Microsoft Picks IBM for XBox 2

[MacRumors]

Microsoft and IBM announced (http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=SVBIZINK2.story&STORY=/www/story/11-03-2003/0002049674&EDATE=MON+Nov+03+2003,+09:00+AM) today that IBM technology will power "future Xbox products and services". Details are scarce, but according to the press release, "the new Xbox technologies will be based on the latest in IBM's family of state-of-the-art processors."

Microsoft's Xbox currently utilizes an Intel processor, suggesting that the future Xbox may break backward compatibility with the current crop of machines. Unless, of course, Microsoft introduces some sort of emulation layer.

Current Nintendo GameCubes utilize the IBM PowerPC processor, while the next-generation Sony Playstation is also rumored to use IBM-based technology (Cell) (http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-948493.html?tag=nl)

[Phil Of Mac]

At least Bungie can develop for the right brand of processor now :rolleyes:

[arn]

This is very interesting.

I thought that part of the big development boon for XBox was "it's just another PC" sort of design.

arn

[Foxer]

Is there an estimated street date for Xbox2? The current is 2 years old, and if they're still trying to decide what processor goes in the next one, that would seem to me that it will be awhile before release.

[stoid]

Another Windows copying Macs ideas I think. Apple goes to IBM and makes the G5, so Microsoft follows suit, goes to IBM and gets XBox 2.

[iGav]

abit risky if it's not backward compatible though isn't it.... that's why the PS2 has been such a huge success because earlier investments haven't been made redundant by upgraded hardware.

Either way Xbox2 Vs PS3 is going to be a monster of a battle! Damn do I wish I was in games design and dev. $$$$$$$$ :eek: :p :p

[MorganX]

Originally posted by arn
This is very interesting.

I thought that part of the big development boon for XBox was "it's just another PC" sort of design.

arn

I think that writing to DirectX API's is supposed to make developing for PCs and XBox easier. Allegedly much of it can be ported without modification.

It will be interesting if they go with a PPC CPU. MS has experience with Windows NT on PPC. It really would be interesting if they moved DirectX to PPC.

[DreaminDirector]

Would the xbox using IBM chips make it easier to port to the mac when games finally come out for the xbox2? Or vise versa?

[arn]

Originally posted by DreaminDirector
Would the xbox using IBM chips make it easier to port to the mac when games finally come out for the xbox2? Or vise versa?

No, not necessarily. It's more about the APIs than the processor.

That being said.... depending on the processor used (if it were a true PowerPC derivative), then emulation would be far more possible than before. But even so, I don't think there are any PC Xbox emulators presently... likely due to legal reasons.

arn

[MorganX]

Originally posted by stoid
Another Windows copying Macs ideas I think. Apple goes to IBM and makes the G5, so Microsoft follows suit, goes to IBM and gets XBox 2.

::Chuckle:: Without IBM, Microsoft would not be 1/25th of the company it is today. IBM indirectly funded development of Windows for years through the "I can't believe they agreed to it" licensing of DOS.

I must be getting old. Seems like such a long time ago, long enough for people to forget anyway.

[Macurious]

If I'm not mistaken, there is a hack for the Xbox that lets people run it like you would a PC. You can even install any OS you want and there is even a custom OS for loading ROMs from any game system. Wouldn't it be funny if after this switch it would be possible to run Panther on the XBox? :)

[Doctor Q]

How will this affect the ability to run Linux on an Xbox (http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6704)?

By the way, Xbox has a lowercase 'b'.

[Phil Of Mac]

Anyone remember what happened the last time Microsoft and IBM made a deal with each other?

[temptatino]

why so many negative ratings for this article? i thought that we all loved IBM now ;) so the more business it does the better, right?

[flyfish29]

Originally posted by iGAV
abit risky if it's not backward compatible though isn't it.... that's why the PS2 has been such a huge success because earlier investments haven't been made redundant by upgraded hardware.

Either way Xbox2 Vs PS3 is going to be a monster of a battle! Damn do I wish I was in games design and dev. $$$$$$$$ :eek: :p :p

On the surface I thoght it was great to be able to play my old games on PS2 and loved that my hardware would work on it as well, but really, are that many people playing their old PS1 games using a PS2? I did for a while, but that was only because there were so few games out on the ps2 initially...I would hope this time they have many more games out on the new platform before it is released...ps3 and Xbox 2 due in 2006 I think.

[mrsebastian]

that would be pretty cool to run osx on a hacked xbox or ps3. running your favorite os on there would certainly help them become the ultimate entertainment center, especially if they add dvr like some of the rumor mills have mentioned.

[Macco]

So even Microsoft admits that PPC processors have something to them? Any idea why they would choose to use IBM processors?

[flyfish29]

Originally posted by Macurious
If I'm not mistaken, there is a hack for the Xbox that lets people run it like you would a PC. You can even install any OS you want and there is even a custom OS for loading ROMs from any game system. Wouldn't it be funny if after this switch it would be possible to run Panther on the XBox? :)

M$ always has a reason for doing something...and it is very clear now...they don't want anyone to take their machine which cost them $4-500 to make and turn it into a Windows or Linux computer so if they change the chip soneone can...unless they can run unix or OSX. This is the real reason they changed it!

[acj]

I would think it would be easy to emulate an older technology even if the difference was PPC to X86. They'll have to offer backwords compatability.

[macshark]

First, I think Nintendo uses the IBM 750 processor in the Game Cube, not the 440.

It would be interesting to see if Microsoft picks the next version of the PPC970 (90nm) or a next gen or modified version of the 750 series. In either case, the processor is likely to have AltiVec capability (if any licensing issues concerning Apple/Motorola are taken care of) which will make AltiVec the de-facto standard vector processing technology for future 3D games. Interestingly, this will also make it much easier for game vendors to port their games to Apple platforms in the future.

