Tuttle said:
The speculation goes on because neither IBM or MS have publicly stated what processor/architecture will be used.
What about using a stripped down PPC in a cell architecture? I might be completly off, but could it be done?later,
epic
Microsoft licensed microchip technology from IBM
- Thread starter Brimstone
- Start date
The speculation goes on because neither IBM or MS have publicly stated what processor/architecture will be used.
What about using a stripped down PPC in a cell architecture? I might be completly off, but could it be done?later,
epic
Perhaps I linked to the wrong article. But I read an article quoting an IBM person stating that it would be some form of a PPC chip, but no other details were given.
Hardware isn't my area, other than using it, but from what I know about the current PPC line it looks like a low power 970 type chip is all that is possible in such a short timeframe.
The Power 4&5 chips are the high end server class chips. Way,way too expensive for a 300 dollar consumer device.
The 970 is the Power 4 stripped of the server class features. Still too much power and heat for a console as is. 40W I believe. My dual G5 is pretty hot, I'm glad winter is approaching.
There is supposed to be a die shrink next year that people are looking forward to enabling 970s in PowerBooks.
Seems like that would be a possible candidate. Or perhaps there is something more custom in the works - on chip support for emulation of the original hardware. Or pehaps some sort of feature like the GameCube CPU has for communicating with its GPU.
Hardware isn't my area, other than using it, but from what I know about the current PPC line it looks like a low power 970 type chip is all that is possible in such a short timeframe.
The Power 4&5 chips are the high end server class chips. Way,way too expensive for a 300 dollar consumer device.
The 970 is the Power 4 stripped of the server class features. Still too much power and heat for a console as is. 40W I believe. My dual G5 is pretty hot, I'm glad winter is approaching.
There is supposed to be a die shrink next year that people are looking forward to enabling 970s in PowerBooks.
Seems like that would be a possible candidate. Or perhaps there is something more custom in the works - on chip support for emulation of the original hardware. Or pehaps some sort of feature like the GameCube CPU has for communicating with its GPU.
McFly said:
The one very intresting aspect to SiS is that they've made a Rambus chipset. It would be ironic if Microsofts hardware end up with a Cell like CPU and uses Rambus for a unified memory architecture.
Microsoft has really thrown a big curve ball with the IBM deal.
Yeah, it doesnt feel like we know more know more now then we did before the IBM announcement. Rambus in xbox2 would really be crazy.Brimstone said:
later,
epic
I'm sure they are capable of designing a chip based on whatever specifications MS needs. Xbox2 doesn't feel like Xbox1 AT ALL in terms of design. Instead of combining over the counter parts, they are designing a system.
But even if they went RAMBUS.. thats not as big a change as going PPC IMO. The PC developer community was really good to the Xbox, and it was one of the reasons it did as well as it did IMO. If they are willing to cut off a large source of potential games, they must be really serious about putting together a cost effective model. Good for them! =)
</mindless ramble>
But even if they went RAMBUS.. thats not as big a change as going PPC IMO. The PC developer community was really good to the Xbox, and it was one of the reasons it did as well as it did IMO. If they are willing to cut off a large source of potential games, they must be really serious about putting together a cost effective model. Good for them! =)
</mindless ramble>
HW doesnt really matter...
Although talking about the cpu is interesting from a technical point of view - I believe that it is actually pretty immaterial...
For Xbox 2 you will be presented with Visual Studio .NET and Direct X 9
You will program in C, and all of your source code will likely remain similar ( with minimal rewrites as found in Xbox 1 code )
The libraries and dev environment make Xbox attractive to the PC devs, not the NV hardware and P3 ( after all you dont only target one graphics card in a PC game... )
Although talking about the cpu is interesting from a technical point of view - I believe that it is actually pretty immaterial...
For Xbox 2 you will be presented with Visual Studio .NET and Direct X 9
You will program in C, and all of your source code will likely remain similar ( with minimal rewrites as found in Xbox 1 code )
The libraries and dev environment make Xbox attractive to the PC devs, not the NV hardware and P3 ( after all you dont only target one graphics card in a PC game... )
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=188409#188409hey69 said:http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12523
they are speculating over a xbox2 with cell over here
I started a post on the third page about this very same article.
Thats what the last 2 pages worth of posts have been about.later,
epic
The Inquirer once again speculates about a non-x86 chip being designed by IBM for Xbox2. ("silicon for an imtermediate lanuage", which they speculate is .NET)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12552
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12552
what exactly is the point of posting Inquirer articles.......?
i mean, even Deadmeat's threads are more useful...
i mean, even Deadmeat's threads are more useful...
