This is probably extremely bad news for us PC gamers. More work for PC & Xbox ports of the same game, coupled with MS's deep pockets and influence over developers, will probably mean more Xbox exclusives of would-be PC titles. Of course, if they add keyboard, mouse, and VGA support to the Xbox 2 I guess I wouldn't really mind.
Eug,
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/031103/1718001361_1.html
The interesting thing is that IBM was designing for Sony too. I wonder what happened to that deal...
Now that I think about it, IBM makes sense because of what's known as "cell".
Still, Intel loses big time in the x86 market share bragging rights as I'm sure they were adding in the xbox chips. Dunno if they ever made much money on them.
Mac
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/031103/1718001361_1.html
The interesting thing is that IBM was designing for Sony too. I wonder what happened to that deal...
Now that I think about it, IBM makes sense because of what's known as "cell".
Still, Intel loses big time in the x86 market share bragging rights as I'm sure they were adding in the xbox chips. Dunno if they ever made much money on them.
Mac
Barbarian is right... but adding to it... It might be a really good way for IBM to become quite the popular. Imagine how easy it would be to port those games to PowerPCs. Imagine how many people will come to realize this and buy a PowerPC just for the new found support for games. Imagine us... the PC users now lost in the sauce, wanting those games. With IBM's new foot hold in the "Xbox the 2nd" we are bound to see a rise in the popularity of the IBM name.
With that... my question is will IBM be able to steal much of Intel/AMDs thunder... I mean the war for 64 bit has started between Intel and AMD... IBM has been there for a while now.... What can we expect...
With that... my question is will IBM be able to steal much of Intel/AMDs thunder... I mean the war for 64 bit has started between Intel and AMD... IBM has been there for a while now.... What can we expect...
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,165
- 1,809
- 126
*** CONFIRMED ***
From:
John E. Kelly III
Senior Vice President and Group Executive
IBM Technology Group
Subject: Today's Announcement -- Our Win with Xbox
Dear TG Colleague:
A few minutes ago we announced that we have won a deal to design, develop and make the processor for the next generation of Microsoft's Xbox game system.
Microsoft selected us for one very simple reason -- we are the leaders in the advanced technologies they need for Xbox.
This is a major win for us on several fronts:
It illustrates and capitalizes on our deep technology and service capabilities. The new Xbox technologies will be based on the latest in IBM's family of state-of-the-art processors;
It is the single largest win for Engineering & Technology Services and a substantial foundry win for our 300 mm facility;
We've handed Intel another defeat. Earlier this year, we kept them out of the Apple G5 and now we've thrown them out of Xbox. (Not bad, considering one Intel executive recently called us "trivial");
We are now the undisputed leader in providing advanced chip technology for the gaming industry. We make the CPUs for Nintendo's GameCube systems. We are shipping in volume the GeForce FX advanced graphics processor for NVIDIA, the premier supplier of graphics chips for the gaming industry. We are working with Sony Computer Entertainment to develop the processor for its PlayStation3 system. And now we've won the next-generation Xbox.
Many of our major worldwide operations will be involved in this project including -- Rochester for design, Austin and RTP for development, East Fishkill for manufacturing and packaging, and Burlington for mask and test work. It exemplifies the type of deals we're starting to win and must continue to win -- deals that use our full capabilities.
More and more, companies like Apple, Intersil, Sony Computer Entertainment, Qualcomm and others are turning to us for advanced chip technologies and the expertise in applying them. And the list continues growing. Finding
more opportunities such as these, closing the deals and delivering on our commitments to our customers all are essential to returning our business to profitability.
So congratulations to everyone on winning this outstanding deal.
From:
John E. Kelly III
Senior Vice President and Group Executive
IBM Technology Group
Subject: Today's Announcement -- Our Win with Xbox
Dear TG Colleague:
A few minutes ago we announced that we have won a deal to design, develop and make the processor for the next generation of Microsoft's Xbox game system.
Microsoft selected us for one very simple reason -- we are the leaders in the advanced technologies they need for Xbox.
This is a major win for us on several fronts:
It illustrates and capitalizes on our deep technology and service capabilities. The new Xbox technologies will be based on the latest in IBM's family of state-of-the-art processors;
It is the single largest win for Engineering & Technology Services and a substantial foundry win for our 300 mm facility;
We've handed Intel another defeat. Earlier this year, we kept them out of the Apple G5 and now we've thrown them out of Xbox. (Not bad, considering one Intel executive recently called us "trivial");
We are now the undisputed leader in providing advanced chip technology for the gaming industry. We make the CPUs for Nintendo's GameCube systems. We are shipping in volume the GeForce FX advanced graphics processor for NVIDIA, the premier supplier of graphics chips for the gaming industry. We are working with Sony Computer Entertainment to develop the processor for its PlayStation3 system. And now we've won the next-generation Xbox.
