Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => General Internet News => Topic started by: Hammer on November 03, 2003, 10:39:56 PM
-
Microsoft Corp. and IBM Corp.'s Technology Group announced today (Nov. 3) that the next- generation Xbox electronic game console will use a yet-to-be-designated IBM processor. IBM's chip will replace Intel Corp.'s Pentium III processor now in the current Xbox version.
Refer to
EE Times Link (http://www.eet.com/sys/news/OEG20031103S0060)
EBNS Link (http://www.ebns.com/showArticle.jhtm)
Comments: The type of CPU may not be as important with MS’s dotNET strategy. Amiga and Mac markets may have some serious competition in the PowerPC arena. IF X-BOX’s X86 legacy is important, we also know IBM is a partner of AMD and it’s not the first time that IBM licensed an X86 CPU e.g. Cyrix series CPUs.
-
This is *not* an announcement that IBM *is* providing the CPU silicon. This is a cross-licensing agreement announcement only.
Don't count your eggs before they are hatched. These same licenses, I would note, are utilized by AMD in their x86-64 chips, and could note a shift from Intel to AMD just as readily as a shift from Intel to IBM. Knowing Microsoft, they are playing these three off of each other to drive the price down.
-
It may well be that modern x86 chips are too hot and power hungry for console boxes. But I'm jumping to conclusions. If consoles did jump to PPC it would be great news for AmigaONE and Pegasos boards.
-
The type of CPU may not be as important with MS’s dotNET strategy.
Erm, what? Does someone need to read up on .NET? :-)
MS and IBM. Can history repeat itself in some fashion? :-)
-
Erm, what? Does someone need to read up on .NET? :-)
MS and IBM. Can history repeat itself in some fashion? :-)
Yeah Mikey,
Maybe IBM will 'ripoff' MS and kill their market...I remember those wars.. :-P
-
Poster: KennyR Date: 2003/11/3 18:17:39
It may well be that modern x86 chips are too hot and power hungry for console boxes. But I'm jumping to conclusions. If consoles did jump to PPC it would be great news for AmigaONE and Pegasos boards.
Modern PPC (970) is just as hot as x86 CPUs. The last PPC that could get away with using a heat sink and no CPU fan, was what, the G3 600MHz? That's not going to be enough horsepower for the XBox. Besides, imagine trying to port M$ to PPC for the XBox to run on. Not pretty.
Dammy
-
Modern PPC (970) is just as hot as x86 CPUs. The last PPC that could get away with using a heat sink and no CPU fan, was what, the G3 600MHz?
It depends for the system. New PPC7457 can be used without a fan in a properly aired system.
-
And what was the last x86 CPU that could run without a large (more than 3cm^2) cooler and fan? 266 MHz Pentium 2?
Heat and power are the only real advantages PPC have over x86 chips. What other reason for switching? Ok, I'm jumping to conclusions again: nobody said it was a PPC chip. But do IBM have any chips close to being as powerful as the PPC range? I don't know of any x86-compatible ones since Cyrix, and that died at the 300MHz or so along with the P2.
-
t may well be that modern x86 chips are too hot and power hungry for console boxes. But I'm jumping to conclusions. If consoles did jump to PPC it would be great news for AmigaONE and Pegasos boards.
Well the Nintendo Game Cube already uses a PowerPC chip and Sony with Toshiba and IBM are currently developing a future PowerPC chip for the PS3. I guess Microsoft must have seen something nice about the PowerPC. Of course add the x86 future with Intel being questionable, seems to make it seem more realistic.
-
From slashdot:
EE Times reports further details on Microsoft's use of IBM chips in its next generation Xbox game and consumer electronics devices, dealing a blow to Intel and providing a much needed boost for IBM's lossmaking chip business." An analyst claims that "IBM is likely to modify its most advanced G5 PowerPC silicon, which is being used in Apple Computer's fastest Macintosh desktops, for the embedded market, reducing the cache and cutting power consumption", and further comments: "This is likely to heat things up at Intel, but it is competition that is healthy for the industry. It's ironic that IBM, with its roots in the computer industry, doesn't supply the processors for the main portion of the personal computer industry. Intel does."
-
@KennyR
[quote}I don't know of any x86-compatible ones since Cyrix, and that died at the 300MHz or so along with the P2.[/quote]
What about the C3s?
You know, the ones they use in the VIA EPIA boards like the ones sold by the Mini-ITX store (http://www.mini-itx.com/store/).
-
Poster: KennyR Date: 2003/11/3 19:21:23
And what was the last x86 CPU that could run without a large (more than 3cm^2) cooler and fan? 266 MHz Pentium 2?
