You replied to everything but let this part out, Deadmeat:
Go on, DeanoC is talking to u, should be honoured.
Go on, DeanoC is talking to u, should be honoured.
(Rumour) XB2 CPU @ 65nm
- Thread starter Dave Baumann
- Start date
- Status
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Things have changed at Sony and the then more independent subdivisions will have to collaborate much more under Transformation 60.
I would not be so quick to exclude CELL plans from CELF sinc eSony plans to use CELL in several of their future CE devices.
Gubbi said:
Mach is the micro-kernel, BSD and Linux are the personalities.
That's what I call micro-kernel. Linux is not.
Win NT is a micro-kernel design before Win NT 4.0, although it is a bloated one since NT 3.1.
For up-to-date ones, QNX is still a real-time micro-kernel OS.
Re: ...
http://www.qnx.com QNX would be well suited for Cell. It is small fast and perfect for SMP.
Edit: maskrider beat me to it.
DeanoC said:
http://www.qnx.com QNX would be well suited for Cell. It is small fast and perfect for SMP.
Edit: maskrider beat me to it.
Wow!
This thread sure went to hell in a handbasket awfully quick, didn't it?
Time for the mods to break out the ol' padlock, methinks.
This thread sure went to hell in a handbasket awfully quick, didn't it?
Time for the mods to break out the ol' padlock, methinks.
marconelly! said:
Why not? I'm sure Sony will be happy to make money on every Xbox2 sold.
They are already getting royalties from the DVD in Xbox, so I don't see why they wouldn't want to license their technology to a competitor. This will legitimate CELL as a new standard architecture for consumer electronic and help amortize the investment on its development.
Why? Plenty o' fun and functional OS discussions going on. ^_^ People just have to remember to keep nastiness in check.Guden Oden said:Time for the mods to break out the ol' padlock, methinks.
Meanwhile, back to the TOPIC a second and processes... If this bears out, who actually thinks anyone BUT IBM would be able to bring about their designs on bleeding-edge processes, unless the timeframe of Xbox2 slips ALOT? I certainly couldn't see random "lowest-bidder" checks going on--not on the timeframe and with the yields they'd want. AMD would be the only "perhaps" I can think of (Intel could DO it, I guess, but I can't see them wanting to after MS jumped their architecture. Plus, it'd just be too weird, wouldn't it?
), but on the whole I can't see there being any real advantage to it. I'm pretty sure IBM has been on as fabber since day one (just not "confirmed" for whatever reasons--perhaps just backout clauses), and any move like this would just seem to confirm it.marconelly!
Veteran
Good point, but somehow I doubt that if Sony has any say there, they would allow their direct competitor to use the same hardware at the same time they do, and possibly leapfrog them in the tech area. They'd probably rather make more money off PS3 itself than Cell royalties.
I'm also not sure if it's in MS best interest as well to be paying Sony royalties for each unit sold. I think that multi core PPC is what they're getting.
Come now, that's hardcore journalism!Paul said:
Re: ...
Doesn't matter, consoles don't need the latest OS version. The OS a console needs is very different from a desktop OS.
Eg. Xbox has a 'ancient' filesystem because speed and overhead were more important than 'cool' features.
A console OS is a simple beast, multi-thread and sync primitives, memory and access to the network stack are at the core with a few nice things like dynamic library (no console has actually supported them yet but it must come one day) and security features. Every thing else is via custom API's (memory cards, controllers, memory and file usually have lower level custom API as well, etc).
No MS console OS will be anything like a desktop OS, Eg. Xbox has no DLL support which predate Win32!
Deadmeat said:
Doesn't matter, consoles don't need the latest OS version. The OS a console needs is very different from a desktop OS.
Eg. Xbox has a 'ancient' filesystem because speed and overhead were more important than 'cool' features.
A console OS is a simple beast, multi-thread and sync primitives, memory and access to the network stack are at the core with a few nice things like dynamic library (no console has actually supported them yet but it must come one day) and security features. Every thing else is via custom API's (memory cards, controllers, memory and file usually have lower level custom API as well, etc).
No MS console OS will be anything like a desktop OS, Eg. Xbox has no DLL support which predate Win32!
Well, all things considered it's a more interesting topic that can be investigated than the original. (Good enough to be broken out, at least.) While there's some stuff to say, I'm'a mainly going to wait for the good folks at Microsoft or IBM to state something definitive about the chippage and processage, rather than TeamXbox. Until then, we've basically talked over those same points from the simple and speculatory angle before. <shrugs> I'm guessing why it shifted to tangents so quickly. (And hey, I tried to take it back, but I can't think of anything much more to say than I already did. ^_^;; )
(Good enough to be broken out, at least.) While there's some stuff to say, I'm'a mainly going to wait for the good folks at Microsoft or IBM to state something definitive about the chippage and processage, rather than TeamXbox. Until then, we've basically talked over those same points from the simple and speculatory angle before. <shrugs> I'm guessing why it shifted to tangents so quickly. (And hey, I tried to take it back, but I can't think of anything much more to say than I already did. ^_^;; )The pros are pretty obvious (smaller process GOOD, cooler tech GOOD), but the big con is that whole "we don't know what they're doing" part, as we're still just as speculatory as what we've discussed in other threads. Until there's more solidity behind the process is being used, what chip ends up being the primary derivative, how many cores, etc., it's just hard to see how any of the situation has changed.
The only things I CAN say are that if it pans out, to my mind it means IBM is by far the most likely choice as fabber, and that it seems like they and PS3 will be competing for who can make the most expensive machine.
In the meanwhile, some public announcements or patents would make for a nice change of pace.
The only things I CAN say are that if it pans out, to my mind it means IBM is by far the most likely choice as fabber, and that it seems like they and PS3 will be competing for who can make the most expensive machine.
In the meanwhile, some public announcements or patents would make for a nice change of pace.
if Microsoft indeed ends up contracting IBM for their fabbing ... I wonder if IBM will use their East Fishkill fab for the job ..........
and if PlayStation 3 and Xbox Next are released around the same time ...... I wonder which chip will get priority in the East Fishkill fab ......... CELL or the CPU for Xbox Next ..
and if PlayStation 3 and Xbox Next are released around the same time ...... I wonder which chip will get priority in the East Fishkill fab ......... CELL or the CPU for Xbox Next ..
<metaphor>I've read about this caribian island, where they've used to bury pigs! But only one half of it! The other half had to stick out! Overnight those pigs blew up in a beautiful display of firework! Bad thing though, was lousy weather the day after. </metaphor>
... reading this made you dizzy? Well, now you know how I felt after, reading this thread :?
... reading this made you dizzy? Well, now you know how I felt after, reading this thread :?
- Status
