XBox 2 Dev Kits

[Wunderchu]

as everyone and his dog knows, Sony has been saying that PS3 will be a 1000x more powerful than PS2. they've said that since 1999, before the PS2 came out. Sony also said PS2 is 200~300x as powerful as PS1. I think 215x was an actual figure. obviously Sony is not going by one specific spec (i.e. FP performance) but overall rendering performance.

I have never seen Microsoft say Xbox2 will be 1000x more powerful than Xbox. or any other figure.


I think a reasonable increase would be 10~20x Xbox's graphics performance, for Xbox2. In comparing NV2A to R300, we have a 2-3x leap. if R420 is 2x faster than R300, and R500 is 2x faster than R420, and if R500X (for Xbox2) is 2x faster than the normal R500 for PC, plus some extra efficiency, we might get a 10~20x performance leap from Xbox to Xbox2. a 50x leap is probably unlikely. bandwidth will go from 6.4 GB/sec to probably 50~60 GB/sec.

now, putting speculations aside, all I want out of Xbox 2 is to have IN-GAME graphics that are just as good and just as smooth as the pre-rendered CGI that MS showed for Xbox1's announcement at GDC 2000. (the Robot demo, and the Afro Thunder demo)

.. I have seen screenshots and videos of those demos, and IMO, indeed no Xbox game has graphics that look as good as the graphics in those demos.. ...but for Xbox Next I am expecting a lot better graphics than the level of graphics showcased in those demos..

 

[_phil_]

for Xbox Next I am expecting a lot better graphics than the level of graphics showcased in those demos..

they should start hiring better artists ,then.....

 

[London Geezer]

for Xbox Next I am expecting a lot better graphics than the level of graphics showcased in those demos..

they should start hiring better artists ,then.....

Nice one. Although i think that, seriously speaking, it's not MS fault, if there just aren't that many good (mainly Japanese) devs making games for Xbox. I mean it IS ultimately MSs fault and responsibility, but you know what i mean.... Don't you............? :|

 

[_phil_]

oh... yes..

I'll admit gladly it is opinion.Even if (deeper in me) i feel it is an educated one ,that can be touchy-touchy.
Anyway ,allmost all is opinion in a way or another.Better start to admit that.

 

[mboeller]

I'm still wondering, that until now no one has mentioned this "news" about the XBox2 - CPU.
The Headline First Xbox 2 Processors Taped-Out ; 5GHz 65nm Chips Enroute to Microsoft? says it all.

Some sources suggest that CPUs in the Play Station 3 and Xbox 2 machines will be based on Cell technology, a derivative of PowerPC micro-architecture.

 

[StefanS]

I'm still wondering, that until now no one has mentioned this "news" about the XBox2 - CPU.
The Headline First Xbox 2 Processors Taped-Out ; 5GHz 65nm Chips Enroute to Microsoft? says it all.

Some sources suggest that CPUs in the Play Station 3 and Xbox 2 machines will be based on Cell technology, a derivative of PowerPC micro-architecture.

"It'll be built on a 65-nanometer process," a source confirmed to TeamXbox. "IBM has already taped out experimental samples at its East Fishkill fab but it will take between 12 to 18 months for them to deliver commercial parts. Anyway, they're way ahead of Intel."

"With the new 90nm manufacturing process, IBM broke the 2 Ghz barrier. The 65-nanometer technology will allow them to break the 3 Ghz barrier for sure and get closer to the 5 Ghz mark," our source further clarified and was quick to add, "However, this is not just about clock speed. The more important thing here is what this baby and its specialized cores can do in a single clock cycle."

That doesn't mean we'll see 5 GHz XBox2/PS3 processors... I highly doubt they'll be clocked that high...

 

[London Geezer]

Not gonna happen, but it would be nice... Not even sure if the BBE and the XCPU2 (or whatever they call it) need to be clocked that high. Surely more clock means more processing speed, but i think we can settle for less. It's a game console at the end of the day...

 

[passerby]

I may not work as an engineer for microprocessors. But I do work with some big irons and have what I consider realistic expectations. I have to say that TXB blown-up reporting is an insult to our intelligence.

 

[London Geezer]

In fact, the "article" (using the term loosely here) said it too, it's not really about clock speed, but more about processing power per-clock. Therefore i don't think any console level CPU (even in 2006) needs to be clocked at 5GHz. And even if it needed to, IT'S JUST NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

 

[Brimstone]

I may not work as an engineer for microprocessors. But I do work with some big irons and have what I consider realistic expectations. I have to say that TXB blown-up reporting is an insult to our intelligence.

If I recall correctly, Panajev was speculating on a high clock speed for the PS3 CELL CPU at one point. A Xbox-2 CELL CPU should achieve near the same clock speed as a PS3 CELL CPU. Team Xbox may very well be wrong, but I hardly see how it is an insult to a persons intelligence? Besides no concrete evidence has surfaced to suggest a CELL CPU will be in the Xbox-2.

 

[Paul]

A Xbox-2 CELL CPU should achieve near the same clock speed as a PS3 CELL CPU.

Not if they are using different technology/one company will push into bad yields/one will invest more into their Cellular MPU/one will take more of a loss up front/one is more skilled.

You can't state this, there are too many variables. It's like letting two companies develop a chip based on X86 and saying they will both hit around the same clock, there are too many variables.

 

[Brimstone]

A Xbox-2 CELL CPU should achieve near the same clock speed as a PS3 CELL CPU.

Not if they are using different technology/one company will push into bad yields/one will invest more into their Cellular MPU/one will take more of a loss up front/one is more skilled.

You can't state this, there are too many variables. It's like letting two companies develop a chip based on X86 and saying they will both hit around the same clock, there are too many variables.

