Microsoft moves into chip world with Xbox Next

Microsoft moves into chip world with Xbox
Last modified: November 10, 2003, 4:00 AM PST
By Michael Kanellos
Staff Writer, CNET News.com


There's a multibillion dollar company moving into the chip business: Microsoft.

According to sources, the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant will more actively participate in the design of the brains for the next version of its Xbox gaming console, tentatively called Xbox Next. By switching from using relatively standard parts to more customized silicon, the company can better optimize its game console, due in 2005. At the same time, the move potentially gives the company a toehold in a completely new market.


"It is clear that Microsoft wants to get a lot of their DNA into it," said Richard Doherty, director of research company The Envisioneering Group. One reason for that involves hacking incidents. "They sure don't want to have a situation where an Xbox can be turned into a PC," Doherty said. Another is that Microsoft can squeeze better performance out of chips by being involved on the front end of the design process.




What's new:
In the next-generation Xbox, Microsoft will shift from using chips that could be found in a PC to silicon customized using intellectual property from IBM, ATI Technologies and Silicon Integrated Systems--with design input from Microsoft.
Bottom line:
Customizing the chips will let Microsoft tweak the performance of the game console, but it also means the software giant will start functioning like a chipmaker. It won't buy chips. Instead, it will pay royalties and engineering fees to its partners. Ultimately, these deals could let Microsoft put silicon it inspired in a variety of devices.

More stories on this topic
For the original Xbox, Intel and Nvidia sold chips to Microsoft that were largely identical to semiconductors the two chipmakers have also sold to the general PC market.

With Xbox Next, Microsoft is licensing graphics technology from ATI Technologies, processor technology from IBM and chipset technology from Silicon Integrated Systems (SIS). Microsoft will then work with these companies to fashion customized chips, sources said.

The arrangement will likely mirror Sony's relationship with IBM and Toshiba to create the Cell processor slated for use in the next big release of the PlayStation game console, said analysts and sources close to the companies.

Microsoft will likely ink deals with one or more semiconductor foundries to manufacture the chips for the new Xbox design, said people familiar with the deal. "Manufacturing is not part of the agreement yet. It is up to them what they do with manufacturing," an IBM representative said.

Microsoft, which announced the IBM and SIS deals last week, refused to comment further on its plans. Chairman Bill Gates is expected to discuss Xbox next at the CES show in Las Vegas this January, Doherty said.

Although chip customization can create risks, it will enable Microsoft to optimize performance inside the console. The company has also been wrestling with Xbox hackers, who've been able to turn the $179 console into a fully functioning computer.

In a sense, "Microsoft is becoming a fabless semiconductor design firm," said Peter Glaskowsky, editor in chief of The Microprocessor Report. These companies--without their own chip-fabrication factories, or "fabs"--design their processors but outsource manufacturing to foundry companies. They also often license design expertise and intellectual property from others. Microsoft "had very little to do" with silicon design for the first Xbox, said Glaskowsky.

Commercially, Microsoft will differ from other fabless companies, such as Transmeta, in that its main customer will be itself. Still, Microsoft could conceivably leverage its investment by using the chips in many products, similar to what Sony plans to do with Cell.

"Microsoft could in principle take the technology they have licensed for Xbox and create hybrid systems," said Glaskowsky, referring to products that combine computing technologies with consumer electronics.

The details on how these different chip agreements will work remains vague at this point. Nonetheless, some of the semiconductor companies working with Microsoft have stated that their Microsoft relationship does not fit into the ordinary dealings between chipmaker and box maker.

"It (the Microsoft arrangement) is different than our normal. It is a technology development thing for SIS," said Brad Walker, director of business development for SIS. Typically, SIS develops chipsets on its own and then seeks out customers later.

The deal with ATI is similar to the relationship ATI has with Nintendo for providing graphics to the GameCube, said Chris Evenden, director of PR for ATI. ATI designed a customized chip for the Japanese giant, which then took the blueprints and found a manufacturing partner. In turn, ATI receives royalties for each GameCube console sold and royalties on the sales of Nintendo games.

With Microsoft, ATI will provide customized graphics technology for "future Xbox services and products" and in exchange will receive royalties. Royalty deals are an exception for the company. ATI mostly earns revenue by selling chips. Nvidia's Xbox revenue came from selling chips.

One of the major open questions, of course, is how different these chips will be from the semiconductors IBM, SIS and ATI will sell on the open market.

