XBox 2 - 3.5GHz PowerPC?

[ffakr]

I think his idea of nicely may be what you're saying is crap.

That's probably close to true. I think I said that I can't run it super high, but it does fun fine at acceptable resolutions. I can't, however, max out all the settings by any means. It looks fine to play, but Farcry can certainly use all the horsepower of a 9800.. which is about 4x as powerful as my 4200ti.

 

[Analog Kid]

I disagree, especially if the rumors about support for HD are true, and the XBox does play well with high-definition screens. HD TVs are expensive, but as with all consumer electronics, the price-to-performance ratio will come down over time. It could very well be the case that an affordable HD monitor will be out by the time the still-vapor XBox 2 is released, in which case $2000 on something that is revolutionary in its application won't seem so bad (ah, to convince people that macs are the same...) and a $300-500 XBox2 will look pretty paltry as far as expendutres go. At the same time, salespeople will be pushing all kinds of component upgrades that will allow your humble little console to act more like the media center that Microsoft probably really wants these things to be.

Every has a TV. Not everyone has a computer. When the prices get down to where you're easily combining the two with high-end technology, people will buy.

Now there's a serious response to yours, too.

I don't see people using their TVs as computer monitors. There are usually either too expensive or too big. They're usually in the wrong room. Back when computer monitors were about the same resolution as current TVs, people may have hooked them up to play but if they got serious about the computer as a computer then there was a separate TV or monitor in the office specifically for the computer.

On the other hand if this is simply going to be used as a "media center" then why not running Apple code? Apple doesn't have a product in that market segment, and I really don't think that would cannibalize many Mac sales. It certainly hasn't cannibalized PC sales... By the time the price/performance ratios come down to what you think is a danger zone, current products would be obsolete and Apple could decide if this was a good strategy or not and pull out if they chose to.

In the end, an Xbox won't compete with Macs because it's too limited and too focused. Media center, maybe. But certainly not general applications. People don't word process on their TVs. Yes, they could, but they don't. They might run a slide show on their TVs, but they're not going to do image manipulation that way. Fundamentally different markets.

The market that would likely use OS X on an Xbox is the same market that runs Linux on an Xbox now, which is decidedly very, very small. They also probably have another computer already, and generally do things like this because they think it's clever not because it's useful... Letting those folks play with OS X wouldn't be such a bad thing IMO. Giving the early adopters a taste of candy could bring some of them into the candy store.

 

[bcsimac]

Wow, if its true.....that is some processor. Only problem is that most of the time when it sounds too good to be true.....it usually is.

 

[thatwendigo]

I don't see people using their TVs as computer monitors. There are usually either too expensive or too big. They're usually in the wrong room. Back when computer monitors were about the same resolution as current TVs, people may have hooked them up to play but if they got serious about the computer as a computer then there was a separate TV or monitor in the office specifically for the computer.

Convergence.

You may not see people using their TV as a monitor, but I quite frequently see people using their computers as a TV/DVD/Music playback unit. Steve has spoken against this being something Apple wants to pursue, but that doesn't mean that other companies won't try to exploit a potential market. Also, given the size and definition of HD TV, well...

HDTV - 16:9 aspect, 1920x1080 or 1280x720 pixel pattern,
HD-ready monitors - Oddly similar.

An interesting note: By 2006, the FCC has declared that NTSC must be shut off. All content will be digital.

On the other hand if this is simply going to be used as a "media center" then why not running Apple code? Apple doesn't have a product in that market segment, and I really don't think that would cannibalize many Mac sales. It certainly hasn't cannibalized PC sales... By the time the price/performance ratios come down to what you think is a danger zone, current products would be obsolete and Apple could decide if this was a good strategy or not and pull out if they chose to.

The iPod was such a success because Apple made it easy to use, appealing, and seized a market that had not been effectively exploited yet. Digital media through set-top boxes is about to get very, very crowded, with Sony, Microsoft, and others all leaping into the mix.

In the end, an Xbox won't compete with Macs because it's too limited and too focused. Media center, maybe. But certainly not general applications. People don't word process on their TVs. Yes, they could, but they don't. They might run a slide show on their TVs, but they're not going to do image manipulation that way. Fundamentally different markets.

Convergence...