One more high volume PowerPCcustomer will pretty much secure the future of the PowerPC architecture as it will generate sufficient profits for IBM to invest into future PowerPC R&D.

[Tulse]

Any idea why they would choose to use IBM processors?

It would be ironic, but I wonder if it might have anything to do with AltiVec support...

[mrsebastian]

Originally posted by flyfish29
On the surface I thoght it was great to be able to play my old games on PS2 and loved that my hardware would work on it as well, but really, are that many people playing their old PS1 games using a PS2? I did for a while, but that was only because there were so few games out on the ps2 initially...I would hope this time they have many more games out on the new platform before it is released...ps3 and Xbox 2 due in 2006 I think.

i totally agree, the old games fall by the wayside pretty quick. i'd rather be able to hack my xbox2 or ps3 with my favorite os, to run some sort of emulator and play all kinds of old games. how cool would that be?! you could play adventure on atari one minute, then play mario brothers on nintendo, and on and on.

[Abstract]

Maybe. Or maybe MS sees the potential of IBM's processors in the future. Maybe they think that IBM's future is much brighter than Intel's. :)

[P-Worm]

So does this mean that we will see more development for OpenGL and therefore more games for the Mac?

P-Worm

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Macco
So even Microsoft admits that PPC processors have something to them? Any idea why they would choose to use IBM processors?

Cost. Cost is everything in the console business until software sales recover the losses all consoles experience during their early years.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by iGAV
abit risky if it's not backward compatible though isn't it.... that's why the PS2 has been such a huge success because earlier investments haven't been made redundant by upgraded hardware.

Either way Xbox2 Vs PS3 is going to be a monster of a battle! Damn do I wish I was in games design and dev. $$$$$$$$ :eek: :p :p

Oh, good, maybe XBox 2 and PS3 graphics will finally match the 1st generation Gamecube's!

Can anyone say "Gamecube 2"?

:D

[mrsebastian]

that would be pretty cool to run osx on a hacked xbox or ps3. running your favorite os on there would certainly help them become the ultimate entertainment center, especially if they add dvr like some of the rumor mills have mentioned.

[xtekdiver]

What if PC makers started using IBMs chips instead of Intel or AMD? What if Microsoft made a version of Windows that runs on a G5 chip? Gives the whole Apple vrs Intel debate a whole new twist doesn't it?

[tutubibi]

Maybe Microsoft is planning to provide backward compatibility with XBOX 1st Gen with Virtual PC?
Think about that. They are working on the next release of Virual PC for Mac that will emulate x86 on PPC platform, including G5. They discovered just how powerful is 970. Including Virtual PC on XBOX2/PPC970 would provide cost efficient way for MS to switch processors and XBOX1 backward compatibily.

[xtekdiver]

I wonder if we will be able to hack the Xbox and run OS X on it. Oh the irony!

[Macco]

Originally posted by tutubibi
Maybe Microsoft is planning to provide backward compatibility with XBOX 1st Gen with Virtual PC?

Yeah, and if it works as well on an Xbox as it does on a G4... :rolleyes:

People are willing to tolerate slowness to a certain extent on a computer. They won't tolerate it on a video game system.

[ddtlm]

tutubibi:

Maybe Microsoft is planning to provide backward compatibility with XBOX 1st Gen with Virtual PC?
Well the Xbox #1 is only a 733mhz P3, so maybe they could do that at reasonable speed. Still, this seems like a lot of effort, I wonder what the big gain is... lower cost to manufacture? Perhaps they forsee IBM having far better performance for a given amount of heat (cheaper power components, cheaper heatsinks, etc)? I better go read this article or whatever it is....

They discovered just how powerful is 970.
Well... its compeditive but really not blowing anyone out of the water.

[P-Worm]

Originally posted by xtekdiver
What if PC makers started using IBMs chips instead of Intel or AMD? What if Microsoft made a version of Windows that runs on a G5 chip? Gives the whole Apple vrs Intel debate a whole new twist doesn't it?

Interesting idea. So does this mean the start of MSRumors.com? :eek:

P-Worm

[Wonder Boy]

Originally posted by Abstract
Maybe they think that IBM's future is much brighter than Intel's. :)

who doesn't? :)

[jeremy.king]

Originally posted by xtekdiver
I wonder if we will be able to hack the Xbox and run OS X on it. Oh the irony!

I doubt this will be true becuase they wont be using a G4/5/6.

I really find this interesting because wasn't the point of using x86 processors to lure PC Game vendors into porting (in most cases, with no code mods) their games to Xbox.

Im guessing they don't like there marketshare right now and they like the future of IBMs CPUs.

But who will win the Video race? Has Microsoft commited to either yet for XBOX2?

In fact, has anyone committed to either (NVidia or ATI) with their next gen consoles?

[Frisco]

This is actually good news. It will help move things away from Intel and the monopoly they desire.

[johnnyjibbs]

Maybe they want to try to stop people playing Xbox games on a PC.

Backwards compatibility isn't a big issue I don't think. Once people see the graphics leap in next generation games they don't bother with the older ones, plus they could just run them on their Xbox. I think that happened with PlayStation. (Although I agree graphics aren't everything!)

Nintendo went for what is basically an (alti-vec-enhanced?) G3 PPC processor to cut costs with the GameCube and so they are not making much of a loss on the hardware. Microsoft, on the other hand, was making massive losses per Xbox sold and I think the Xbox is yet to break even (software sales are where the money is). So although it's hardly an issue for Microsoft, maybe it's simply a cost-cutting issue :p

But I thought that, despite denials from Microsoft, the Xbox ran Windows architecture under the hood, so isn't this just an unncessary complication for Microsoft?

[macphoria]

I wonder if IBM will develop totally new processor for Xbox or use existing technology? IBM already makes processor for Nintendo and developing a new processor for PlayStation 3. And of course Apple gets G5 processors. My guess is Microsoft might not want to use something that is used in all these other machines and opt for something more exclusive.

