Microsoft Picks IBM for XBox 2

[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]

Re: Hacking the Xbox

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.

 

[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]

This is bloody brilliant

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

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Re: Re: Hacking the Xbox

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

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]

Re: Backward compatibility

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]

Re: This is bloody brilliant

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.

 

[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:

1. Low power == low heat generation
2. Cheap
3. Cheap interconnects
4. 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]

Re: Mac or PC

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]

Re: This is bloody brilliant

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]

GameCube's Gecko *IS* an IBM PPC 405

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]

fantastic news

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