See above. HDTV monitors are spreading, and they're encouraging device convergence for multiple purposes, and there's a nice market in all-in-one formfactor media center PCs at the moment. It doesn't cost a whole lot to get
a decent machine with built-in Tivo or Tivo-like functionality on top of its normal functions, and you can just slap one of those nice, big HDTV monitors onto it in order to increase functionality.

People play games on bigscreen TVs. The only reason that they don't do other things on them is limitation of technology and lingering habits.

Before 1984, people didn't use mice, either.

So what?

 

[airmac]

That's probably close to true. I think I said that I can't run it super high, but it does fun fine at acceptable resolutions. I can't, however, max out all the settings by any means. It looks fine to play, but Farcry can certainly use all the horsepower of a 9800.. which is about 4x as powerful as my 4200ti.

Thx, I think I got my answer. But really, the game is worth upgradng in my opinion.

...

 

[uzombie]

I am doubtful of Xbox2 having such a powerful processor. The current generation has a P3 700mhz. It's cost-saving factor is undeniable, even though M$ is losing $ on it, the price fixing/licensing of software titles is the key here.

And about HDTV, we do need to get a game machine that has the HD-DVI connector out, along with optical. Even it is an optional adaptor. I'd love to use a ?32" LCD HDTV with a game machine at 720/1080i res.

Tell me, what is the cost of a single G5 @ 3Ghz? Triple that and I still bet its double what the current model sells for ($199). I will not pay $+400 for a game system. I can build a XPC for that (sans AGP video card).

Point is, I believe hardware is now significantly beyond software. The time it takes programmers to code, test, debug, re-code, test and GM a title, the hardware is already outdated. (ok, graphics keep evolving...but so do the engines..)

OT- Halo2 was due this past April. It was postponed to possibly November. if they don't hit the market with halo2 by December (a big snafu), wil lthey hold it up to release with Xbox 2 (likely Mid 2005).

Gotta love rumors... (and what is up with "Tiger" .. or should I say Tigger!)
G5 3.0ghz..where are yooouuuuuu?

 

[dieselg4]

Convergence...

See above. HDTV monitors are spreading, and they're encouraging device convergence for multiple purposes, and there's a nice market in all-in-one formfactor media center PCs at the moment. It doesn't cost a whole lot to get
a decent machine with built-in Tivo . .

Convergence, at least for the next few years in my opinion, is a dead fish. Gateway doesn't tout it media PC's in nearly the same way they used to, there has been little marketing success in Windows Media Center Edition, and, well people just don't type sitting movie-distance away. It seems to make sense that for most functions, eps. where you're relating print material next to you to something your doing on a screen, it makes sense to have them all in a similar viewing plane.

 

[dieselg4]

I am doubtful of Xbox2 having such a powerful processor. The current generation has a P3 700mhz. It's cost-saving factor is undeniable, even though M$ is losing $ on it, the price fixing/licensing of software titles is the key here.

And about HDTV, we do need to get a game machine that has the HD-DVI connector out, along with optical. Even it is an optional adaptor. I'd love to use a ?32" LCD HDTV with a game machine at 720/1080i res.

Tell me, what is the cost of a single G5 @ 3Ghz? Triple that and I still bet its double what the current model sells for ($199). I will not pay $+400 for a game system. I can build a XPC for that (sans AGP video card).

Point is, I believe hardware is now significantly beyond software. The time it takes programmers to code, test, debug, re-code, test and GM a title, the hardware is already outdated. (ok, graphics keep evolving...but so do the engines..)

OT- Halo2 was due this past April. It was postponed to possibly November. if they don't hit the market with halo2 by December (a big snafu), wil lthey hold it up to release with Xbox 2 (likely Mid 2005).

Gotta love rumors... (and what is up with "Tiger" .. or should I say Tigger!)
G5 3.0ghz..where are yooouuuuuu?

For those of you who have acess to a copy, there is an excellent article this week in Time about Microsoft. THey specifcally mention the loss lead of the XBox - it's gaining momentous marketshare but a a price to Microsoft. They also point out the winners in the XBox sage are the gamemakers, like Sony. Playstation 2 makes much more money off game sales than unit sales, just as the XBox money coems from game sales. Sony should be glad they didn't have to fork over R&D and marketing money for this thing.