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by flyfish29
On the surface I thoght it was great to be able to play my old games on PS2 and loved that my hardware would work on it as well, but really, are that many people playing their old PS1 games using a PS2? I did for a while, but that was only because there were so few games out on the ps2 initially...I would hope this time they have many more games out on the new platform before it is released...ps3 and Xbox 2 due in 2006 I think.

There will never be an Intelligent Qube for the PS2 or beyond - due to a contractual dispute. Also, the Ps1 had Tecmo Stackers and Devil Dice - these three are the best puzzle games beyond Tetris, in my opinion, IQ far surpassing it.

That said, I play all of them on my Mac with Connectix Virtual Game Station in 9 and FlareStorm (which can play Ps2 games now) in OSX.

On topic: This is good news indeed for futuring gaming on the Mac.

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by mrsebastian
that would be pretty cool to run osx on a hacked xbox or ps3. running your favorite os on there would certainly help them become the ultimate entertainment center, especially if they add dvr like some of the rumor mills have mentioned.

At best you'd be able to run Linux PPC. But I believe the real reason Microsoft wants to move to IBM processors is BECAUSE of Linux.

They really hate that lots of hackers are turning them into mini linux terminals. Maybe they feel the IBM chip will make that more difficult, odd though, that's what OS IBM uses.

[mrkstu]

There has been some question as to whether Nintendo was going to come out with next generation hardware.
Nintendo recently stated they would- but I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft had approached them about making a console together, allowing Nintendo to focus on making money from games, and still getting a cut of licensing and networking revenues. Basing a new console on a PPC derivative would allow it to be backward compatible with the GameCube.

I would guess a Cell based machine if not for the fact that would upset Sony too much. I can't imagine they want to start from scratch.

A third alternative may be that IBM has obtained an Operton/AthlonFX liscense and will be manufacturing an advanced x86 derivative for them...

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by Foxer
Is there an estimated street date for Xbox2? The current is 2 years old, and if they're still trying to decide what processor goes in the next one, that would seem to me that it will be awhile before release.

This just says "future XBox products ... to be announced at a later date".

Fits "XBox 3" as well as XBox 2.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Anyone remember what happened the last time Microsoft and IBM made a deal with each other?

Jog my memory, please.
:)

[ryanw]

Originally posted by mrsebastian
that would be pretty cool to run osx on a hacked xbox or ps3. running your favorite os on there would certainly help them become the ultimate entertainment center, especially if they add dvr like some of the rumor mills have mentioned.

Well, I don't hear of OSX running on any current PowerPC systems like the IBM Unix boxes or the GameCube. The GameCube is running on PowerPC... there are lots of PowerPC things out there.. but to get an OS to run on a device is much more involved than just having the same processor.

[Marble]

Does IBM automatically imply PPC? It seems like they'd stick with their x86 guns, and IBM has plenty of those, as well..

[iGav]

Originally posted by flyfish29
On the surface I thoght it was great to be able to play my old games on PS2 and loved that my hardware would work on it as well, but really, are that many people playing their old PS1 games using a PS2? I did for a while, but that was only because there were so few games out on the ps2 initially...I would hope this time they have many more games out on the new platform before it is released...ps3 and Xbox 2 due in 2006 I think.

but what almost guaranteed the success of the PS2 was that (most) Playstation games would be compatible and thus increased the desirability of the new system through reduced risk, think Atari Jaguar and how that bombed.

But you nailed it on the head, you played your old games on the system until new PS2 games filtered through, without that retro-ability how many people would have risked buying a PS2?? because at the time, there was still talk of the PS2 bombing as well, the Xbox suffered a similar rumour scare, and at the beginning looked like it was going to bomb... big time as well!

It remains to be seen though if loads of new games are available from the offset, no company is willing to risk millions upon millions of dollars creating games, until they're sure that the console has a market.

From what I've been reading about the PS3 though, is that it's going to move gaming, form, function to another level.... and will be more than just another box, and if any one company can pull this offf, it's Sony.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by sethypoo
Jog my memory, please.
:)

Bill Gates licensed DOS to IBM, thus building the Microsoft empire.

Originally posted by Macco
So even Microsoft admits that PPC processors have something to them? Any idea why they would choose to use IBM processors?

Is this a precursor of porting Windows XP to PPC processors and abandoning Intel forever? They considered it with CHRP, why not now? You heard it here first.

Originally posted by Marble
Does IBM automatically imply PPC? It seems like they'd stick with their x86 guns, and IBM has plenty of those, as well..

IBM does not produce x86 processors, only POWER and PowerPC. (If you get pedantic and name their mainframe and/or supercomputer processor lines, I'm going to kick you.).

Another question: Why is hardware innovation in consoles so slow? You buy an Xbox and it's the same for three years. A three year old Mac is crap! I don't get it.

As for emulation, there was a PS1 emulator for Mac awhile ago, Virtual Game Station. It's not that hard.

[Lancetx]

Originally posted by ddtlm
tutubibi:

Well... its compeditive but really not blowing anyone out of the water.

Oh really now? It's a bit more than just competitive. You might want to go talk to those guys at VA Tech and see what they have to say about that...

[From Win to Mac]

if it's a PPC and DirectX is ported, then we'll be able to get sooo many more games, like HL2, for example.

[kwajo.com]

wonder if this news and that story that had the guy fired after he posted G5s going into microsoft are related? :confused:

[Freakk123]

Microsoft has gone to Nintendo about making a console together, and Nintendo has refused. The most likely reasoning for Microsoft’s switch is to thwart people from using Linux. As for why I voted negative: I want IBM to do this with Nintendo, not Microsoft…

[machinehien]

Is it economical enough to use in a game console with a $200 - 300 price tag. If so than I am starting to feel really disenfranchised here. My sawtooth is way old an I am staring at $600 price tags to upgrade the processor with faster G4 cards.

