleneck in games since the previous gen. Slow CPUs have prevented developers from bringing their games to life. Graphics are basically going nowhere these days, so CPU performance should be at the forefront of the next gen.

You have to remember these consoles likely started developing in 2016/17 and still ended up with 8 zen 2 cores sure Zen 3 launched at the same time but there is no way they'd have launched the current generation consoles in 2020 if they had used it the only higher performing AMD core available to them.

And they were words better than the tablet pos cores the previous generation got.

 

[TechLurker]

It's worth noting that the reason Xbox and Sony both stepped away from NVIDIA in the first place was because NVIDIA refused to do semi-custom solutions for either of them, as NVIDIA was (rightfully) more interested in chasing the enterprise/commercial sector first, and charged a high licensing cost just to use existing repurposed chips. Meanwhile AMD and ATI both had experience doing semi-custom solutions for various customers, and were willing to work with both MS and Sony on their consoles. Heck, we have had interviews with former console heads from both companies stating that AMD/ATI were the best partners to work with as they were willing to tailor a custom solution instead of forcing them to work with only existing chips in production.

And given Ryzen's strong performance value and the cheaper, open-source options from Radeon bringing close parity in most everything except raytracing, plus AMD's strong semi-custom division that has been quietly working away in the background, it's not really a surprise that MS and Sony would end up going with all AMD again.

Now if only MS would bring the Xbox Ally's semi-custom OS as a "Windows 11 Gamer Edition" setting for Windows, which cuts down the bloat and allows for a streamlined interface, it could be a tempting rival to Steam OS, given how seemingly smooth, efficient, and responsive it is in early sample reviews.

 

[Chrispy_]

It's not like Nvidia give a shit about gaming any more.

The Switch 2's Nvidia CPU is unimpressive as hell. Qualcomm put out better offerings in midrange phones, at half the power draw, too. Don't get me wrong, the Switch 2 will be incredibly successful but that's despite Nvidia, not because of them.

I'm not versed on why Nintendo chose another Nvidia design, but presumably a big part of the decision was compatibility with the Switch 1's architecture to allow Switch 2 to play Switch 1 games. Without that requirement, just about anything else would be cheaper and better.

 

[ThomasK]

The amount of people whining because Microsoft chose Amd over Nvidia for its next gen console is honestly hilarious. And Sony is probably going the same route.

Nvidia's last public presentation, alongside the whack job that RTX 5000 is, should be enough to tell you that the crocodile leather jacket's company doesn't care about gamers anymore.

 

[dgianstefani]

It's not like Nvidia give a shit about gaming any more.

The Switch 2's Nvidia CPU is unimpressive as hell. Qualcomm put out better offerings in midrange phones, at half the power draw, too. Don't get me wrong, the Switch 2 will be incredibly successful but that's despite Nvidia, not because of them.

I'm not versed on why Nintendo chose another Nvidia design, but presumably a big part of the decision was compatibility with the Switch 1's architecture to allow Switch 2 to play Switch 1 games. Without that requirement, just about anything else would be cheaper and better.

Lol. They chose it because it's cheap and has DLSS, plus backwards compatibility.

It's a 2022 era GPU design with an even older cpu architecture on an "8nm" process that is essentially a 10nm node (and not a good one). Nintendo has always put massively outdated hardware because it sells anyway. There's no reason they couldn't have gone with something much newer from NVIDIA, like one of the car APUs etc, besides cost, and Nintendo still would have made bank from $80 games and joy con replacements. No surprises there's some issues with battery life etc.

Are you complaining about the 2025 "Z2" ASUS "Xbox" handhelds using Steam deck AMD hardware that was obsolete anemic trash even on release years ago? Ironically the area where FSR 4 would have mattered most (underpowered handhelds that struggle with native 720p or having more than a hour of battery life) is where AMD sticks with RDNA 2/3.5 designs, because, like NVIDIA, their clients don't want to cough up the cash for a newer more expensive design.

Doesn't matter though, because it's still the best selling console in history, and the kids and manchildren are still having tons of fun even without the OLED screen it should have had.

 

[Chrispy_]

Are you complaining about the 2025 "Z2" ASUS handhelds using Steam deck AMD hardware that was obsolete anemic trash even on release years ago? Ironically the area where FSR 4 would have mattered most (underpowered handhelds that struggle with native 720p) is where AMD sticks with RDNA 2/3.5 designs.

We're talking about XBOX, not switch. The only reason I brought up the Switch 2's outdated, underwhleming Nvidia Tegra is because that's the best Nvidia have to offer and it's obviously no good for Xbox.

Nvidia aren't interested in mobile gaming, end of discussion. The fact that $2500+ RTX 5070 laptops are still bottlenecked by 128-bit GPUs capped at 8GB is yet more fuel for the discussion, if the Switch 2 isn't enough of an example to make a case for why Nvidia aren't playing in this space any more.