 

[meta-ghost]

I don't see people using their TVs as computer monitors. There are usually either too expensive or too big. They're usually in the wrong room. Back when computer monitors were about the same resolution as current TVs, people may have hooked them up to play but if they got serious about the computer as a computer then there was a separate TV or monitor in the office specifically for the computer.

In the end, an Xbox won't compete with Macs because it's too limited and too focused. Media center, maybe. But certainly not general applications. People don't word process on their TVs. Yes, they could, but they don't. They might run a slide show on their TVs, but they're not going to do image manipulation that way. Fundamentally different markets.

hey kid, i don't have time to go through the thread so excuse me if it has already been said. but, in addition to "fundamentally different markets" there are "fundamentally different cultures". we do have to look at the global picture on occasion. france for instance (for reasons i won't go into) has only 10 percent of it's homes with equipped with a computer. i'm willing to bet that the use of the tv to do many of the things you and i would prefer to do on a computer will be much higher there. possibly being "le solution".

 

[dieselg4]

hey kid, i don't have time to go through the thread so excuse me if it has already been said. but, in addition to "fundamentally different markets" there are "fundamentally different cultures". we do have to look at the global picture on occasion. france for instance (for reasons i won't go into) has only 10 percent of it's homes with equipped with a computer. i'm willing to bet that the use of the tv to do many of the things you and i would prefer to do on a computer will be much higher there. possibly being "le solution".

I would think a big reason would be cost redundancy, but most of the emdia PC's I've seen advertised cost more than an emachine or an emac. . .

at least in France the cost of real estate means the TV will be alot closer to your face, though i guess the same could be said for NYC . .

 

[Mac_Max]

"Additionally, Intel is moving quickly (2005/2006) to produce Tejas and other dual core CPUs at 65nm. It will be interesting to see how much volume Intel can produce for Dothan (90nm Pentium-M)." (first page)

Actually Tejas has been canceled. Instead the Pentium M's core will become the new architecture for all or Intel's Desktop chips. A step back yet forward.

 

[MorganX]

Actually Tejas has been canceled. Instead the Pentium M's core will become the new architecture for all or Intel's Desktop chips. A step back yet forward.

It's actually a step forward. Dothan's (Pentium M's) outperform the Prescott core clock for clock and produce less heat. Perfect for dual-core.

But Prescott isn't dead. They already have disaled 64-bit extensions and in Q4 will get 2MB cache and a 1066 bus. No price increase. They will be hot, literally.

Intel is already sampling dual core Intaniums with 24MB cache. I'm not counting out Itanium yet either. It's got Windows, it's got apps. With everyone doing 90nm now and sampling 65nm, it's going to get cheaper and faster. Nothing like competition to wake up Intel and MS.

 

[desertboy]

It would boot if Apple coded it to... It would rank pretty high on the dirty trick list, but imagine an OS X(box): Apple makes $129 per copy sold and MS loses $100 per Xbox sold.

Evil...

Apple would have a hard time getting OSX to boot on the xbox2 even if this was the real specs.

The xbox won't boot unsigned code M$ are not going to release the xbox2 without decent copy protection. Yeah sure you can mod an xbox reasonably easily (No software mod for new xbox's and the software mod was very unreliable) but that means soldering a modchip or performing complex steps (some of which can damage hardware if you solder bad or try the HD boot trick). So essentially you are going to have to take the xbox2 apart to mod it so you can boot your os as if Apple are going to run the risk of porting an OS that M$ would try to sue them for and the end user had to rip the unit apart and invalidate the warranty to get it to boot. They would also have to rewrite the compilers, reverse engineer sound, video, 3d card support, usb, ethernet, etc. Apple makes it's money on hardware that's why in the OS license agreement it says you're not allowed to boot this on no apple hardware (This would never stand up in a court in the EU)

Check
http://www.xbox-linux.org/docs/projectboverview.html
For the protection steps taken in the xbox, Mac on Linux might work if (When) they get linux to boot.

If this is real it similar processors are going to be made available to apple.

What this spells for intel only remains to be seen. Wouldn't take M$ much to port windows to another architecture and cobble on a processor emulator for backwards compatibility like apple did with the 68000-powerpc transition.

At these specs you'd even get reasonable performance using pearpc on linux.

M$ has a hell of a lot deeper pockets than most of you give them credit for and they know this is where the future lies. I'm sure Apple would be going this route if they had the cash.