Latest Pentium, would be the Pentium 4-Mobile at 2 GHz, think it averages about two watts. IIRC, you can find a fair number of x86 low power (7-12 watts) from Intel, AMD, andTransmeta. My point is, laptops are driving the need for low power, fast CPUs. PPCs are not the only beast in the low power catagory.
Dammy
-
Modern PPC (970) is just as hot as x86 CPUs. The last PPC that could get away with using a heat sink and no CPU fan, was what, the G3 600MHz? That's not going to be enough horsepower for the XBox. Besides, imagine trying to port M$ to PPC for the XBox to run on. Not pretty.
Not true. Apple has produced several G4 based Macs, including the cube, that do not need anything other than a heat sink to cool. Even the 1.33Ghz G4 in the latest PowerBooks does not require continual fan cooling.
-
Oooh, I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. Microsoft always has alterior motives, and playing their vendors off of each other would be typical. Who knows what they have up their sleeve. Oh, and if anyone thinks PPC runs as hot as x86 CPUs, I've got A burnt Celeron and Athlon that I'll sell you for cheap.
-
@PastAmigaOwner: All the Macs I've taken apart have HUGE heatsinks, though. The G3 I used to have at work has a heatsink about 18 square inches, with a 120mm case fan blowing on it. That's one advantage of being able to build custom cases. The G5 Mac also has a case fan in front of each CPU heatsink. That's hardly passive cooling. Maybe Apple is really pushing these processors to their limit?
I also heard the Cube had overheating problems, because the video chip gets too hot and thus affects the CPU. It doesn't matter to the end user what the problem is.
-
@KennyR
The 933 MHz Via C3 has been tested, by playing Quake III for hours, without any forms of cooling.
-
An IBM-CPU, an ATI graphics card:
All we need is a new HAL, and we'll be able to run OS4 on it! :-D
-
Latest Pentium, would be the Pentium 4-Mobile at 2 GHz, think it averages about two watts
Then it's not running at 2GHz when it's only consuming 2W. Heard of SpeedStep before? My laptop rather likes it. My P3M 1.2GHz can clock down to 650 or 800MHz. When it's at 1.2GHz, you can heard the CPU fan whirring. The software allows you to change the clock frequency on the fly.
-
This is *not* an announcement that IBM *is* providing the CPU silicon. This is a cross-licensing agreement announcement only.
According to IBM they are providing "Processor Technology", meaning this thing could have a G5.
Modern PPC (970) is just as hot as x86 CPUs.
Not quite, IIRC average power for the 2GHz G5 is 50-70W, Intel P4EE is 92W, the next gen will be over 100W.
The last PPC that could get away with using a heat sink and no CPU fan, was what, the G3 600MHz?
We've ran a 1GHz G4 (10W) with a fairly small fanless heatsink.
Latest Pentium, would be the Pentium 4-Mobile at 2 GHz, think it averages about two watts.
I'd love to know where people get these low figures from, according to the Intel spec sheet it's 30W / 20W depending on clock voltage & clock speed.
The only way you can get low power out of an x86 is to cut the performance. VIA C3 is a good example of this.
-
I'd love to know where people get these low figures from, according to the Intel spec sheet it's 30W / 20W depending on clock voltage & clock speed.
The only way you can get low power out of an x86 is to cut the performance. VIA C3 is a good example of this.
And/or reduce the number of instructions the chip is capable of.
-
Given chip design resource has been assigned to the project
I very much doubt that it is a cross licensing or rebranding exercise.
Sounds like a new or enhanced chip to me.
-
IBM presents their G3 CPU line as the ones suitable for game machines. IIRC 900Mhz 750Fx consumes 3,5watts... perhaps the XBOX2 chip will be a modified 750VX.
-
"The only way you can get low power out of an x86 is to cut the performance. VIA C3 is a good example of this."
Actually the Via C3 CPU has so poor performance, mainly because Via is a much smaller company than Intel, AMD and IBM, specialised in mobo chipsets. They most obviously don't have the funds to hire a legion of electronics engineering experts like Intel or AMD and therefore the design of their cpu's is monolithic and competely anoptimized. I read somewhere that the Via C3's design ressembles mainly to that of intel 486! :-?
-
What about the C3s?
C3 are waaaay slower than ppcs... they are waaaaay slower than celerons at the same clock rate.
-
If you tend to believe any of the rumors,
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/05/20030509020831.shtml
-
@Crumb
C3 are waaaay slower than ppcs... they are waaaaay slower than celerons at the same clock rate.
Yes, they are, but that wasn't the point I was making. You'll note I was responding to KennyR's assertion that the last fanless x86 chips died with the Cyrix 300 and the P2.
