X-Box 2 Speculation!

[fbg1]

Given time anything is possible, unfortunately even Gates's billions cant buy time ... it is too late for lots of custom development, best they can do is get a slightly adapted GPU. ...

Same conclusion I've come to. I wonder if MS will be able to come up with a better console than Sony this time round. The Cell sounds good so far, with its 1TF, but will that be the final product? Or are there design tradeoffs we don't know about yet that will significantly limit its realworld performance? Given Sony's expertise in hype, I suspect the latter.

 

[fbg1]

Just my tuppence worth.

Interesting point, but for what use on a stationary game console? Or console/set-top box for that matter.

 

[Tahir2]

Possibly networking and of course the game controllers.

At a later stage perhaps to network one appliance to another (maybe not the next generation but the generation after you get the XBOX3 and PS4 talking to your refigerator? )

Everyone else is speculating about 5GHz chips and Tera that and Giga this why not something a little more simpler like Bluetooth?

 

[jvd]

actually i'm pretty sure the on-die memory controller reduces the latency which is why amd went that route. instead of it having to go through an northbridge. Not only that but the hammers have hyper transport .

3 hyper transports at what is it 3.2gigs of bandwidth on them ?

1 to the sound card , one to the system ram one to the video card and then the video card using a high mabye 1024 bit bus to the video ram. Makes for a fast system . A cell killer the hammer is not but a damn good cpu it is and couple it with one or two of the fastest chips out at the time i think sony will have some stiff rivals

well yeah take a system with 128 Geforce4's and it will crush PS3 ... thing is, at what price?...

see the point is, they would have to go multi-chip to keep up with Sony's designs. that makes u think about:

1) who's the best hardware manufacturer
2) where are you going to put all those chips, unless u want a Xbox2 to be the size of your Desktop

Uh yea .... but we wouldn't be using the hammers on die memory controler to let the gpu comunicate with the gpu ram , the gpu will have its own bus to its own ram then have a hyper transport to the hammer chip .

Oh and the bandwitdh of the hyper transport would scale when the on die controler increases in speed. Amd is already considering a 200mhz version for when it comes out . I'm sure amd can easily create (between now and 2005) a 400mhz or even 800 mhz bus to ram and faster hypertransport esp if microsoft gives them a fat contract .

Not only that but microsoft would save money since most of the northbridge functions would be off loaded to the cpu.

Depending on the chip they use i don't think 2 gpus would be all that expensive . Say at the most 40$ a gpu for an ati board partner but if ms is ordering millions of them i'm sure they will get them alot cheaper , then factor that number by 2 and i'm sure they can get even cheaper still . But a but load of memory and get it cheaper too , external ram is much cheaper than on die ram

How much do u think a cell chip or a gs2 chip with 64 megs of fast ondie ram is going to cost ? Its prob more expensive then two r500s or whatever is out at the time .

 

[fbg1]

Possibly networking and of course the game controllers.

Of course... I totally forgot about wireless controllers. [slaps palm to forehead] I wonder what the chances are of having wireless controllers and wireless LAN/systemlink standard on the next gen consoles. I'd bet pretty good.

 

[a4164]

a4164,

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to label you a fanboi, I just meant it as a joke. Don't be angry with me please okay?

It's a bit amusing, so many really WANT M$ to come out with a Cell-killing custom CPU, I just wanted to poke a lil fun at that, I meant no disrespect.

*G*

hehehe, its all good. I did get it after a while

I must say I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the responses so far in this thread.

 

[MfA]

AMD has HT-2 in the works which has bandwith per pin in the same range of Redwood, that is not so much a problem.

 

[Phil]

I think one problem Microsoft is facing and the advantage Sony has is the following:

Since Sony is custom designing their chips - they have

a.) full control over what their doing
b.) full control over pricing (lowest price / also earlier price drops as seen with PS2 chips)
c.) No extra costs due to internal fabs

Microsoft however can not control pricing, since they will most likely be dependent on parts of others. Adding to that, price will increase in the process. Availability of those chips is also not in their hands. As price rises, it becomes more and more unlikely that Microsoft will invest insane amounts of money just to be competitive. As I outlined in the other threads, history has shown that hardware is not the selling factor - which again decreases the possibility that MS will invest insane amounts just to be competitive.

Yes, it is possible - but very unlikely.

 

[fbg1]

a.) full control over what their doing
b.) full control over pricing (lowest price / also earlier price drops as seen with PS2 chips)
c.) No extra costs due to internal fabs

Don't forget another big one:

d.) not limited by legacy architecture (x86).

In my opinion, that's a huge factor since it allows Sony to come up with interesting goodies like Cell, and waste no overhead on the inefficiencies of outdated legacy wiring.

If they want backwards compatibility, just slap the single-chip EE/GS on the mobo, and perhaps even the IOP if they want PS backwards compatibility. Those chips should be quite inexpensive by 2005.

Backwards compatibility is another problem MS faces with Xbox2. Unless all Xbox games are coded strictly to whatever APIs MS has provided, which I doubt, then I don't think MS will be able to get 100% backwards compatibility in the Xbox2 hardware, unless they stick Xbox's XCPU and XGPU onboard. I doubt Intel & Nvidia will allow MS to combine those two chips on one die, if that's even possible, and being the archenemies they are. I think it will be fairly difficult and expensive for MS to give Xbox 2 backwards compatibility.