I own an xbox (Chipped), a Windows XP machine and a G4. I like OSX a lot but XP is ridiculous stable I get 3 months between reboots on it (And then only for updates). OSX hangs probably once a month or so. On the other and of course XP is more vunerable to viruses than OSX (Only because of poularity). I think both OS's have there good and bad points but sooner or later I'll have to use linux as both companies will give the US government backdoors into their OS's for "security" reasons where as linux being Open Source won't suffer the indiginity.

 

[Krevnik]

An interesting note: By 2006, the FCC has declared that NTSC must be shut off. All content will be digital.

This is a bit off-topic, but this isn't true... this is one of those things that got blown out of proportion (especially by the slashdot crowd who wouldn't even read the article summary). What is happening is that all TVs made after 2006 must include a digital receiver which would replace most people's digital cable/satellite boxes. VHF/UHF transmissions aren't scheduled to be 'cut-off' for at least a decade after that.

On topic: this is bunk... The basic concept is probably good, but the clock speed, the VRAM size, and the 'tri-core' just doesn't make any engineering sense. I would LOVE to see reasonable 3D HD content rendered with a 10MB VRAM buffer...

 

[ffakr]

On topic: this is bunk... The basic concept is probably good, but the clock speed, the VRAM size, and the 'tri-core' just doesn't make any engineering sense. I would LOVE to see reasonable 3D HD content rendered with a 10MB VRAM buffer...

well, if we assume for a second that this is true (I'm not taking the position the report is accurate)..
There is no indication that the 10MB of integrated vram is the only video memory to be available. If we assume it is just the frame buffer and we look at what that would deliver... 1024 x 768 resolution at 32bit is precisely 3MB of data.

I'm not sure why they'd go through the trouble of building what seem to be described as on-die frame buffer. It's be faster than you'd ever need for a frame buffer. Perhaps it's something new.. a L2 like cache for a GPU where normal VRAM is the L3.

I think the processor info lends just as much or more doubt as the vram. It's supposedly a 3 core PowerPC with HT. It would appear as 6 virtual processors. Each processor (or virtual processor) would have a relatively low IPC so it looks like they will be simple cores compared to the PPC 970.
So, here's the big question. Since Games are notoriously difficult to code as highly threaded applications, why would you design a game console that appeared to the OS as a 6-way system? It would be very difficult to code on. If current game code was run on it, most of the processor would sit idle. Even supposedly smp aware games like UT 2004 run the audio in one thread, and the rest of the game in the other.
In short.. the Xenon Xbox2 is designed exactly the way you wouldn't want a game console to be designed.

That said, if the leaked specs are accurate, the system would be fabulously powerful for a console. It could easily do multiple things, even while playing games. it could, for example, play a video game and record as a pvr and serve music on your internal network all at the same time.

 

[sambo.]

"I think both OS's have there good and bad points but sooner or later I'll have to use linux as both companies will give the US government backdoors into their OS's for "security" reasons where as linux being Open Source won't suffer the indiginity."

it wouldn't surprise me to learn that this is already the case. one of the more surprisingly sane decisions by the US congress in recent years was knocking the "clipper chip" on the head. the US' attitude to encryption code is already quite frightening, basically the NSA doesn't want any encryption software to be used that it can't break. many pieces of encryption code are already classified under ITAR, which regulates (among other things) the dissemination of knowledge about nuclear weapons.

Linux is the way of the future, of this I have no doubt. not being a 'puter geek myself is the only reason I don't use it now. but four or so years time, i prolly will, and not only because i don't want to send any more money to Redmond (or Cupertino for that matter).

 

[Krevnik]

well, if we assume for a second that this is true (I'm not taking the position the report is accurate)..
There is no indication that the 10MB of integrated vram is the only video memory to be available. If we assume it is just the frame buffer and we look at what that would deliver... 1024 x 768 resolution at 32bit is precisely 3MB of data.

I'm not sure why they'd go through the trouble of building what seem to be described as on-die frame buffer. It's be faster than you'd ever need for a frame buffer. Perhaps it's something new.. a L2 like cache for a GPU where normal VRAM is the L3.