HUH

Much of the latest fab technology Sony has is from IBM. The bulk of engineers that put together CELL are from IBM.

Of course variables will exist, but the situation is a bit different from AMD and Intel. Intel didn't share any information with AMD and with every chance they get they try to screw them over. The whole CELL effort betweent IBM, Sony, and Toshiba is one of cooperation.

 

[Paul]

The whole CELL effort betweent IBM, Sony, and Toshiba is one of cooperation.

But Broadband Engine(The Toshiba and SCE offshoot of Cell) is a Toshiba and Sony thing, they are building their own fabs to produce it, have researched and developed some of their own technology for it, have spent billions of their own money on it, etc.

Cell is nothing but an architecture in which IBM did help Toshiba and Sony make, from Cell, you create microprocessors, this is what the Heart of the Playstation 3 is, the Broadband Engine.

It is true that to fab BE, Sony and Toshiba are going to use some of IBM's fabbing tech(SOI), but for the most part, BE is a seperate effort done by Toshiba and SCE only.

 

[Wunderchu]

Just occured to me - ATI were scheduled to introduce R400 (as it was) last year and they certianly went as far as taping them out. There's a possability that this work has continued behind closed doors (whats coming out or Marlborough is very closed) such that the dev kits may not feature contempary PC parts, but R400/R500 style parts.

Performance is not so much of an issue as you can tell developers "expect x to be 2X the speed... expect y to be the same speed...", but features will be more important - if you want the full extent of the functionality used in the early games then having contempary parts will not give the full access to the types of functionality available with the XB2 graphics. An old R400 based system may offer more of the functionality that the XB2 part will, but at a different performance level.

It'll be interesting to hear what they have in the dev kits, if we can find out, or at the very least see what they publically announce (interestingly, although its widely rumoured that both NV and ATI will announce their latest parts at CeBit, ATI don't list CeBit on their events list, but do GDC).

seems like they are using R350 's (and will use R420 's in the future);

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14407




(I first heard about that article from nAo 's post here:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10489&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20 )

 

[MfA]

Paul, are you quite sure about that? The EE wasnt quite a miracle of compact design ... if IBM is not involved in the ASIC design with Sony&Toshiba then I am fully expecting IBM's Cell processors to be better when they surface

 

[Panajev2001a]

Paul, are you quite sure about that? The EE wasnt quite a miracle of compact design ... if IBM is not involved in the ASIC design with Sony&Toshiba then I am fully expecting IBM's Cell processors to be better when they surface

IBM is involved, why would you think Sony financed part of East Fishkill ?

IBM has been driving CELL evelopment at STI and Sony and Toshiba have worked very hard on CMOS4 ( 90 nm bulk CMOS design ), CMOS5 ( 65 nm mixe loaing design: mixed wafer with logic on SOI and e-DRAM on bulk-CMOS ) and and CMOS6 ( 45 nm full SOI design with capacitorless e-DRAM which means very compact e-DRAM ) technology.

IBM defined the basic structure of the APU and the PU ( IBM patents cover the APU, the basic PE structure, etc... ) and Sony and Toshiba, which were involved in the STI center, did work with IBM on CELL's design especially from a CE perspective ( IBM is not a leader in the CE field: Sony and Toshiba are ): Toshiba is clearly qualified to help with the APU given their excellent work with the EE's VUs.

IBM said they started froma clean slate: it is true that they were not pulled back due to backward compatibility/legacy issues as they were starting a new design, but they did take ideas from their immense repertoire of IPs.

IBM has also collaborated with both Sony and Toshiba on the manufacturing side of things: Sony has been licensing IPs from IBM and is now trying to work closely with them.

I think Sony and Toshiba evolved quite a bit since 1999 if only by looking at their combined Semiconductors' budget ( Sony/SCE has been refocusing around Semicnoductors for quite a while ).

 

[Squeak]

It still puzzles me why IBM would support microsoft in any way, after all the stuff they have pulled on them through the years.
Have they no pride, or corporate consciousness?


Unless of course...

 

[Fafalada]

It still puzzles me why IBM would support microsoft in any way, after all the stuff they have pulled on them through the years.
Have they no pride, or corporate consciousness?

Within last 10 years, IBM did things like supporting M$ to the point of letting their own inhouse products come second to Windows support.
I don't think corporations of that size even have a notion of pride, nor much of a corporate conscioussness.

 

[Deadmeat]

...

It still puzzles me why IBM would support microsoft in any way, after all the stuff they have pulled on them through the years.
Have they no pride, or corporate consciousness?

1. IBM Microelectronics is losing money.
2. East Fishkill fab is running undercapacity.
3. It was IBM that begged for the deal, not MS.

"What? Intel's charging you $45 for a Celeron?? Come to us and we give you Power5 for same money!" The rest is history...

 

[Panajev2001a]

Re: ...

It still puzzles me why IBM would support microsoft in any way, after all the stuff they have pulled on them through the years.
Have they no pride, or corporate consciousness?

1. IBM Microelectronics is losing money.
2. East Fishkill fab is running undercapacity.
3. It was IBM that begged for the deal, not MS.

"What? Intel's charging you $45 for a Celeron?? Come to us and we give you Power5 for same money!" The rest is history...

Uhm, weird I recalled AMD and SCE investing money on east Fishkill and guys like Altera and Xilinx sustain that due to a lot of manufacturers not investing in 90 nm and beyond now there is lack of supply for 90 nm technology.

IBM microelectronics lost money, but their Services sector more than made up for it and that is all what BM has cared so far: also due to the low supply of 90 nm tech they are now facing themselves with more business than they can fulfill.