PS5 vs Xbox Series X: Why Use AMD Instead of Intel or NVIDIA?

If there is something that we have all been clear for years, it is that AMD was going to be chosen again by both SONY and Microsoft for their next-generation consoles. Few ask the question of why both technology giants leave Intel or NVIDIA aside for a market as juicy as the PS5 and XSX , what are the reasons why both companies are left out of consoles?

Intel doesn’t even smell it, but NVIDIA is present in the world of consoles with the Nintendo Switch. Even so, and both being much larger than Lisa Su’s company, it is this generation after generation that takes the cat to the water.

PS5 vs Xbox Series X

Why are CPUs and GPUs always from AMD on PS5 and Xbox Series X?

There are many reasons to address in these business decisions that are usually very complicated. To this we must add the past experiences between these three giants, where for example we already saw how the partnership between Microsoft and NVIDIA ended on the first Xbox and the problems that Redmond’s had to face to compete with SONY.

Therefore, we will divide this article into several points to be developed independently to try to understand the specific reasons of the companies mentioned.

PS5 Xbox Series X


If the consoles have something for each new generation that comes out, it is precisely costs for manufacturers that are more than adjusted. SONY and Microsoft have come on several occasions to sell their consoles at a price of balance or even with losses, having to compensate with payment services or accessories for these what is lost with each sale.

The cost of each component makes the difference between a user buying one console or another, since in concept, the price will always be high. For both companies to opt for two chips instead of just one, the only thing it would achieve would be to raise the final costs of the console even more.

Also, if we talk that one of the two chips will be from Intel or NVIDIA, then the price difference from AMD will be greater. Therefore, in terms of pure cost, a single chip is more optimal than two, and it is preferable to opt for AMD and its prices than for Intel and theirs, since those of Lisa Su can play with lower margins and earn less , while Intel has marked minimum benefits per chip that rarely breaks.


NVIDIA is out of this section due to the null operation in CPUs due to lack of patents in X86, so it all comes down to AMD vs Intel. In this section, AMD is currently ahead in overall performance with Zen 2 and in GPU architecture, although it lags behind NVIDIA, it is at the same time ahead of Intel.

Therefore, the option to choose is quite clear. If we add to this the previous experience of the developers for the generation of previous consoles, it is to add even more points. It happens that all developers claim that it is easy to work with AMD chips and its platform, something that for example SONY with the Cell on PS3 did not get anywhere near and that was a chip well ahead of its time.

Therefore, the simplicity and ease of coding by developers is also a point to consider within the architecture and evidence that AMD is on the right track.


Neither Intel nor NVIDIA are going to spend a huge amount of physical, personal and financial resources to take a very small cake in terms of profitability. For what is explained in the cost section, finding a company that designs an IP to your liking and needs without the price rising too high is only within the reach of those who have the need to do so.

Neither Intel nor NVIDIA are going to play that trick since they are looking for higher profit margins for the investment made and the number of chips sold does not compensate them either since the number of those they sell in their products is well above that of the consoles.

The only possibility is that SONY and Microsoft would have admitted a base of an existing chip, where the modifications to it are minimal and with this the investment of Intel or NVIDIA justified the expense. Something like what Nintendo has done with its Switch, where the console revolves around the SoC and not the other way around.


For AMD, the risk it runs in the sector is minimal in terms of sales of consoles worse than expected. The price of the same will rise and although sales will shoot up over time they will stabilize and then it will be time to add numbers.

Many are not willing to spend 500 euros or more on a device that will be obsolete in a little more than half a year due to a lot of optimization that it integrates, where online is paid every month and games are more expensive than on PC, where they can be obtained Keys for much less money.

Intel and NVIDIA are not going to take a risk in the sales of the consoles for much forecast that SONY and Microsoft mark, because as we have commented, the margins are low. AMD already said at the time that having benefits was enough for them in the long term, so they are two different approaches that again position Lisa Su as the only option in force.