I think the processor info lends just as much or more doubt as the vram. It's supposedly a 3 core PowerPC with HT. It would appear as 6 virtual processors. Each processor (or virtual processor) would have a relatively low IPC so it looks like they will be simple cores compared to the PPC 970.
So, here's the big question. Since Games are notoriously difficult to code as highly threaded applications, why would you design a game console that appeared to the OS as a 6-way system? It would be very difficult to code on. If current game code was run on it, most of the processor would sit idle. Even supposedly smp aware games like UT 2004 run the audio in one thread, and the rest of the game in the other.
In short.. the Xenon Xbox2 is designed exactly the way you wouldn't want a game console to be designed.

That said, if the leaked specs are accurate, the system would be fabulously powerful for a console. It could easily do multiple things, even while playing games. it could, for example, play a video game and record as a pvr and serve music on your internal network all at the same time.

Here is the problem, once you start getting into HD resolutions, the 10MB is barely enough to handle the framebuffer alone. If they are using ATi hardware like rumored earlier, then there is a lot more VRAM needed beyond 10MB. It needs texture buffers and depth buffers for rendering. Putting that information in system RAM would seriously hamper the power of the video card (which is slower than the DRAM used in video sub-systems). L2 cache of that size would become horrendously expensive to produce as well (even at 500Mhz). The XBox already has HD resolutions available, so sticking with 1024x768 is a little low for checking how much VRAM something uses. 1600x1400 uses over 7MB, and a depth buffer is going to be the same size. L2 cache just doesn't make much sense in terms of cost/effectiveness, especially when you can have external DRAM that keeps up with a 500Mhz graphics processor for less money.

The reason why I say the processor is bunk is that 3.5Ghz is not going to be magically hit anytime soon... not soon enough for developer prototypes to float around in quantity anyways. Plus the chips would be the cost of an XBox is now, even in bulk. Not to mention the fact that nobody has developed a 3-core chip because it is simpler (and more feasible in an engineering sense) to keep things in powers of 2. That is why you see dual-processor and quad-processor designs, and no 3-processor designs. The same engineering reasons go for chips... it just isn't feasible to slap 3 cores into a chip and get them communicating and synchronized at higher speeds (not without some sort of sacrifice).

And you even said a multi-core chip just isn't the way you design a console. As for PVR ability, MS does seem to be thinking about leaving the HD out in the XBox 2 (unconfirmed), and if that is true, then PVR ability is a non-issue.

 

[stevehaslip]

heat?

i didnt put much thought into this rumor when i saw it a few months back, but there was more information on a gaming site recently about it. can you seriously imagine how much heat a 3 core 3.5Ghz power pc chip would give out? i get pissed off when i watch a dvd and the playstation hums along in the background. how can they seriously make an xbox with that much heat inside??? it will be like a hairdryer in your living room!

and how much does a g5 chip cost to put in your powermac? im gonna guess at around $300+ each if you loook at current intel/amd prices. so we're talking of maybe $600 for a console, how can micro$oft sell a console for $600??? thats not exactly gonna be mass market appeal there if it costs that much!

i'd love for it to be true and as awesome as it sounds from the specs but i honestly can't see it happening. and they want to release this before sony's PS3? they want to beat them to the punch and get a large market share right at the start, how can they do this if the machine costs mega bucks? based on what i've read about xbox's marketing i cant see some of the rumored specs being true. fingers crossed though!

 

[macsrus]

The reason why I say the processor is bunk is that 3.5Ghz is not going to be magically hit anytime soon... not soon enough for developer prototypes to float around in quantity anyways. Plus the chips would be the cost of an XBox is now, even in bulk. Not to mention the fact that nobody has developed a 3-core chip because it is simpler (and more feasible in an engineering sense) to keep things in powers of 2. That is why you see dual-processor and quad-processor designs, and no 3-processor designs. The same engineering reasons go for chips... it just isn't feasible to slap 3 cores into a chip and get them communicating and synchronized at higher speeds (not without some sort of sacrifice).

The other reason the processor is complete HOGWASH is.....
A power 4+ running at 1.9 GHZ costs $10000 and the 3 core PPC specs everyone is quoting here are better than the power 5
This is just a load of manure

Also to think that IBM is going to produce a 3.5 GHZ power based multicore CPU anytime soon is pure fantacy....

 

[maxvamp]

Really folks

I personally cannot see the XBOX with three 970s. I mean, why would we need a supercomputer in a box just to run a MS OS and one game???? Wait, Scratch that..