 

[Brimstone]

The hardware overall just won't make or break the next generation systems. If Sony does manage to make a signifigantly more powerful console, how big of a loss will that be to Microsoft? They lose bragging rights among fan boys, but to the general consumer the image quality between a PS 3 and XB 2 will be hard to distinguish. Even now Sony with a weaker hardware platform (hardware wise) in the PS 2 is outselling the competion by a wide margin. Even when I walk into a game store and look at the games on display, with just a casual glance I don't notice a dramatic difference at first. Of course when I focus in on a game I can quickly tell if the game is a PS 2 or X-Box by image quality but even then the gap in image quality isn't earth shattering.


It will be all about games. Game software engineers and artists are far more valuable than hardware engineers. I'm not saying hardware power won't matter, but Microsoft just needs to keep it close. As long as Microsoft keeps growing the size of it's first party, they should have a chance to overcome of the Sony dominance.

 

[Teasy]

MS could have solved all those potential problems mentioned above by doing the following.

1 - Build there own fab
2 - Get PowerVR to provide the GPU design.

That way MS would have had 100% control over the chips.

Not sure if this is still possible with a deadline of 2006.. I have no idea how long it takes to get a big good quality fab up and running. I have no idea of the cost either come to think of it.

BTW talking of using more then one GPU. Didn't PowerVR have a technology that made it possible to manage many graphics cores in parallel on one chip? Also isn't a TBR very efficient with multiple cores rendering a single frame?.. compared to an IMR anyway.

Ok, I'll shut up about PowerVR now

 

[glappkaeft]

Where would they get this world-class semiconductor design team from? M$ has never done anything even remotely similar in the past. They'd need like a couple dozen well-experienced engineers.

You mean all those ex-DEC engineers now working at MS?

Funny when people don't bother to read their own links? Hint: They are software engineers.

 

[BlackAngus]

Where would they get this world-class semiconductor design team from? M$ has never done anything even remotely similar in the past. They'd need like a couple dozen well-experienced engineers.

You mean all those ex-DEC engineers now working at MS?

Funny when people don't bother to read their own links? Hint: They are software engineers.

Yeah man, a ton of the DEC guys and API network guys now work for AMD. =) Which is why hamer should rock!

 

[Deepak]

Possibly networking and of course the game controllers.

Of course... I totally forgot about wireless controllers. [slaps palm to forehead] I wonder what the chances are of having wireless controllers and wireless LAN/systemlink standard on the next gen consoles. I'd bet pretty good.

a BIG no!

 

[fbg1]

Funny when people don't bother to read their own links? Hint: They are software engineers.

I knew someone would make that comment. I read my link, and decided to post it anyway. I think the top OS kernel developers in the world from the top CPU design company in the world (yes, DEC) understand enough about microprocessors that they are capable of designing one. MS has all the human resources they need to make their own silicon. However, as I stated earlier, the problem they would face is designing a chip that is competitive with the Cell. That's a whole nother can of worms.

 

[fbg1]

Yeah man, a ton of the DEC guys and API network guys now work for AMD. =) Which is why hamer should rock!

Yep. Dirk Meyer and Jim Keller especially.

 

[PC-Engine]

I just found something quite interesting. A HD version of T2 will be available on a standard single layer DVD next month. It uses Winmedia9 compression and runs in 1080p.

 

[Evildeus]

As far as the GPU goes, I have doubts if either ATI or Nvidia will get the contract. Cost seems to be a huge concern for Microsoft and a company like Power VR or 3d labs will produce a GPU design at a lower cost. If Microsoft wants performance though (cutting edge features and raw power), I don't see them having much choice but to choose Nvidia.

Well i don't see how you come to this statement. Till, they are not really on the market ATM, and if it was the case they would be the first provider on the graphic market, which is not the case. :?

 

[zidane1strife]

They lose bragging rights among fan boys, but to the general consumer the image quality between a PS 3 and XB 2 will be hard to distinguish.

IQ generally does not matter, but if the XB2 doesn't animate the onscreen objects even remotely close to the ps3... than consumers will notice, and they'll be very very concerned about it.

Say you brake a good nighphotoreal barrel, and water comes out, if the ps3 does this in a believable way, and the XB2 in a nonbelievable way people will notice.

Clothing, hair, blood, breaking of objects, grass, water, fluids, etc... will require quite a good amount of physics, maybe they can go around that with the gpu... but if not... PS3, and GCN2 will be the top consoles....

editedii

 

[chaphack]

Wow! Some of you are making it sound as though MS will have a tough time matching the CPU power of PS3?!!

Must have because how Xbox1 got raped by PS2 in fluid/clothing/limb animations, *looks at SC2* *looks at DOA3* oh wait.....

Sure both of them will be out much closer than XB/PS2, but im sure MS will want to make sure Xbox2 will be technically inferior to the godly Cell. Hmmm.

And since when does IQ doesnt matter anymore? Who is to say PS3/Xbox will do equally good IQ. Just because both of them might support all HDTV res, doesnt make IQ any less important.