DeadmeatGA
Banned
...
If not Power5, the other option is the BleuGene/L ASIC that delivers 5.6 GFLOPS at 700 Mhz. But since short-pipe PPC cores don't clock high, I don't think IBM will go in that direction.
Power5 can be fit into a 100 mm2 die IF L2 cache and L3 cache interface is removed.
If not Power5, the other option is the BleuGene/L ASIC that delivers 5.6 GFLOPS at 700 Mhz. But since short-pipe PPC cores don't clock high, I don't think IBM will go in that direction.
Power5 can be fit into a 100 mm2 die IF L2 cache and L3 cache interface is removed.
DeadmeatGA
Banned
...
http://www.macosrumors.com/
http://www.macosrumors.com/
This article claims a derivative of Power5, which sounds entirely reasonable to me.
Yes, and I have much less of an issue with it if we're talking about a stripped-down version than, say, a Power5+ dual-core...
I was already assuming a PowerPC 970 variant, but there's no reason to not use advances the 980 will bring, so long as they are modifying it to be a cheaper, consumer-grade chip. Until we know what features have been added versus what features sacrificed and see the clock speeds, it will be hard to gauge how it compares to the G5's we see currently. On-die memory controllers can certainly take up some space, but I can see them being very useful for increasing performance and efficiency in a box with locked specs.
I'm still pretty interested to see if--with Microsoft fully producing and supporting DirectX for the PowerPC architecture--it could end up on Macs and any other systems to use PowerPC and have the interest and wherewithal.
I was already assuming a PowerPC 970 variant, but there's no reason to not use advances the 980 will bring, so long as they are modifying it to be a cheaper, consumer-grade chip. Until we know what features have been added versus what features sacrificed and see the clock speeds, it will be hard to gauge how it compares to the G5's we see currently. On-die memory controllers can certainly take up some space, but I can see them being very useful for increasing performance and efficiency in a box with locked specs.
I'm still pretty interested to see if--with Microsoft fully producing and supporting DirectX for the PowerPC architecture--it could end up on Macs and any other systems to use PowerPC and have the interest and wherewithal.
I don't mean to sound like a grammar nazi, but out of all your posts that's the ONE word that always leaps out and beans me in the head! Since the frequency picked up of late I just cracked.
Since the frequency picked up of late I just cracked. nondescript
Regular
Re: ...
Hmm...within a week of announcing that IBM will supply the processors they're already rolling out some early specs...does it sound like MS is trying to fast-track development to pull an early launch? They're "not 100% finalized", but it sounds like they've been working on this for a while - Power5 is already in IBM labs, and it will be mass-produced next year, and with all the spare fab capacity IBM has idling, they'd certainly welcome some extra orders...
Software designed for Power4 is compatable with Power5, so its might be possible for developers to get out polished games in time for a early launch.
Very unlikely, I admit...but not impossible - and MS has already stated that they definitely don't want to launch later than PS3, and would like to launch earlier.
The plot thickens...IBM/ATI/SIS, I'm looking forward to what they come up with.
DeadmeatGA said:
Hmm...within a week of announcing that IBM will supply the processors they're already rolling out some early specs...does it sound like MS is trying to fast-track development to pull an early launch? They're "not 100% finalized", but it sounds like they've been working on this for a while - Power5 is already in IBM labs, and it will be mass-produced next year, and with all the spare fab capacity IBM has idling, they'd certainly welcome some extra orders...
Software designed for Power4 is compatable with Power5, so its might be possible for developers to get out polished games in time for a early launch.
Very unlikely, I admit...but not impossible - and MS has already stated that they definitely don't want to launch later than PS3, and would like to launch earlier.
The plot thickens...IBM/ATI/SIS, I'm looking forward to what they come up with.
nondescript:
> does it sound like MS is trying to fast-track development to pull an
> early launch?
Well, that is one rumor obviously (which Robbie Bach denied recently however). But that article is just speculation and the PPC 980 has been known about for quite a while. As such it's not really indicative of anything.
> does it sound like MS is trying to fast-track development to pull an
> early launch?
Well, that is one rumor obviously (which Robbie Bach denied recently however). But that article is just speculation and the PPC 980 has been known about for quite a while. As such it's not really indicative of anything.
Similar threads
