IBM's new Xbox2 role?
- Thread starter AzBat
- Start date
Why are we all operating under the assumption that IBM is providing Nintendo's next Cpu? That is looking more & more unlikely now, when was the formal contractural announcement made? Are we completely forgetting NEC? Remember this? http://www.planetgamecube.com/news....on=item&id=3785
"Bloomberg is reporting today that NEC Corp. is in talks with Nintendo Co. to develop a chip for the GameCube's successor, and compete with Sony's PlayStation 3."
Why? Because NEC wants a larger stake in Nintendo's next generation platform instead of simply being contracturally responsible for fabricating their existing technology. (Gekko & Flipper) I am currently thinking that the CPU for the next Nintendo system will be some form of collaboration with NEC and several Japanese companies on a powerful multi-core CPU. perhaps Hitachi (one of the partners in reported Digital-Hub / Nintendo console) Fujitsu, Mitsubishi, and/or others. perhaps some of these companies are working with NEC and Nintendo on a powerful CPU, ARM more than likely however.
Especially in light of NEC's flexing its processor producing muscle as of late, from Buggy Loop over at GA:
"Early reports were saying its NEC, but it was never confirmed. But logically, it makes a lot more sense for nintendo to go with NEC, they're already good partners, NEC is pretty good with fab'ing technology and NEC has also invested a LOT in microprocessors recently. Known possibilities for NEC processors, the NEC+ARM parallel processor, the Cray+NECprocessor, the NEC+motorola+Hitachi processor, NEC+Matshusita's new CPU core, a NEC MP98 derivative which NEC said would be updated by roughly 2003/2004, the NEC V.I.R.A processor, the NEC's ES2.0 processor (earth simulator with gigantic performances, obviously scaled down for home consoles) and I'm probably forgetting some..
So you see no formal announcement was ever made, nor existed between Nintendo & IBM. We would've certainly heard it by now if anything btw. Also a MS 2004 launch would be tantamount to market suicide, it will be 2005 at the earliest. Remember that the majority of console software houses need kits 2 years prior.
"Bloomberg is reporting today that NEC Corp. is in talks with Nintendo Co. to develop a chip for the GameCube's successor, and compete with Sony's PlayStation 3."
Why? Because NEC wants a larger stake in Nintendo's next generation platform instead of simply being contracturally responsible for fabricating their existing technology. (Gekko & Flipper) I am currently thinking that the CPU for the next Nintendo system will be some form of collaboration with NEC and several Japanese companies on a powerful multi-core CPU. perhaps Hitachi (one of the partners in reported Digital-Hub / Nintendo console) Fujitsu, Mitsubishi, and/or others. perhaps some of these companies are working with NEC and Nintendo on a powerful CPU, ARM more than likely however.
Especially in light of NEC's flexing its processor producing muscle as of late, from Buggy Loop over at GA:
"Early reports were saying its NEC, but it was never confirmed. But logically, it makes a lot more sense for nintendo to go with NEC, they're already good partners, NEC is pretty good with fab'ing technology and NEC has also invested a LOT in microprocessors recently. Known possibilities for NEC processors, the NEC+ARM parallel processor, the Cray+NECprocessor, the NEC+motorola+Hitachi processor, NEC+Matshusita's new CPU core, a NEC MP98 derivative which NEC said would be updated by roughly 2003/2004, the NEC V.I.R.A processor, the NEC's ES2.0 processor (earth simulator with gigantic performances, obviously scaled down for home consoles) and I'm probably forgetting some..
So you see no formal announcement was ever made, nor existed between Nintendo & IBM. We would've certainly heard it by now if anything btw. Also a MS 2004 launch would be tantamount to market suicide, it will be 2005 at the earliest. Remember that the majority of console software houses need kits 2 years prior.
chaphack said:
Of course you would, and shit... if Windows does it
Right. So, now that Microsoft has entered we can forget about the ideology behind a console and just have another PC... hey, good times. Makes it easier on Baumann and his forum's, huh?