Doesn't matter though, because it's still the best selling console in history, and the kids and manchildren are still having tons of fun even without the OLED screen it should have had.

Well duh, that's why I said this:

Don't get me wrong, the Switch 2 will be incredibly successful but that's despite Nvidia, not because of them.

 

[dgianstefani]

We're talking about XBOX, not switch.

The only reason I brought up the Switch 2's

Pick one please

outdated, underwhleming Nvidia Tegra is because that's the best Nvidia have to offer and it's obviously no good for Xbox.

It's not the best, like I said, there's newer, much more powerful versions of the Switch chip going into cars, since auto makers are willing to pay. The reason Xbox is going for AMD again is because it's cheap and their entire selling point this upcoming gen is backwards compatibility, which is hard if you switch architectures.

 

[evernessince]

Bummer. I'd really like an Nvidia console and/or handheld beyond the Switch 2. Microsoft's already working hard on getting Windows on ARM with Qualcomm and Nvidia releasing mobile chipsets, so software wouldn't be a huge issue for next-gen consoles. And having the efficiency advantage of ARM and Nvidia would be a distinguishing factor over the PS6.

I wonder if Nintendo has an exclusivity deal for Nvidia consoles, or if AMD's desperateness ability to deliver value at a low cost for stakeholders was the deciding factor.

I'm not so sure a custom Nvidia developed solution would be more efficient than a competing AMD design. AMD's CPUs and GPUs are pretty good at managing their power draw nowadays and AMD has more semi-custom experience than Nvidia. Particularly with AMD being the brand that the handheld PC market is thriving off. AMD has some very impressive looking APUs coming out and their current offerings are better than competitors as is.

ARM's primary efficiency advantage is low performance and idle scenarios. Above 20w, the difference basically vanishes, at least when comparing to AMD's mobile single CCD offerings.

I really don't need to see price increases as a result of Nvidia demanding huge margins either. We've already got that in the GPU market, ya don't need that in the console market.

 

[dgianstefani]

Nvidia aren't interested in mobile gaming, end of discussion.:

Tell that to 90%+ of the gaming laptop market. Or to the best selling mobile (or any console) console in history, twice.

 

[Chrispy_]

Pick one please

It's not the best, like I said, there's newer, much more powerful versions of the Switch chip going into cars, since auto makers are willing to pay. The reason Xbox is going for AMD again is because it's cheap and their entire selling point this upcoming gen is backwards compatibility, which is hard if you switch architectures.

Please learn to read. My post started with "because Nvidia aren't playing"
Switch 2's Tegra is the best Nvidia have to offer, it's relevant to my point, but it's not my entire point.
Reading comprehension, that's your job at TPU, isn't it?

 

[dgianstefani]

I'm not so sure a custom Nvidia developed solution would be more efficient than a competing AMD design. AMD's CPUs and GPUs are pretty good at managing their power draw nowadays and AMD has more semi-custom experience than Nvidia. Particularly with AMD being the brand that the handheld PC market is thriving off. AMD has some very impressive looking APUs coming out and their current offerings are better than competitors as is.

ARM's primary efficiency advantage is low performance and idle scenarios. Above 20w, the difference basically vanishes, at least when comparing to AMD's mobile single CCD offerings.

I really don't need to see price increases as a result of Nvidia demanding huge margins either. We've already got that in the GPU market, ya don't need that in the console market.

Any of AMD's CCD/IO die based mobile solutions that are essentially soldered power limited desktop chips have worse battery life than even Intel ARL, let alone LNL. Their actual good efficiency APUs are monolithic, like on the desktop APUs.

Please learn to read. My post started with "because Nvidia aren't playing"
Switch 2's Tegra is the best Nvidia have to offer, it's relevant to my point, but it's not my entire point.
Reading comprehension, that's your job at TPU, isn't it?

Again, no it's not.

Speaking of learning to read:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra look at Thor, which I mentioned.

It's not the best, like I said, there's newer, much more powerful versions of the Switch chip going into cars, since auto makers are willing to pay.

Thor uses Blackwell GPU, much newer CPU cores, and released this year.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

It's not like Nvidia give a shit about gaming any more.

The Switch 2's Nvidia CPU is unimpressive as hell. Qualcomm put out better offerings in midrange phones, at half the power draw, too. Don't get me wrong, the Switch 2 will be incredibly successful but that's despite Nvidia, not because of them.

I'm not versed on why Nintendo chose another Nvidia design, but presumably a big part of the decision was compatibility with the Switch 1's architecture to allow Switch 2 to play Switch 1 games. Without that requirement, just about anything else would be cheaper and better.

I'm not exactly an executive for Nintendo, but if we look back at when Tegra 239 we should see something. What I'm seeing is that the Tegra 2 launched in 2010...so it was a high end offering then. Add on 15 years, and a few revisions, with Tegra 3 announced in 2011...and the ARM A78C being from 2020...