What clock speed do you think they will run at? 1.2 Ghz or faster?

[mikez]

The most interesting aspect of Microsoft's switch from Intel to IBM for Xbox 2 processors must be that they seem to have more faith in IBM than in Intel in the ability to produce fast processors - at least for gaming.
The G5 may be the turning point after all!! When do we get the second mouse button and the scroll wheel?

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by kwajo.com
wonder if this news and that story that had the guy fired after he posted G5s going into microsoft are related? :confused:

Probably not. Microsoft develops a lot of Mac software, including Virtual PC, and they need to test it on the G5, especially Virtual PC.

[kwajo.com]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Probably not. Microsoft develops a lot of Mac software, including Virtual PC, and they need to test it on the G5, especially Virtual PC.

way to burst my bubble ;)

[iLilana]

the new x-box should be nice although I have a feeling it's going to be combined with windows media center... or media center type gui may be the installed OS. For those talking about the PS3.. its out already only its called the PSX and only available in Japan currently. There are two models. It costs...(are you sitting?) 955.00 and 1299.00 approximately canadian dollars. Thats still about 700 & 850 US. It is howwever more than just a PS. It's also a TIVO like machine and digital hub device. (for us canadians who don't get TIVO thats a DTS with a digital recorder and a pretty funky GUI). I don't read Japanese so translations would be nice.

160 & 250 GB HDD for hours of Family Guy and Clone Wars

http://www.jp.playstation.com/psworld/psx/index.html

[Freakk123]

The PSX is NOT the PS3. The PSX is just a PS2 that has some sweet upgrades, such as the ability to work as a PVR, and the ability (I believe) to burn DVDs. The PS3 will be an all new console, and is expected to be released in 2006. GameCube 2 (or whatever it may be called), on the other hand, is expected to be released in 2005.

[eric_n_dfw]

I think that the number of people who buy a console based on backward compatibility is failry low. Sega offered such a deal for the Genesis for Master system games. (hear the crickets chirping?)

If you got all those old games, you probably have the old console to play them on.

The reason the PS2 sold so well was because it's games we so much better looking/sounding from PS1 and because Sony knows how to lure game shops into producing. I mean, look at GT3 compared to GT1 & 2, that game alone probably sold a quarter of the PS2's in service today!

(BTW - I'm a GameCube owner and have an Xbox as well. XBox's controllers suck so bad that I rarely even turn it on.)

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by macphoria
I wonder if IBM will develop totally new processor for Xbox or use existing technology? IBM already makes processor for Nintendo and developing a new processor for PlayStation 3. And of course Apple gets G5 processors. My guess is Microsoft might not want to use something that is used in all these other machines and opt for something more exclusive.

IBM is not developing a new processor for the PS3. The PS3 will use the CELL processor, which is a joint venture between Sony, Toshiba and IBM. Toshiba makes the current PS2 core. The CELL processor will be used by Sony and Toshiba. Sony will use it in the PS3 as well as other products, how many cores it has depends on the purpose. Toshiba will also use it in their consumer electronics. Saying the cell is an IBM processor is not entirely true. It could be more of an R&D thing for IBM then anything else.

[SiliconAddict]

Originally posted by stoid
Another Windows copying Macs ideas I think. Apple goes to IBM and makes the G5, so Microsoft follows suit, goes to IBM and gets XBox 2.

:rolleyes: Ya know Steve Jobs breaths air. So does Bill Gates. Dang copycats. It isn't even a PC platform for god sake. :p There's no copy about it. :(

On the bright side I've seen a BSOD in an Xbox game on a friends system. I just about soiled myself. http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums//images/smiles/pukeface.gif (Then again I've read about fatal errors in a few SP2 games so...) Anything that gives the XBOX a black eye......no backward compatability!??!!? http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums//images/smiles/beer.gif
Unfortunately MS can afford 10 more generations of XBox until they get it right. The company can't fail when you have that kind of money in my pockets. http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums//images/smiles/icon_evil.gif

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Another question: Why is hardware innovation in consoles so slow? You buy an Xbox and it's the same for three years. A three year old Mac is crap! I don't get it.


If they made a new console every year, they would have to pass that onto the consumer thus raising prices. Then what happens if you used a new core and the game developers created it for the newer hardware and it looked lousy on he platform that was sold last month. If the platforms change too often, consumers of the first version and later could be locked out. That is version, not generation. The PS2 has a few versions.

[iLilana]

Originally posted by Freakk123
The PSX is NOT the PS3. The PSX is just a PS2 that has some sweet upgrades, such as the ability to work as a PVR, and the ability (I believe) to burn DVDs. The PS3 will be an all new console, and is expected to be released in 2006. GameCube 2 (or whatever it may be called), on the other hand, is expected to be released in 2005.

Being that I don't read japanese I appreciate you clearing that up for me :)

I do however ".. play with samari swords."

Ooooo I miss swordplay.

[Fukui]

Originally posted by sethypoo
Jog my memory, please.
:)
OS/2.....

[silvergunuk]

This is great news. We might aswell start making xbox 2, gamecube and ps3 emulators on the mac. Just a little tinker here and there and we can have more games than the pc. Maybe Microsoft did this because intels chips are way too expensive and it would be harder to make xbox2 emulators for pc. If some one makes it on the mac, the market is smaller so xbox 2 sales will still be reasonable. Think they'll use apples XCode? :))

[Loopy]

If Microsoft did use a PPC chip for Xbox wouldn't they be close to running Windows native on a PPC as well, this would help a lot of PC vendors to switch chips it would also allow Microsoft to run their OS on any Platform.