I'm confident Sony and Nintendo's PR would rip Microsoft a new one if they attempted this. PlayStation (R) is powerful enough, IMHO, to kill any early attempt via PS3 hype and a $99 PS2 with it's strong line-up. Hell, just announce PSTwo & GTA4 and it's game over if PSOne's precedent is anything to base a projection off of.
I like Windows XP just fine. All you Linux elitist can suck it, so much more things to do with XP easily. I wouldnt even mention Mac, too expensive too little.
ANYWAY, this 2004 isnt much in stone. Just a possibility, some speculation and its it. Hell, even Sony is moving away from the gaming console idealogy. Nothing wrong for MS to try something new. 3 years aint exactly fast. I mean right now, you have people hopping around for next gen stuffs. Then again, developing a game might be hMMmMM...
STILL, speculations and all. Some sites even put it as 2005. XB2 in 2005 Winter is a good kudos to my insider source though!
ANYWAY, this 2004 isnt much in stone. Just a possibility, some speculation and its it. Hell, even Sony is moving away from the gaming console idealogy. Nothing wrong for MS to try something new. 3 years aint exactly fast. I mean right now, you have people hopping around for next gen stuffs. Then again, developing a game might be hMMmMM...
STILL, speculations and all. Some sites even put it as 2005. XB2 in 2005 Winter is a good kudos to my insider source though!
They are?
95 took 6+ years until XP.
NT took 6+ years until 2000.
Doesn't sound like a 3 year cycle to me - and no, I don't count upgrades as releases because if I did that Windows are on a 3month cycle.
As for what I think of accelerating things - if I wanted to work on PCs I already would
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Fafalada said:
Fafalada, after this and the Deadmeat's logic paradox i think you might have a career in stand-up commedy
Yes, MS will just magically get the latest super technology that has not needed any research prior going into xbox2.chaphack said:
It's a secret 'alien technology' from Uranus
chaphack said:
From ATI and IBM? 2004 - 2007 = 3 years. Good enough research i say.
er no not really.
95/98 are overhauls XP and 2000 are good refinements of from their NT core neither of which followed linearly from the other. longhorn is suitably what we can consider an new OS.
er no thanks.
I wouldn't talk about things you have never used and have no clue about it.chaphack said:
About 3 years cycles:
I am very reluctant to buying a console knowing that I can throw it away in just 3 years. I am not even talking about the fact that the hardware wouldn't be pushed to its limits technically and that the selection of games would also be very limited. Additionally developers would have to throw away their engines/codes, etc. away every three years. That's more cost to them. Moreover, developing a console every 3 years means more R&D costs because of the shortening of life time. Switching over to this model would be pretty moronic.
chaphack said:HmmMMM... anyone knows what "might" be the difference between this PPC(say 970?) and the PPC in CELL? Can it work in multichip solution? A few PPC + a few R5X? Coz the price and heat might be and issue..
*shrugs* nope, well we can hazard a guess that they'll take an existing architecture (core+layout) and bolt/mod a few things.
CELL is supposed to be from the ground (well from the bare bones PPC core) up so don't expect anything too similar.
chaphack said:
Cell isn't centered around the PPCs Chap, why do you keep bringing this up? Over all, it will be vastly more effecient in terms of sheer area usage/ computation per area, power use.. basically, it promises to potentially totally outclass any traditional superscalar in Dynamic Media Apps by a wide margin.
Chap said:Can it work in multichip solution? A few PPC + a few R5X? Coz the price and heat might be and issue..
Why not, just throw a frickin' ACSI sized cluster in there... the black box is big enough.
rabidrabbit said:
<img src=http://maddox.xmission.com/controller3.jpg height=250 width=270>
chaphack said:Well then, how does the PPC in Apple G1/2/3/4/5/ Macs do in games or something related..or something?
adequately, which isn't saying much since those platforms don;t exactly have a massive lib of title to test from.
you could try a search on ars for some benchies if you want.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
chaphack said:
This will likely include some shipment ( manufacturing ) of chips.