For better performance you'd need to look at the mobile models from both Intel and AMD.
Then you have the various statements that high end PPCs don't need any cooling, when in most cases they need a great big heat sink and active case cooling instead. Expensive silent case fans are not the same thing as no fans at all.
That's not to say PPC's don't run cooler that x86 chips cycle for cycle, but the issue is often exagerrated.
Incidentally, I note that the "more powerful cycle for cycle" argument has been rolled out again. While this is true, it's usually irrelevant. the comparison that really matters is "performance/price" because we all know we shouldn't pay any attention to cycle figures. :-P
-
According to IBM they are providing "Processor Technology", meaning this thing could have a G5.
Yes, it could. It could also mean an x86, or a G3. IBM has made x86 cores, even a x86-compatible PowerPC core before. (the 615) It could also mean a cut-down G5 combined with Microsoft's recent purchase of VirtualPC. Right now this all is conjecture.
Tomorrow Microsoft is to have an announcement with more details on this deal, I highly suggest we all wait and see what comes out of there.
-
The stuff available internally is only more detailed in you can see the resources that are assigned, so you can guess, but beyond that nothing firm that tells us the technology being used.
-
Actually the Via C3 CPU has so poor performance, mainly because Via is a much smaller company than Intel, AMD and IBM, specialised in mobo chipsets. They most obviously don't have the funds to hire a legion of electronics engineering experts like Intel or AMD and therefore the design of their cpu's is monolithic and competely anoptimized. I read somewhere that the Via C3's design ressembles mainly to that of intel 486!
VIA are not poor, they had the money to purchase not just 1 but 2 x86 CPU vendors!
The C3 is based on the IDT Centaur design, it was never designed for speed, it is designed specifically for low power. Designing an x86 compatible CPU is no small (or cheap) effort. The C3 is compatible with the full Pentium 4 instruction set, it even identifies itself as one to the OS.
It is like a 486, it's that way on purpose.
The stuff available internally is only more detailed in you can see the resources that are assigned, so you can guess, but beyond that nothing firm that tells us the technology being used.
It looks like a 970 derivative. It needs to be significantly faster then the current 600MHz P3 and I don't think a G3 will give a big enough difference. Also we are talking a couple of years away by which time the 990 will be nearing and the 970 positively old.
The 980 is expected (and rumoured) to be out next year. IBM have already talked on record about a "consumer POWER5". I expect the 990 will be a consumer POWER6.
However I think this quote on IBMs web site pretty much says it:
According to Bernie Meyerson, IBM Fellow and chief technologist for IBM's Technology Group, the new Xbox technologies will be based on the latest in IBM's family of state-of-the-art processors
-
@PastAmigaOwner: All the Macs I've taken apart have HUGE heatsinks, though. The G3 I used to have at work has a heatsink about 18 square inches, with a 120mm case fan blowing on it. That's one advantage of being able to build custom cases. The G5 Mac also has a case fan in front of each CPU heatsink. That's hardly passive cooling. Maybe Apple is really pushing these processors to their limit?
While I agree with you that PPCs definitely do generate some significant heat, I have a dual G4 PowerMac (with just normal sized heat sinks), a 1.25Ghz G4 PowerBook with passive cooling only (unless it gets really hot, then the fan kicks in), and a Dual 2Ghz PowerMac G5. While the G5 certainly does have its fair share of active cooling (9 fans), the fans spin at very low RPMs and this is the quitest computer I've ever owned.
Bottom line is that there are numerous PPC processors that could fit into the form factor of game machine without cooling issues. Apple is looking at using liquid cooling systems to get a G5 into a PowerBook and Sega has done this before with the Dreamcast, so it's not out of the question.
-
ZiffDavis on Yahoo (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1738&e=3&u=/zd/20031103/tc_zd/111370) says the next generation X-Box will use PPC but doesn't say which.
-
Well I wouldn't all get your hopes anyway. Two points relating to if and when the xbox uses ppc.
1) The first xbox hasnt exactly taken over the console market has it. So whats to say the xbox2 would.
2) both the N64 and Gamecube use ibm supplied ppc. And of course the gamcube also uses custom graphic from ATI. so it won't be anything new.
I wonder also has this got anything to do with that big batch of G5's that microsoft had delivered the other day :)
-
C3 are waaaay slower than ppcs... they are waaaaay slower than celerons at the same clock rate.
A friend of mine has a Cyrix 700MHz processor that, especially regarding FPU capabilities, equals that of a P166MMX I had a good few years ago :-)
-
Well I wouldn't all get your hopes anyway. Two points relating to if and when the xbox uses ppc.