Well, my conclusion is that Nintendo called up their vendors, asked "what's the technology that you guys will be twilighting in three years," and then built a system around technology that is basically as cheap as they can get without having to pay extra to keep lines running...but will be hugely faster than their previous offerings because those are basically a decade behind everything given they made the same bargain to be profitable on day one. No "software sales push us from the red into the black" like most console developers.


If it isn't clear, I think their console design is less about what can be and more about how much profit can be coaxed from their system. That is admittedly built upon the absolute bangers of first party IP they horde, but Nintendo without their 5 or 6 core games is nothing. Xbox is trying to diversify away from that, and now even Sony is sharing the exclusives with PC. We'll see how much longer the big N can exist without becoming a software house...
Seriously though. AMD and MS to make a new suite of interconnected things. I would be absolutely stoked to get a Steam Deck style of console with a Windows OS that had to be gutted of bloat to work properly...but I'd be surprised that MS is even considering it.

 

[dgianstefani]

I'm not exactly an executive for Nintendo, but if we look back at when Tegra 239 we should see something. What I'm seeing is that the Tegra 2 launched in 2010...so it was a high end offering then. Add on 15 years, and a few revisions, with Tegra 3 announced in 2011...and the ARM A78C being from 2020...

Well, my conclusion is that Nintendo called up their vendors, asked "what's the technology that you guys will be twilighting in three years," and then built a system around technology that is basically as cheap as they can get without having to pay extra to keep lines running...but will be hugely faster than their previous offerings because those are basically a decade behind everything given they made the same bargain to be profitable on day one. No "software sales push us from the red into the black" like most console developers.


If it isn't clear, I think their console design is less about what can be and more about how much profit can be coaxed from their system. That is admittedly built upon the absolute bangers of first party IP they horde, but Nintendo without their 5 or 6 core games is nothing. Xbox is trying to diversify away from that, and now even Sony is sharing the exclusives with PC. We'll see how much longer the big N can exist without becoming a software house...
Seriously though. AMD and MS to make a new suite of interconnected things. I would be absolutely stoked to get a Steam Deck style of console with a Windows OS that had to be gutted of bloat to work properly...but I'd be surprised that MS is even considering it.

Precisely. This is a Nintendo choice, not a lack of options from NVIDIA, lmao.

Plus the "8nm" (10 nm) Samsung node not being used for anything else means high volume cheap production. It's literally all about cheap, because their market is cornered and it will sell anyway.

 

[Dr. Dro]

It's not like Nvidia give a shit about gaming any more.

The Switch 2's Nvidia CPU is unimpressive as hell. Qualcomm put out better offerings in midrange phones, at half the power draw, too. Don't get me wrong, the Switch 2 will be incredibly successful but that's despite Nvidia, not because of them.

I'm not versed on why Nintendo chose another Nvidia design, but presumably a big part of the decision was compatibility with the Switch 1's architecture to allow Switch 2 to play Switch 1 games. Without that requirement, just about anything else would be cheaper and better.

You're letting your hatred speak louder than your reasoning. The Switch 2's SoC was designed to Nintendo's specification. Nvidia offers plenty of SoC's that exceed the T239's performance. It's a low cost, unassuming SoC with a GPU that is close to what is used in GA107-based GeForce MX products. It's the exact same recipe of the original Switch, low cost, profits from day one.

I'm not exactly an executive for Nintendo, but if we look back at when Tegra 239 we should see something. What I'm seeing is that the Tegra 2 launched in 2010...so it was a high end offering then. Add on 15 years, and a few revisions, with Tegra 3 announced in 2011...and the ARM A78C being from 2020...

Well, my conclusion is that Nintendo called up their vendors, asked "what's the technology that you guys will be twilighting in three years," and then built a system around technology that is basically as cheap as they can get without having to pay extra to keep lines running...but will be hugely faster than their previous offerings because those are basically a decade behind everything given they made the same bargain to be profitable on day one. No "software sales push us from the red into the black" like most console developers.

If it isn't clear, I think their console design is less about what can be and more about how much profit can be coaxed from their system. That is admittedly built upon the absolute bangers of first party IP they horde, but Nintendo without their 5 or 6 core games is nothing. Xbox is trying to diversify away from that, and now even Sony is sharing the exclusives with PC. We'll see how much longer the big N can exist without becoming a software house...
Seriously though. AMD and MS to make a new suite of interconnected things. I would be absolutely stoked to get a Steam Deck style of console with a Windows OS that had to be gutted of bloat to work properly...but I'd be surprised that MS is even considering it.

Exactly that. And I'm all too happy to do my part to help Big N become a software house, because I won't buy their console.

 

[Lycanwolfen]

Nvidia made amazing chip with the PS3 also the cell was amazing but hard to program. When the Last of us Came out on the PS3 it showed what good engineering could do on the PS3. Ever since then everything been AMD.