Apple could do the same with OS X

This could be very good for Microsoft but I don't think it's good news for Apple as a Hardware Producer.

I wouldn't want to see OS X on a PC. The Return of the Clones?

Also if you could boot the mac with Windows as the main OS why would Microsoft want to develop any Mac software.

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by Freakk123
Microsoft has gone to Nintendo about making a console together, and Nintendo has refused.
Yes, Microsoft approached Nintendo near the release of GC/Xbox and pleaded them to join them and scrap GameCube at that late stage. Apparently Nintendo was half going for it. But it would never have been old Yamauchi's style. Thank god they didn't.

Just hope they didn't make the same mistake as when they cancelled the SNES CD add-on "PlayStation":( :D

It's happening though... GameCube is firmly at number 3 in the market :(

Back on topic, I still think Microsoft just wants to cut down on the pirating and PC-like image of Xbox. Also, Xbox's 733MHz didn't sound too good to PC users when they were getting 1GHz+ PCs at the time of launch :D ;)

[VIREBEL661]

This COULD be good news for Mac gamers.. I don't know anything about what's involved with porting games, but this is prolly going to be a PowerPC processor... Thus, wouldn't it be easier to port such games to a Mac platform? Also interesting that m$ is going with something other than intel for it's next gen gaming system. I have no idea why - it seems that intel would be cheaper, and most game companies develop for it anyways. I'm probably wrong. Interesting news...

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by Loopy
Also if you could boot the mac with Windows as the main OS why would Microsoft want to develop any Mac software.
I would have thought that Apple would build something into Mac OS and their hardware that would prohibit that.

But it should be good news for possible Mac ports, games and otherwise.

[VIREBEL661]

Originally posted by iGAV

Either way Xbox2 Vs PS3 is going to be a monster of a battle! Damn do I wish I was in games design and dev. $$$$$$$$ :eek: :p :p

I just hope Nintendo can get there stuff together in time! I'm a fan of their stuff - but not having all the cutting edge mature games is killing them! They need to market their product similarly to PS IMO!!! It's not like kids aren't playing these games anyways!

[silvergunuk]

Would this mean that apple mac G5s would be used as part of the xbox 2 development kits? :))

[Freakk123]

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
Yes, Microsoft approached Nintendo near the release of GC/Xbox and pleaded them to join them and scrap GameCube at that late stage.
Apparently, Microsoft has since gone to Nintendo again and asked them to join them for the Xbox 2, or so I've heard. I'm glad they refused twice, because I would have trouble supporting Nintendo as much as I do. On the other hand, I wish they hadn't cancelled the SNES add on with Sony. Talk about your bad business decisions.

[johnnyjibbs]

So they are still frightened of Nintendo? Or more likely, they want to add weight to their campaign against PlayStation. Erk! Zelda on Xbox?!

[VIREBEL661]

Originally posted by Freakk123
The PSX is NOT the PS3. The PSX is just a PS2 that has some sweet upgrades, such as the ability to work as a PVR, and the ability (I believe) to burn DVDs. The PS3 will be an all new console, and is expected to be released in 2006. GameCube 2 (or whatever it may be called), on the other hand, is expected to be released in 2005.

A truly bizarre break with tradition for Nintendo to release something actually BEFORE the competition!:rolleyes: OK, the NES was, but I digress...

[mvc]

Imagine the hacking possiblities

OSX, putting the X into Xbox!

[Raidiant]

I have an Xbox and I am deeply dissapointed with it beyond the first batch of games, and apart from knights of the old republic.

PS2 is just that more sucessful, apart from final fantasy series they just have more games period. Maybe its just me but my Final Fantasy X still looks better then all my xbox games put together

I think PS2 has won the console war, so the fact that future XBOX products has IBM chips I don't care ^^

[ssurgeman]

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs


It's happening though... GameCube is firmly at number 3 in the market :(


Not entirely true. For the record Cube is number 2 only in the USA. Internationally its number 2. Recendtly infact the Cube has made some excellent strides. Since price cuts it has consistantly out sold PS2 by 2-1 or more and Xbox by up to 7-1. Granted its a bit late in the game to catch up to Sony's double digits head start. However these new found sales numbers are further propelling the Cube in front of the Xbox. And lets also remeber that Nintendo mostly breaks even on hardware sales and sells 35% or all games via first party, thats double of Sony and Triple of Xbox. First party games is where the money is made people. That coupled with licencing of non-Nintendo made Cubes and the massive margin on Wavebird wireless controllers puts Nintendo in the best possition they have been in years.
Hopefully Nintendo will remain on the PPC bandwagon as well as with ATI. At the moment we know that Xbox is PPC and ATI powered. Sony is IBM powered and all rumors that cross my desk point to ATI also. SO for the first time ever all consoles may run on a very similar archetecture.


Avery Lund
- Jr. Editor Gamespot UK

[Raidiant]

you might have just said it.

maybe microsoft wants IBM because it is scared people would rather developed for both game cube and PS2 and would be ok if it didn't port to Xbox. why create a game on a less popular platform, then a game that could be ported to 2 popular platforms.

[Frohickey]

Originally posted by xtekdiver
I wonder if we will be able to hack the Xbox and run OS X on it. Oh the irony!

Doubt it.
A Mac if more than just the processor. In fact, the Mac is more like the core logic and IO chip than the processor.

Now, if Xbox were to move to PPC, it would be a good idea for Microsoft to partner with Nintendo since the GameCube is already PPC-based. Nintendo might not want to partner with Microsoft though, because Microsoft's partners have had a tendency to die when they get into bed with Microsoft. :D

[tsugaru]

Hey iLilana,

Ponoka is in Alberta. I live in Edmonton, so I'm probably one of the only people on here that knows this.

