Well according to the article neither have said this, but they havn't denied it and it sounds rather ominous that the G5 will power the next xbox
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
IBM Producing 65nm Chips?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well according to the article neither have said this, but they havn't denied it and it sounds rather ominous that the G5 will power the next xbox
Originally posted by Snowy_River
They wouldn't need the VPC technology, as they'll be writing the OS directly for the processor. I wouldn't be surprised to learn the MS has had versions of their OSes that run on PPC processors all along, just as Apple has Marklar. Just because they have it doesn't mean they'll use it...
They would if they wanted xbox1 games to run on xbox2's. Thing is the speed of the xbox2 would have to take one hell of a leap otherwise xbox1 games would run slow on the xbox2
G5 pricing
If the PPC goes in the xbox, this could mean a cheaper G5. Whilst RISC chips are theoretically cheaper to manufacture than CISC, this has not been the case because of volume.
If the volume market shifts toward the PPC then Apple may be able to reduce their costs because of cheaper PPC's
If the PPC goes in the xbox, this could mean a cheaper G5. Whilst RISC chips are theoretically cheaper to manufacture than CISC, this has not been the case because of volume.
If the volume market shifts toward the PPC then Apple may be able to reduce their costs because of cheaper PPC's
VPC
if microsoft actually plans to use virtual pc to allow xbox owners to play their games on xbox 2...could we expect that some of that technology would make its way into virtual pc for os x? could it suddenly became feasible to run graphically intensive windows apps on a mac? and would that be a good or a bad thing? sure more available apps...but less actual mac software?
all this whole xbox 2/power pc/virtual pc thing does is make me ask questions...
if microsoft has some version of virtual pc software in every xbox 2, what's running it? there's no way it's some form of mac os...! i guess microsoft will probably take some of the technology that they acquired from connectix and make some proprietary xbox 2 only mash of it all... still, i feel like i must have missed something important because it all seems so improbable. i guess the best possible scenario out of all of this is that xbox 2 game developers decide to make a mac version as well because it's not too much extra effort...
...end of rambling mess.
if microsoft actually plans to use virtual pc to allow xbox owners to play their games on xbox 2...could we expect that some of that technology would make its way into virtual pc for os x? could it suddenly became feasible to run graphically intensive windows apps on a mac? and would that be a good or a bad thing? sure more available apps...but less actual mac software?
all this whole xbox 2/power pc/virtual pc thing does is make me ask questions...
if microsoft has some version of virtual pc software in every xbox 2, what's running it? there's no way it's some form of mac os...! i guess microsoft will probably take some of the technology that they acquired from connectix and make some proprietary xbox 2 only mash of it all... still, i feel like i must have missed something important because it all seems so improbable. i guess the best possible scenario out of all of this is that xbox 2 game developers decide to make a mac version as well because it's not too much extra effort...
...end of rambling mess.
5 GHz is great, but I see the disparity between CPU and disk I/O continuing to increase.
Personally I don't really care about clock speed after around 2 or 3 GHz. Disk I/O, specifically seek time on hard disks, will continue to be a performance killer indefinitely. What we need is 100 GB of Magnetic RAM in a chip. MRAM promises to reduce power consumption and latency, increase storage capacity, and provide true on/off computing.
If only they could get past 4 megabits that they are currently producing. One can dream!
According the wired.com article, we will probably expect to see chips that are close to the current 2.0Ghz G5's. If these were made with in 65nm, then that would cut down on the heat a lot.
As for emulation, the XBox only has a 733Mhz Celeron, which is nothing when compared to the 2.0Ghz G5. I think that any old XBox game should be able to be emulated with a G5.
Of course, with Microsoft, I wouldn't be suprised if half the old games didn't work and the other half caused a reboot when inserting the disc
As for emulation, the XBox only has a 733Mhz Celeron, which is nothing when compared to the 2.0Ghz G5. I think that any old XBox game should be able to be emulated with a G5.
Of course, with Microsoft, I wouldn't be suprised if half the old games didn't work and the other half caused a reboot when inserting the disc
Hmmm....well, where does this put Intel?
Probably still selling around thirty billion dollars' worth of processors per year to the various computing markets that it dominates. Did you assume that the Xbox was Intel's major source of income? It is a tiny fraction.
What chips does IBM make.
Everyone is speculating that its a PPC, the same used in the Mac. My question is, does IBM make other types of processors other than PPC, say an Intel compatable ix86 type, that would be powerful enought to power the xBox2? If IBM only makes the PPC, then we can say that the new xBox will be Mac compatable =).
As for the Idea of G5 laptops, I think summer, WWDC for that. 5Ghz will take about another more than 2 years. It will take a year to get to 3Ghz, just think that if you keep the dual cpus going, you wont need the 5Ghz for awhile.
