Blazkowicz
Legend
4 cores and 16 threads is equally possible, I bet on that.
it's probably better than a worse cpu with more cores.
it's probably better than a worse cpu with more cores.
About the 16 core bulldozer, I had completely forgot how huge a die that would be, Anandtech lists a AMD Interlagos die at 2x315mm. So 630mm?
No chance considering all the silicon on a OG Xbox came in closer to 400mm.
Or if they do, it's incredibly stupid, considering what an absolutely monster GPU you could do for that price instead.
Sure they can probably cut a lot of cache out or whatever, maybe they're even hoping on a node shrink, but I still dont see it as feasible.
If it's 16 threads, maybe they're jaguars and those are much smaller cores, or something.
The article says:
If true, I'd be looking much more into something from IBM then, since AMD doesn't really do hyperthreading, they do more of x number of true threads. I mean hell technically the 360 is 3 cores/6 threads and obviously tiny.
Plus, if MS wants to do software BC, as they surely do, you probably need an IBM CPU...
Something I had been thinking is that maybe they are copying Bulldozer, but are using AMD's "CMT" on Jaguar cores. So depending on a person's interpretation it could be 16 threads or 16 cores. Everything I/we have been hearing points so far to MS using x86.
Something I had been thinking is that maybe they are copying Bulldozer, but are using AMD's "CMT" on Jaguar cores. So depending on a person's interpretation it could be 16 threads or 16 cores. Everything I/we have been hearing points so far to MS using x86.
No.Xbox Live Arcade games? Games on Demand? Flash drive? USB drives support?
iirc the initial launch date was march 2006, but was delayed to november (and 2007 europe)
Probably both.AS i asked before given that bulldozer has lots of register renaming and pointers etc is going to SMT a logical next step or a whole pile of additional work?
AMD is pretty desperate to justify its new business model, and it does have stronger graphics IP than IBM. If Sony and Microsoft bought into heterogenous solutions, and Sony already bought into it for PS3, then AMD now has better consumer-level tech.Why is everyone convinced they are moving away from power PC? If you want a lot of float performance with relatively small core why not do something similar to last time? Obviously OoO this time and hopefully 4-6 cores + hyperthreading plus VMX.
Unless AMD were giving there cores away whats the advantage?
And games on demand, are you going to sit waiting for hours for the first level to download before you can play, only to likely have to wait hours again for level 2?
iirc the initial launch date was march 2006, but was delayed to november (and 2007 europe)
Sorry but if you think you can rely on multi megabit connections for the vast majority of your customers your going to have problems.
That's probably a discussion in itself. At the beginning of PS3, there was PR talk of a close partnership and future product collaborations. Didn't even get an nVidia GPU in PSP's successor, let alone a Cell with nVidia-designed rasterising units or something.I wonder why Sony left Nvidia, Nvidia indeed troublesome to work with? Or just AMD offered a better deal? But why go searching for a better deal in the first place if you were happy with Nvidia...
Aah crap, we're in "The Sims".. Please, God, don't accidentally remove the door in my house?Yeah, God's game has pretty good graphics, but the gameplay is pretty boring. Yeah, the massive multiplayer system is quite impressive, but most of the time I'm going to school or to my job. Not a very fun game in my opinion.
I was thinking in "options", a model without disc drive, but you can add it later, the same for hard drive.
bkilian hasn't been hinting at anything, bkilian is just enjoying arguing and muddying the waters. I'm South African, we love arguing, and will often take an opposing viewpoint just to see where it goesjives completely with what bkillian has been hinting at. there was some post where somebody was complaining durango might not have great gpu, and he posted back how power!=gpu but might be more in the cpu.
Oh, I'm pretty sure they wanted to launch in March. Unfortunately, the Blu-ray specifications took longer to finalize than they thought. The first Blu-ray player launched in June. Blue-laser production was _extremely_ limited throughout 2006.They never really intended to launch in March of 2006, it was all a smoke screen, much like their entire 2005 E3 presentation.