The IBM representative acknowledged that Microsoft is looking at the company's PowerPC technology, the underlying architecture behind the chips in Apple computers. PowerPC concepts will also be the basis of the Cell processor, which will contain multiple chip cores that handle a variety of tasks.

Sony, Toshiba and IBM, however, have been working on Cell since 2001, and it won't come out until at least late 2005. Doherty speculated that Microsoft's IBM-flavored processor probably wouldn't represent as radical a departure as Cell, but the chip would differ from the silicon found in Macs.

"They are going to make sure that it is not a rubber stamp of someone else's," Doherty said.

ATI's Evenden said, "you want to leverage as much of your intellectual property as possible" from the PC market in making game console chips. There are, however, substantial differences. With a PC chip, users want to adjust the resolution and other factors. In consoles, companies don't have to worry about those issues.

Manufacturing is also uncertain. Although no deal has been signed with IBM, it is inevitable that Big Blue will make some of the chips, said Glaskowsky. IBM embarked on a strategy in 2002 to sign intellectual property and/or manufacturing contracts with high-profile chipmakers.

Some of its clients include Advanced Micro Devices and Analog Devices. IBM also upgraded its East Fishkill, N.Y., fab to handle some of this work.

Microsoft, though, will have options. Chartered Semiconductor, a Singapore-based foundry, is redesigning some of its fabs with IBM's cooperation so they will be virtually identical from a manufacturing standpoint, as IBM's. Typically, Asian foundries charge lower fees than IBM.

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5104656.html?tag=nefd_lede
 
NICE!!!!!!!!

now let's see if deadmeat can winge and whine about this too, now that even MS is going the "different way"....
and with Nintendo being rumoured to go with Nec and their version of a highly parallel platforms, next generation is gonna be HOT!!!!

guess it will be a general being-broke generation all over again for me....
 
"Ultimately, these deals could let Microsoft put silicon it inspired in a variety of devices."

M$'s attempt at a 'cellular computing' platform with a whole range of interconnectable gadgets?

*G*
 
This is probably for the best.
They do have an awful lot of graphics technology just sitting around collecting dust.
They may as well convert it to hardware and get some use out of it rather than just endlessly publishing research papers.
Btw, as a loyal Xbox owner, I am appalled by the name "Xbox Next". It sounds like something Pepsi would come up with...
 
I am appalled by the name "Xbox Next". It sounds like something Pepsi would come up with...

heh, ditto.
 
This is a good article. It states what I'm thinking, in that MS won't use a stock power PC chip and it will be different in some way. One thing to keep in mind, the set top box team MS has were once the owned by 3DO when the M2 hardware was designed. They could be using this team to build some sort of custom design using Power PC and X-86 tech, hence needing IBM with expertise in both.


There's a lot of people out there suggesting that MS not using a intel chip will cause a backlash among developers. I don't think that will happen at all, it's just showing how serious they are about this market. I don't think console developers will care what the hardwar eis made with, as long as it's powerful and the tools available are stable/easy to use.
 
I think this old piece has alot of relavance for Xbox2

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?page=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php(que)id=9181

ZDNN has speculated that X-Box hardware is likely being developed by WebTV engineers - the same team that originally worked on the 3DO console and M2 project. Samsung picked up the crew after the 3DO hardware bombed, and offloaded the team after negotiations for a project with Nintendo failed. Microsoft WebTV took the development unit on after that. "Those guys are still there," Hugh Martin, former CEO of 3DO Systems told the service. "They are inside WebTV in Palo Alto (California)." Martin went on to say, "I guarantee you that if there's a group that knows how to build a videogame machine, it's the one inside WebTV."
 
I don't think it will cause a backlash, but it might cost them some easy porting they've have gotten otherwise. (Depending on how different Xbox2's development is compared to PC than Xbox's is. Might not actually BE all that different if they get all their API's lined up straight, but console developers are certainly more used to coding closer to the silicon, since they are dealing with a static environment and can afford to.)

I don't think their move or designs are going to be similar to CELL (spreading to many other devices, and the other points mentioned in the article) but it DOES mean they're serious in developing a custom console for its' own sake, rather than leaning PC tech, which is very good in its own right.

