(Rumour) XB2 CPU @ 65nm

[nobie]

You could in theory take an APU, the way they designed it, and use it as a CPU in another system with few modifications here and there.

APUs are independent processors which can be commanded by this super-CPU which is the PU in the case of the PE.

These are contradictory statements, if it was an independant processor it would function on its own without modification. I really don't think STI would have included the PU in the design unless it was a neccessary component.

 

[Vince]

Re: ...

The rule of semiconductor biz is that no chip fabricated on identical process around a similar timing blows the other away by more than a factor of three. CELL won't be "vastly more powerful" than Power5 lite that MS is putting inside Xbox Next.

Ignorant BS. A contemporary GPU will have a speed-up of tens of orders of magnitude over a same process x86 CPU. This is totally task dependant and I don't think you'll find a person around (besides you) who can say that a Power4/5 will keep pace with a Cell/BE/EE-like IC in any intensive application which is found on a game console.

And where did this "Rule" come from? Wait, nevermind, I can guess.

 

[bbot]

Apparently IBM can license CELL tech to Microsoft:

http://www-1.ibm.com/press/PressSer...lass&SESSIONKEY=any&WindowTitle=Press+Release


"In a separate agreement, IBM will transfer the latest SOI technologies to Sony and Toshiba. The development work will be conducted by a team of scientists and engineers from all parties at the IBM Semiconductor Research and Development Center (SRDC) in East Fishkill, N.Y. Each party then will have the ability to build the advanced chips in its own manufacturing facilities, products and applications, and for its own semiconductor business customers. A significant portion of IBM's soon-to-be-completed, 300 mm wafer manufacturing facility in East Fishkill will be dedicated to these new processes. "

 

[DeanoC]

Re: ...

No DLL support in XBox has got nothing to do with one application running.

DLL exists to share library code between multiple running applications. Since Xbox Next will run only one application(game) at a time, there is no need for library sharing, so DLL can be omitted without a problem.

Thats one use but not the only one, a major use of DLL's in games is a simple efficient form of overlays. Code can be placed in DLL seperate from the main app and loaded at will.

Many games use this (or there own form of it on Consoles), to save memory (i.e. each level has a DLL with its unique code) and for ease of development (the game can be developed in a relatively safe sandbox, away from the main engine).

This use of DLL is o.k. with MS (they even help do it for non-release versions) but DLLs are a security risk, as the running of non signed code (code outside the main executable which has been signed by MS) is disallowed. Hence no DLL's on XBox.

 

[Deadmeat]

...

A contemporary GPU will have a speed-up of tens of orders of magnitude over a same process x86 CPU.

I am talking about a CPU to CPU comparison.

I don't think you'll find a person around (besides you) who can say that a Power4/5 will keep pace with a Cell/BE/EE-like IC in any intensive application which is found on a game console.

It will. They are fabbed on similar process and have same cost constraints. Sure, CELL might have 2~3X sustained FLOPS over Power5 but Power5 blows CELL away on integer code, which make up the vast majority of a program anyway.

A 300 Mhz EE has a 6.2 GFLOPS while a contemporary 733 Mhz Celeron2 in Xbox has 3 GFLOPS. So did PSX2 blow XBox away in gaming??? No it doesn't. People would say the opposite is true.

A significant portion of IBM's soon-to-be-completed, 300 mm wafer manufacturing facility in East Fishkill will be dedicated to these new processes.

IBM builds many SOI devices. A fab process is independent from design.
While IBM "could" license CELL to MS, that's not what MS was looking for; MS was looking for the fastest NT processor it could find for its money and IBM cut them a deal, a deal presumably more sweet than AMD could offer.

 

[Paul]

It will. They are fabbed on similar process and have same cost constraints. Sure, CELL might have 2~3X sustained FLOPS over Power5 but Power5 blows CELL away on integer code, which make up the vast majority of a program anyway.

FUD. Because you can't even say what Broadband Engine will or not sustain, this makes the above irrelevant.

A 300 Mhz EE has a 6.2 GFLOPS while a contemporary 733 Mhz Celeron2 in Xbox has 3 GFLOPS. So did PSX2 blow XBox away in gaming??? No it doesn't. People would say the opposite is true.

Look exactly what your comparing.

A VPU(EE), which does geometry, AI, T&L, physics, against a largely general purpose CPU(XCPU) which basically only does AI and physics.

Don't compare single IC but rather the system as a whole. But if you were comparing the EE to the XCPU, some would say EE blows it away for the purpose they both have.

 

[Crazyace]

Blowing away...

To be fair DM, the Xbox does have the added help of twin vertex shaders ( 8 flops ( V.Madd ) x 233MHz x 2 ) giving an extra 3.7GFlops..
The 64MB memory and more advanded pixel level shading are probally more
responsible for visual differences, and for most code the L2 cache is a big factor.