Everyone is speculating that its a PPC, the same used in the Mac. My question is, does IBM make other types of processors other than PPC, say an Intel compatable ix86 type, that would be powerful enought to power the xBox2? If IBM only makes the PPC, then we can say that the new xBox will be Mac compatable =).
As for the Idea of G5 laptops, I think summer, WWDC for that. 5Ghz will take about another more than 2 years. It will take a year to get to 3Ghz, just think that if you keep the dual cpus going, you wont need the 5Ghz for awhile.
For all of you hoping that you will be magically able to run xbox 2 games on the mac... take a look at PCs and the current xbox.
The xbox has a 700 Mhz Celeron processor, plus the xbox runs on a stripped down win2k kernel.... and there are 0 working xbox emulators for the PC.
The xbox has a 700 Mhz Celeron processor, plus the xbox runs on a stripped down win2k kernel.... and there are 0 working xbox emulators for the PC.
Originally posted by Dippo
According the wired.com article, we will probably expect to see chips that are close to the current 2.0Ghz G5's. If these were made with in 65nm, then that would cut down on the heat a lot.
As for emulation, the XBox only has a 733Mhz Celeron, which is nothing when compared to the 2.0Ghz G5. I think that any old XBox game should be able to be emulated with a G5.
Of course, with Microsoft, I wouldn't be suprised if half the old games didn't work and the other half caused a reboot when inserting the disc
Yeah, considering that all it has to do is render it's graphics at NTSC or HDTV quality... I bet the graphics on one of those would be great. However, I hate the XBox. I think the PS3 will be much mroe compelling. Xbox 1 is a pretty big failure. Gamecube even out sold them this X-Mas.
It could very well be a version of an amd 64 chip. It is well known that IBM is a big producer and partner with AMD. They are codevelopers of the AMD 64 technology.
I would love to see either chip(G5 or AMD64) in the xbox, just to spite intel. But i like it is more likely that it is and amd variation or a new chip design based on x86 tech. I do not think it is likely that MS will utilize any form of PPC tech.
I would love to see either chip(G5 or AMD64) in the xbox, just to spite intel. But i like it is more likely that it is and amd variation or a new chip design based on x86 tech. I do not think it is likely that MS will utilize any form of PPC tech.
When the "nm" factor was first pointed out, I saw it as another "Mhz" type thing. Slowly, bit by bit, growing. The rate of increase right now is incredible. Computers have to decrease in value, simply because at this rate, they won't keep their value! (Ducking flames and pointers that we haven't actually seen real change as fast as the rumors, and that the companies will manage the technology so that they still make money.....)
Impressive boosts in capability and technology.
Impressive boosts in capability and technology.
M$ ditching intel for their high performance game box? The tech world gets more interesting by the minute... I expect to see many more 'gray' areas in the future with regards to processors, OS's, etc... wintel is NOT going to be the primary game in town in the future - and you can bet Macs will still be here!
I'm no processor manufacturer, or claim to be any kind of expert on that subject, however I've heard we were reaching the limitations of silicon as far as speed and smaller processes. I bet we'll see a revolutionary step in the next couple of years - something that makes current processor tech obsolete. I remember hearing something, but don't know where. For the sake of conversation, perhaps someone with a better memory than I can post some information on emerging processor technologies? Here's to G5 Powerbooks soon (hopefully) - I'll be buying one at that time!
The future of microprocessing lies with these two words "Carbon Nanotubes"
More information here...
http://www.ipt.arc.nasa.gov/carbonnano.html
and here...
http://www.personal.rdg.ac.uk/~scsharip/tubes.htm
You can also do a search in google for more info...
For reference, if you lined up 400 carbon atoms, that's 65nm. So time is running out for conventional chips, but there's probably still 10 years left in current processes.
Molecular circuits are next, but it'll be a while before the iPodMolecule.
Think 3 dimensions. Current chips are currently manufactured in 2 dimensions. In the last few years I have heard a few blurbs about once they reach the smallest size possible that they can begin layering in the 3rd dimension. The reason they can't do it currently is heat dissipation and finding an appropriate material to do so.
I read something a month or so ago about them finding a way to imprint circuits on an inexpensive easy to make synthetic material. This would relieve the chip industry from the cost incurred by using Silicon which is expensive to grow in the fasion needed to make wafers for chips.
The next revolutionary step in computing could possibly be computers that use photons instead of electrons.
The next step after Photonic Computers probably could be in the area of Quantum computing.
Mechanical computers with gears and punchcards were the first (if you also include the abacus). Then came the Silicon Computer Age, which we are in now. Give another decade or two before we reach the end of this technology.
Certainly greater things are ahead of us.
Thanks for the info. This is some truly amazing stuff. I can't wait for them to find a way to actually apply it and put it to use. Just reading about it and looking at the 3D models made me have flash backs to Star Trek.