[silvergunuk]

I can't wait to open the packaging on my xbox 2 to see it stamped G5 inside

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by Frohickey
Doubt it.
Now, if Xbox were to move to PPC, it would be a good idea for Microsoft to partner with Nintendo since the GameCube is already PPC-based. Nintendo might not want to partner with Microsoft though:D
At least GameCube would get Rare back...

Nintendo makes the most profit though I think in the console market, although didn't they just post their first loss?

However well Xbox is doing, it still appears to get most games developed for it. It's amazing how well its established itself in the market considering they started from scratch and without any decent games. I don't see why developers will not continue to develop for 'Xbox 2'. It's more important that Nintendo sticks with a similar architecture than Microsoft for the next round of consoles.

Originally posted by Freakk123
The PS3 will be an all new console, and is expected to be released in 2006. GameCube 2 (or whatever it may be called), on the other hand, is expected to be released in 2005.
I think Nintendo merely said that they wanted to release with the competition. Therefore, if the others release in 2005 (doubtful I reckon), they will, otherwise 2006. The PS2 has always been ahead because it was released first, just like the PSX vs N64 days.

[ffakr]

Originally posted by macshark
First, I think Nintendo uses the IBM 750 processor in the Game Cube, not the 440.

It would be interesting to see if Microsoft picks the next version of the PPC970 (90nm) or a next gen or modified version of the 750 series. In either case, the processor is likely to have AltiVec capability (if any licensing issues concerning Apple/Motorola are taken care of) which will make AltiVec the de-facto standard vector processing technology for future 3D games.

The 440 is an embedded processor, the 750 (as everyone probably knows) is a G3. 440s go into stuff like cars, while 750s go into computers (and some more complex embedded devices)
Nintendo Game Cube uses NEITHER. It uses a processor that was designed especially for Nintento, but it uses the PowerPC ISA. It's called the Gecko.

I'd be shocked if Microsoft used a 970. It's too powerful for a gaming system, especially one that runs on TVs and has to cost a reasonable ammount. Even HD TV runs at lower resolutions than any decent PC monitor.

So, assuming this story is essentially true, that leaves us with really two (maybe 3) possibilities...
1- IBM is going to whip up some PowerPC based CPU for MS like the did with the Gecko (for Nintendo). It's going to be small and cheap, but it will be designed for running a stripped down 'OS' and games.
1a- "son of point 1" .. They would get the latest G3s or the lowest, bottom of the barrel, slowest 970s, though I doubt we'd see a 58 million transistor processor in a $300 game box yet.
2- IBM is going to make some processor for the xbox2 but it won't be the primary CPU. It could be some co-processor or AISC.

Personally, I only saw one good argument for moving away from x86 in the xbox2.. that was the possibility that MS want's to make this NOT be a typical x86 PC so it's harder to run popular OSes on.
This seems unlikely since moving away from x86 would mean:
- porting the current xbox OS (and the future one) to a different architecture
- porting the development enviorment
- breaking all xbox games (or making them run dog slow in emulation, yes emulation is dog slow)
- supporting Yet Another Architecture
- not benefiting from the volumes and agressive pricing available from Intel or AMD.
... the list could go on and on.

Here's my take..
The next xbox uses a P4 celeron or a Duron/AthlonXP. Either are more than fast enough for a stripped down console, significantly faster than xbox1.
If the story is true, IBM will have some silicon in it, but who knows what it will do.

Originally posted by Phil of Mac
<paraphrased> IBM doesn't make x86 processors...
[/b]
IBM did make X86 processors. They fabbed Cyrix X86 processors. AMD is working out of IBM fabs now too. Maybe the article was slightly off... maybe IBM will be fabbing an x86 processor that will be used in the xBox because the vendor [AMD??] doesn't think they could handle the additional volume??
Hmn.

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by Marble
Does IBM automatically imply PPC? It seems like they'd stick with their x86 guns, and IBM has plenty of those, as well..

IBM does not manufacture x86 processors. Period.

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by Macco
So even Microsoft admits that PPC processors have something to them? Any idea why they would choose to use IBM processors? To get a better price from Intel when they finally go with them.

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by DreaminDirector
Would the xbox using IBM chips make it easier to port to the mac when games finally come out for the xbox2? Or vise versa? The primary issue for most modern applications is the API, not the CPU.

This is why I often state that Mac OS X on x86 (or Xeon, Itanium, ...) is not that technically difficult.

There are some big business issues in both cases, however. I still think this is just a ruse by MS.

[hvfsl]

Originally posted by arn
No, not necessarily. It's more about the APIs than the processor.

That being said.... depending on the processor used (if it were a true PowerPC derivative), then emulation would be far more possible than before. But even so, I don't think there are any PC Xbox emulators presently... likely due to legal reasons.

arn

There are at least two Xbox emulators for the PC that play Halo quite well, there are also GC and PS2 emulators, but I dont think they can run games yet. Go to www.emuunlim.com

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
I think that the number of people who buy a console based on backward compatibility is failry low.
I think it might jump-start initial sales. As always, a new platform will have a small number of initial titles. Being able to claim that it runs thousands of titles will help market the product.

Also, lack of compatibility will be pointed to in the press as a bad thing.

Finally, space in front of the TV, stereo console, or the dorm room is limited, and many people may want to have only a single box that can play the new titles and the old favorites.

I generally agree with you, especially after 6 months. But initial perception can be important.

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by silvergunuk
I can't wait to open the packaging on my xbox 2 to see it stamped G5 inside
I suspect they would re-brand the chip. :p

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by ffakr

I'd be shocked if Microsoft used a 970. It's too powerful for a gaming system, especially one that runs on TVs and has to cost a reasonable ammount. Even HD TV runs at lower resolutions than any decent PC monitor.


I agree.