1) The first xbox hasnt exactly taken over the console market has it. So whats to say the xbox2 would.
I don't think anyone here is hoping either would 'take over the market', but what it does do, which we do want, is that it helps IBM to put more funding into CPU development/production.
-
Erm, what? Does someone need to read up on .NET?
“The Common Language Runtime (CLR) of dotNet is similar to Java Virtual Machines, in that it allows byte-coded applications to run, without the need for applications to be fully compiled for the local platform. “ – Australian PC Authority Nov 2003 Edition.
Example of high performance dotNET game is Quake II .NET
Refer to http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2.htm
" using the Microsoft Common Language Runtime (CLR) without noticeable performance delays. " - Vertigo Software.
Adding PowerPC to mix only strengthens Microsoft’s position within the embedded market since PowerPC has significant share in this particular market. I don’t think MS has completely abandoned the Windows NT every-where’s goals.
Updated Windows NT (cut-down) PPC edition + MS dotNET framework + ATI GPU (DirectX 9+ Class) should be attainable for MS.
-
And what was the last x86 CPU that could run without a large (more than 3cm^2) cooler and fan? 266 MHz Pentium 2?
Intel's "Pentium M".
-
@PastAmigaOwner:
Interesting. I wish more PC vendors used heatpipes. The dual heatpipe cooler in the Dreamcast is a wonderful piece of engineering, and makes the unit far, far quieter than my PS2. :-)
-
Hmmm, my Dreamcast sounds like a steamroller or something :-)
The gamecube is waaaay more quiet. Don't know how much noise an XBox or PS2 makes though.
-
XBOx is loud.
Now, my Jaguar, that's quiet.
-
wow, i wonder why eyetech think of this. The X-Box was just an x86 PC. This would be perfect for tha microA1... Morethan perfect. I'ts already here with onboard graphix... Im not sure about what chip their using but maybe the chip could be upgraded or a special microA1 supplied for the Xbox?
With Eyetechs good relatinos with IBM it might be just what their looking for. Also i wonder if this has any implications about the china thing and alternative platforms?
Also, what about games compatibility? Are all those games companies going to want to recompile/rework their games just so they'll run on the xbox? Probably but i cant be sure! :)
Interesting!
-
wow, i wonder why eyetech think of this. The X-Box was just an x86 PC. This would be perfect for tha microA1... Morethan perfect. I'ts already here with onboard graphix... Im not sure about what chip their using but maybe the chip could be upgraded or a special microA1 supplied for the Xbox?
The current solution from A1-lite (i.e. ATI Radeon 7000 IF the rumour is true) wouldn't be adequate to replace the following;
1. nVidia's DirectX8 class GPU.
2. nVidia's nForce 1 class core logic chipset, memory bandwidth and APU/DSP solution.
The next question we can ask is “Who will provide the core logic for X-BOX 2?”
ATI’s core logics chipsets (for the Pentium IV markets) may give some clues on what components/performance can be included in the X-BOX 2 (assuming IF ATI will embark on such a project for the PowerPC).
There’s nothing new with the use of non-X86 CPU in an X-BOX2 since Sega's Dreamcast** was powered by Hitachi SH4 CPU. **It was a variant of MS Windows CE box with DirectX ~6 class GPU i.e. PowerVR.
-
Not quite, IIRC average power for the 2GHz G5 is 50-70W, Intel P4EE is 92W, the next gen will be over 100W.
Hmmm....I would have expected better, if a
1GHz G4 consumes around 10W, I would figure -
considering more advanced fabrication process/
etc - that the G5 would maybe consume 20 - 30%
more...50-70W is a huge jump from 10 or even 20W.
I hope IBM can cut power consumption to
a more reasonable amount in future chips.
-
C3 are waaaay slower than ppcs... they are waaaaay slower than celerons at the same clock rate.
Time to go OT! :-D
As someone allready stated, the C3's are specifically made for running cool.
It is based on IDT's Centaur core and, to some extent, the Cyrix III-core.
VIA is NOT a poor company! Being one of the most successful chipset-makers for the x86 platform, they got enough cash to keep developing CPUs.
The successor to the C3, the C4 (too bad it ain't a High Performance-CPU, the commercials would be cool :-)), is sheduled for release late this year.
BTW, they're not that slow. The newer versions even have full-speed FPUs! :-D
-
From this source i.e.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12523
It would seem that the cheap & cheerful SIS was contracted to produce I/O chipsets for Microsoft’s X-BOX 2.
-
I don't know if this was said, but the website www.macosrumors.com is reporting the PPC cpu is a derivative of what apple would call the 'G6'
(PowerPC 980)
it is a rumor site.