Funny thing is they're kind of taking a "Microsofty" approach to chip design as well. ^_^ There were rumblings a few years back that ended up becoming nothing, and this time they're entering in more of a "managerial" way: license technology and designs from chip companies who've been at it longer, yet retain the ability to intercede on specific design points they'd want and leave all the ultimate decisions up to them (who actually does the fabbing) in the end. Could be a good enough approach for them, but one still wonders if they've left themselves enough time to take the most advantage of it.
 
Qroach said:
There's a lot of people out there suggesting that MS not using a intel chip will cause a backlash among developers. I don't think that will happen at all, it's just showing how serious they are about this market. I don't think console developers will care what the hardwar eis made with, as long as it's powerful and the tools available are stable/easy to use.

Second that. From what I understand of console game developers, especially those already used to devising arcane assembly programs for PS2, is that they love original hardware. It may cause them some extra learning curve which means the game won't get out quite as quickly and hence will cost them some money, but I think the guys in trenches at least enjoy the challenge.

What it does make me wonder is, will it be possible for MS to achieve backwards compatibility with Xbox? The only way I can imagine they could do this now is to somehow include both the original XCPU and XGPU in Xbox 2, a la PS2 IOP, since I doubt Xbox2 will be powerful enough to emulate Xbox games. By ~2005, would such a thing even be possible? Or will those parts still cost too much? Or might there be technical issues that make it impossible?
 
fbg1 said:
The only way I can imagine they could do this now is to somehow include both the original XCPU and XGPU in Xbox 2, a la PS2 IOP, since I doubt Xbox2 will be powerful enough to emulate Xbox games. By ~2005, would such a thing even be possible? Or will those parts still cost too much? Or might there be technical issues that make it impossible?

There are also legal barriers concerning that arrangment. I also question just how much they can shape the XBox architecture away from normalcy in a year - shall be interesting to see.
 
fbg1 said:
Second that. From what I understand of console game developers, especially those already used to devising arcane assembly programs for PS2, is that they love original hardware. It may cause them some extra learning curve which means the game won't get out quite as quickly and hence will cost them some money, but I think the guys in trenches at least enjoy the challenge.

Correct. Console developers will roll along as they always have and wouldn't really be affected if they switched to Cray/Bitboyz. :LOL: The Xbox, however, lent more appeal to PC crossovers and PC developers in general, so will likely cause some backlash that way.

Of course I think this is a GOOD thing, as IMHO the way to make the X2 stand out as a console is to get it not so buddy-buddy with PC development anyway. The bigger titles and certain developers will follow along regardless (one can get a litmus test by looking at what ends up ported to PS2), but with luck it won't seem DRIVEN by that market. Other mindset has to change along with, but I think this is a step in the right direction.
 
The Xbox, however, lent more appeal to PC crossovers and PC developers in general, so will likely cause some backlash that way.

That was due to the simulatiry of the tools during development. I don't think the tools MS has for development of xbox 2 will be any more difficult then they are now. Despite the platform.
 
That was due to the simulatiry of the tools during development. I don't think the tools MS has for development of xbox 2 will be any more difficult then they are now. Despite the platform.


agreed.


Also, I think the fusion of ATI, CagEnt and DX10 will result in a spectacular machine.
 
I'd still say this is going to have fundamental similarities with the contempary DirectX functionality. Remember, that DX is already moving beyond x86 with the introduction of DirectX for handhelds.
 
As I said, it depends what they deliver for X2, and how similar it ends up being to now. Not to mention how soon they can deliver it, at least as far as the launch is considered. (And how might it affect initial and further development if devs get too used to leaning only on the tools provided instead of delving futher into the uniqueness of the platform? Console developers do this constantly, but PC ones are likely used to being able to continue building on what they've done before for years to come, not to mention providing better legacy support in the future. Between X and X2 they might find futher steps they took becoming unapplicable.)

The overall effect certainly won't become a giant sore spot, but it WILL be more than zero. ;)
 
Manufacturing is not part of the agreement yet. It is up to them what they do with manufacturing," an IBM representative said.

Does that mean the estimated $1.5b IBM could earn is more for R&D and whacaca! MS is the rich! :oops:


Sony, Toshiba and IBM, however, have been working on Cell since 2001, and it won't come out until at least late 2005.
Hmm....US or Japan...


Doherty speculated that Microsoft's IBM-flavored processor probably wouldn't represent as radical a departure as Cell, but the chip would differ from the silicon found in Macs.
speculation and all. at least MS tries to be more "traditional" ?
 
Back
Top