So, assuming this story is essentially true, that leaves us with really two (maybe 3) possibilities...
1- IBM is going to whip up some PowerPC based CPU for MS like the did with the Gecko (for Nintendo). It's going to be small and cheap, but it will be designed for running a stripped down 'OS' and games.
1a- "son of point 1" .. They would get the latest G3s or the lowest, bottom of the barrel, slowest 970s, though I doubt we'd see a 58 million transistor processor in a $300 game box yet.
2- IBM is going to make some processor for the xbox2 but it won't be the primary CPU. It could be some co-processor or AISC.


IMHO, most likely candidate is the 750 line of processors. Remember, Xbox I only had a 733MHz P3 in it, hardly even close to a fast processor when the machine was announced. However, there are good points about the P3:

[list=1]
Low power == low heat generation
Cheap
Cheap interconnects
Vector support (very important!)
[/list=1]

Looking down that list, the 750"VX" (AKA, G3+Altivec) satisfies each requirement. Lower power usage than an equivalent P3, cheap relative to the P3 I believe, simple interconnects, Altivec support ...

On the other hand, a G5 breaks most of those. It consumes significantly more power than the existing chips, and it has a fairly hefty FSB unless MS has IBM knock the CPU:FSB ratio up to 8 or so.

Amongst IBM's existing lines, I think the "G3" lines are the most likely candidates here. 'Course I wouldn't mind another buyer of G5's on the scene ... makes for a much cheaper CPU when you have it going in game consoles too.


IBM did make X86 processors. They fabbed Cyrix X86 processors. AMD is working out of IBM fabs now too. Maybe the article was slightly off... maybe IBM will be fabbing an x86 processor that will be used in the xBox because the vendor [AMD??] doesn't think they could handle the additional volume??
Hmn.

Um, no. The Press Release (in non-forward-looking statements, these suckers have at least a minimal standard of reliability like you won't find in rumor postings; it's funny to see a rumor site posting doubting the veracity of an IBM press release!) states that IBM processor technology will be used. IBM fab space is used for dozens of clients doing all sorts or horrendous things to their silicon. IBM processor technology does NOT, however, include AMD's chips or Cyrix's chips or Jim and Joe Bob's Proprietary System Interconnects and Vaccuum Cleaner Regulating chips. IBM processor technology is (surprise!) technology upon which IBM-designed processors are based.

At the moment, aside from a few very minor side-projects (including cell), that is all PPC-based.

Doesn't mean it won't change, of course. It would just be rather odd for MS to be contracting with IBM to design and produce a P3 clone.

[Dont Hurt Me]

this is good for Apple,IBM, and Microsoft. All helps the PPC move forward. Hey whatever happened to motorola?

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by sethypoo
Jog my memory, please.
:)
Most people think of IBM outsourcing the CPU to Intel and the OS to Microsoft and then losing complete control of their creation.

Also, MS and IBM worked on the next-generation windows-based OS, OS/2. Oh yeah... MS also happen to be working on their own solution as well.

BTW. In the early days IBM still exerted a lot of control of MS. Steve Ballmer's trips to IBM used to be nicknamed BOGUS - Bend Over and Grease Up Steve.

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by Loopy
If Microsoft did use a PPC chip for Xbox wouldn't they be close to running Windows native on a PPC as well, this would help a lot of PC vendors to switch chips it would also allow Microsoft to run their OS on any Platform.

MS has many operating systems, so define windows. They have XP Pro, XP Home, XP 64, 2003 Server, CE, etc. Some are quite different then the rest of the family.

Just because a platform can run windows, that doesn’t mean the programs will run. Sun has Solaris SPARC and Solaris x86. The drivers are not interchangeable and neither are the programs.

MS tried running windows on several different platforms, it was called Windows NT 4.0. The last couple of service packs were x86 only.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by silvergunuk
I can't wait to open the packaging on my xbox 2 to see it stamped G5 inside

Considering the fact that G5 is an Apple trademark, I doubt that'll happen.

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by JoeRadar
Most people think of IBM outsourcing the CPU to Intel and the OS to Microsoft and then losing complete control of their creation.

Actually IBM forced Intel into funding their competition. IBM would not deal with just one hardware supplier. So Intel funded their competition to get the IBM business.

[ffakr]

Originally posted by jettredmont Um, no. The Press Release (in non-forward-looking statements, these suckers have at least a minimal standard of reliability like you won't find in rumor postings; it's funny to see a rumor site posting doubting the veracity of an IBM press release!) states that IBM processor technology will be used. [/B]
Actually, the press release posted in the first story is a MS press release, not an IBM press release. It's pretty vague.

IBM does have a press release, didn't see it linked in this thread but it could be.

IBMs is just as vague as MS's, in fact they have the same text in them.

It says next generation processor technology, but that doesn't have to mean 750, or 970, or something IBM is working on with AMD, or even just a DSP or AISC.

.. ffakr.

[JoeRadar]

Originally posted by Marble
Does IBM automatically imply PPC? It seems like they'd stick with their x86 guns, and IBM has plenty of those, as well..
I think everything is to vague and too far away for those of us in the cheap seats to know what is really going on.

o MS could go with a completely original design.

o MS could go with a stock IBM chip (POWER X, or 9x0).

o IBM could work with a 3rd party (AMD, Transmeta) to develop an x86-like chip.

o IBM may develop some other internal components of the chip, and the CPU may still be an Intel-ish chip.

o IBM may be shutout completely in the end once MS gets Intel or AMD to drop their price some more.

[BigHairyBuds]

why doesn't apple use the CELL processor? isn't it processors stacked on top of each other and each individual processor is assigned for a specific task (audio, rendering, etc.) that would make an excellent digital hub (proc. for tv, audio, computations, video rendering, etc)

[Mr.Hey]

I'll be buying Playstation 3.