It is well published on IBM's PowerPC page that they are willing to make custom fabrications for manufacturers using the PowerCore, and an add on engine of some form. In Apple's case, it is altivec. for Sony and Nintendo, it is surely something else.

I could see Microsoft taking three 400 or 700 cores, and adding thier own engine to it, coupled with an NVidia ( another IBM partner of sorts ), and making this three core design people keep taking about. The engine could be altivec, or it could be some other SIMD design. If it were a custom design, it might reduce the incompatibility with older games.

Think about it... A PowerPC with SSE3?

We shall see.

Max.

 

[maxvamp]

BTW FFakr

Chris Tom told me....

Nevermind <grin>

Max.

 

[wizard]

well, if we assume for a second that this is true (I'm not taking the position the report is accurate)..

Well that is an issues but it does key in with the way future hardware will be delivered.

I think the processor info lends just as much or more doubt as the vram. It's supposedly a 3 core PowerPC with HT. It would appear as 6 virtual processors. Each processor (or virtual processor) would have a relatively low IPC so it looks like they will be simple cores compared to the PPC 970.
So, here's the big question. Since Games are notoriously difficult to code as highly threaded applications, why would you design a game console that appeared to the OS as a 6-way system? It would be very difficult to code on. If current game code was run on it, most of the processor would sit idle. Even supposedly smp aware games like UT 2004 run the audio in one thread, and the rest of the game in the other.

I'm not sure that is entirely accurate. Yes on the Apple platoform SMP is primarily used to support audio. It doesn't have to be that way.

Multi thread games are not by nature difficult to program, but that doesn't mena that old code bases easily make the jump to multithreaded code. If someone today was to produce a competitor to UT, it would be a very smart move to build that game as a multithreaded application.

In short.. the Xenon Xbox2 is designed exactly the way you wouldn't want a game console to be designed.

This is the statment that caused me to respond to this posting in the first place. The alleged Xenon XBox2 is exactly what you would want to produce to enable future software products. This should be no mystery to anyone as there is little choice ot improving game performance, thus projects like CELL. Now one could argue about how well this will all work and it can be stated plainly that there is likely to be teething pains, but Multi processors are not going away. In fact in a few short years buying anything other than a multiprocessor chip for a PC will be very difficult.

Sure there are some apps that will never realize much benefit from SMP but it is foolish to use current game results as a indicator of future performance. There are games that have proven to make use of SMP today, it will only get better as the technology matures.

That said, if the leaked specs are accurate, the system would be fabulously powerful for a console. It could easily do multiple things, even while playing games. it could, for example, play a video game and record as a pvr and serve music on your internal network all at the same time.

While what you describe above is certianly possible I don't think it will be long before game developers fully saturate the system. It certainly will take longer than the old XBox, but is likely to happen none the less.

Dave

 

[ifjake]

yeah developers will eventually saturate the system, but as systems become more complex it becomes increasingly hard to do so. only now are developers beginning to fully utilize the potential of the xbox, particularly with Doom III and the Riddick game. so anything microsoft can do to make it easier and quicker and cheaper to develope for the next xbox is of utmost importance. i think it's XNA that they're currently working on as a set of developer tools specifically designed for game makers.

on another note, cheap access to awesome processing power might classify this thing as a weapon. i remember when they were afraid of PS2s being used for missile guidance. plus i'm sure networking capabilities will be built in to this thing.

 

[Dr. Dastardly]

When this comes out it will probably have to come up against the Play Station 9 with its electronic spores to induce a more euphoric gaming experience.

Tri core 3.5ghz... give me a break.

 

[wizard]

Two comments here.

First there is certainly a need for a change in the mindset of the developers. Since inertia is a problem in any field I expect the games that really take advantage of this sort of design would be from developers fresh to the field. In any event if the new xbox is to use a version of NT there will be services making use of the multiprocessing capabilities right off the bat. NT could provide a platform to simplfy the demand on the developers.

As to the issue of computing hardware getting into the hands of ignorant people that is a very real problem. Frankly I wish we had a better choice than Bush but it appears that he is the best we got running at the moment. Ultimately I think WE will have to apply this sort of technology on a massive scale within the military. The problems in this world are far from over.

Dave