[reiggin]

It is an embedded processor. Relative of the PPC 440, it is in fact a modified PPC 405. Read all about it here:

http://www.mdronline.com/publications/epw/issues/epw_141.html

And I quote: "The GameCube motherboard contains just two major ICs plus memory. One of the larger chips is a custom IBM processor code-named Gekko and built around the PowerPC 405 core. Gekko connects to only one other device in GameCube, the ATI/Nintendo "Flipper" system controller and 3D accelerator."

You can Google around for yourself and find out that this is collaborated by MANY other sources.

[Sheebahawk]

wow this sure surprised me, came out of nowhere, I really thought the ps3 would be usig 970's, but maybe microsoft's decision will open a lot of people's eyes. Hope it comes with built in wireless internet

[silvergunuk]

Don't count on the Cell being something special. It's just sonys spin doctors at work. I wonder what they will claim for this machine. So powerful they can't release it in afganistan just incase of nuclear war? An engine thats so advanced, it can calculate emotions? This is the chip that will start of war between machinery and mankind..maybe the robots were based off the governor of california...were gonna die! How about the chip that is so advanced it'll beat the virginia G5 cluster on its own? A machine that can see into the future perhaps?

[Raidiant]

Originally posted by silvergunuk
Don't count on the Cell being something special. It's just sonys spin doctors at work. I wonder what they will claim for this machine. So powerful they can't release it in afganistan just incase of nuclear war? An engine thats so advanced, it can calculate emotions? This is the chip that will start of war between machinery and mankind..maybe the robots were based off the governor of california...were gonna die! How about the chip that is so advanced it'll beat the virginia G5 cluster on its own? A machine that can see into the future perhaps?

haha I think they did claim something like that with their emotion engine. Mind you the PS2 preforms remarkably well and it came out first. Look at Final Fantasy X.

[Krevnik]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
As for emulation, there was a PS1 emulator for Mac awhile ago, Virtual Game Station. It's not that hard.

There is a difference though... the PS1 was a 33Mhz chip with a low-end custom graphics controller. The Xbox is a P3 733Mhz chip with a pretty heavy 3D system.

Considering you have to spend time translating code to execute it, you are looking at a MAXIMUM of 1/2 speed. Then you have translation of APIs and other key things required to get access to the hardware and 3D chipset. You are looking at just BARELY, just MAYBE being able to eek out enough performance from a single proc 2Ghz G5 to emulate the Xbox hardware.

One of those would be too expensive for a 300$ device, so emulation of the Xbox on a PPC chip in a console is out of the question right now.

Virtual PC isn't going to be any help because these numbers I am using are based on Virtual PC's performance numbers.

Virtual Game Station also needed a minimum of a 66Mhz bus to work right, which was far more than the PS1's puny bus. A 233Mhz chip and 66Mhz bus trounces the 33Mhz chip and even slower bus on the PS1... showing that the emulation is not 'hard', but rather resource intensive.

[GregA]

Originally posted by silvergunuk
Maybe Microsoft did this because intels chips are way too expensive and it would be harder to make xbox2 emulators for pc. A few people have said that the console makers make their money on the games - not the console. If that is the case, wouldn't it be best for Sony to sell (or allow) a PS2 emulator on Mac - thus encouraging more games to be sold, AND they wouldn't lose as much money on console sales.

Or am I misunderstanding something?

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by GregAussie
A few people have said that the console makers make their money on the games - not the console. If that is the case, wouldn't it be best for Sony to sell (or allow) a PS2 emulator on Mac - thus encouraging more games to be sold, AND they wouldn't lose as much money on console sales.

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Sony only makes money on the games it sells. As opposed to the games someone else sells.

[johnnyjibbs]

The problem for Sony for the PS2 when it first came out was that the simple games-only model didn't work anymore. Tons of people (particularly the Japanese, where it was launched first) bought Sony's loss-making PS2 hardware simply to play DVDs (there were no good games at the start anyway). That was a big problem for Sony as they were making a loss on the hardware and no money on the software.

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Sony only makes money on the games it sells. As opposed to the games someone else sells.
The console manufacturers do make money from all games. The console manufacturers licence out the system to developers. The platform is their own proprietry platform after all. Sony has the cheapest and least restrictive licences (hence many crappy games on PS2) and Nintendo has the highest and most restrictive licence fees (hence less games, more high quality). Microsoft is somewhere in the middle.

Games magazines keep predicting that all consoles will converge to one common platform like VHS and DVD, but I am skeptical due to the technological competition and the stubborness of Nintendo;) (bit like Apple, in fact!)

[kwtneo]

Microsoft's next-generation Xbox will ditch its Intel chip in favor of the same kind of chip used in Apple's Macs -- an IBM PowerPC processor

http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,61065,00.html

[Dont Hurt Me]

they might as well say G5,who knows maybe i wont need a G5 Mac just a xbox2 and ill still have my G5:eek:

[the_dalex]

Nowadays, for consoles, the GPU is going to be the most important chip. The CPU is going to handle things like character AI, physics calculations, etc. while the graphic work is all handled by the GPU... that's how systems get by with such slow CPUs. A 733Mhz PIII in an Xbox is doing less work than a 2Ghz machine, because the code is specifically written for the GPU and takes 100% advantage of it. The demands on the processor grow as you start to enrich the game with non-graphical features, such as more characters with better AI, better game physics, and so on.

On a normal PC, games are written to work on older, less-capable 3D hardware and are much more CPU-intensive as a result... game development on the PC is always behind technologically.

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by the_dalex
On a normal PC, games are written to work on older, less-capable 3D hardware and are much more CPU-intensive as a result... game development on the PC is always behind technologically.

Always behind? Only if you consider graphics the most important thing, which they are most certainly not.

[Dont Hurt Me]

anyways it looks like the new xbox will have a type of g6 or rather 980 or modified 980 in it if you can trust mac os rumors. if this is true it would help ibm and apple get the 980 going if all three have the same wants and the wallet for it.