Many of our major worldwide operations will be involved in this project including -- Rochester for design, Austin and RTP for development, East Fishkill for manufacturing and packaging, and Burlington for mask and test work. It exemplifies the type of deals we're starting to win and must continue to win -- deals that use our full capabilities.
More and more, companies like Apple, Intersil, Sony Computer Entertainment, Qualcomm and others are turning to us for advanced chip technologies and the expertise in applying them. And the list continues growing. Finding
more opportunities such as these, closing the deals and delivering on our commitments to our customers all are essential to returning our business to profitability.
So congratulations to everyone on winning this outstanding deal.
Yeah, let's be cocky about it too there IBM... lol
and for EUG... The instruction set for the PPC isn't going to change for Microsoft's console I don't think... So any work that IBM and Microsoft does would easily run on any other PPC is my guess... and even if Microsoft says that IBM can't go running Windows on their machines... What's to say that the "Game Makers" couldn't make games for the PPC powered "Xbox the 2nd" and make ports for the PPC in general. What I'm saying is It would be really easy for games to be ported over to the PPC from the "Xbox the 2nd" and harder to port to the PC. It's a limitation on the CPUs nothing to do with the fact that it's a port from windows to Mac.
You know what? Let me stop there... I'm forgetting about the whole DirectX deal... We all know Microsoft will use DirectX in the "Xbox the 2nd"... it just makes sence... There is no support for the DirectX on PPC that I know of... correct me if I'm wrong... please. But if Microsoft continues with this deal with IBM I think it would open a door way for DirectX on the PPC in general.
Still yet... Argh!!! let me stop... I think I'll leave it there and come back once I've seen more. lol
and for EUG... The instruction set for the PPC isn't going to change for Microsoft's console I don't think... So any work that IBM and Microsoft does would easily run on any other PPC is my guess... and even if Microsoft says that IBM can't go running Windows on their machines... What's to say that the "Game Makers" couldn't make games for the PPC powered "Xbox the 2nd" and make ports for the PPC in general. What I'm saying is It would be really easy for games to be ported over to the PPC from the "Xbox the 2nd" and harder to port to the PC. It's a limitation on the CPUs nothing to do with the fact that it's a port from windows to Mac.
You know what? Let me stop there... I'm forgetting about the whole DirectX deal... We all know Microsoft will use DirectX in the "Xbox the 2nd"... it just makes sence... There is no support for the DirectX on PPC that I know of... correct me if I'm wrong... please. But if Microsoft continues with this deal with IBM I think it would open a door way for DirectX on the PPC in general.
Still yet... Argh!!! let me stop... I think I'll leave it there and come back once I've seen more. lol
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,165
- 1,809
- 126
That's exactly what I was getting at. I'm no programmer, but it would seem to me that MS would develop the DirectX framework for Xbox2, and Xbox2 only. There would be no such thing on the Mac. So the only way you could directly port the game to PPC 970 G5 is if IBM were to release a desktop G5 PPC 970, running Windows, with full Windows for PPC 970 DirectX support.
Otherwise, gaming on PPC 970 G5 desktops would still be on Macs, and games would have to be ported from DirectX to OpenGL or whatever.
So could we say that porting to and from the "Xbox the 2nd" in general would be harder.... I mean the instruction set is there for PPC but there is no DirectX... and then DirectX is there for PC but the programming would be for the PPC instruction set not X86. In a sense it would be a proprietary system right?
I still don't see, however, how you can have DirectX support on a PowerPC CPU for neXtBox or whatever and it not work for a regular ol' PPC... What's the line that actually stops that?
I still don't see, however, how you can have DirectX support on a PowerPC CPU for neXtBox or whatever and it not work for a regular ol' PPC... What's the line that actually stops that?
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
AMD did not get the contract
WTF, the xbox is going to be a gamecube with IBM and ATI
Yeah??...WTF? Its going to be Gamecube 2. Not XBOX2
What's to say that Microsoft will even write a Windows like OS for the neXtBox. They can't just port it over without rewriting it to fit the instruction set of the PowerPC CPUs... and if they did rewrite any portion of windows for the PowerPC that same code would run on any PowerPC... what's to say that directX support doesn't come to the Mac... and really you can't say because of the OS because the OS is built around the instruction set of the CPU as are the rest of the programs. How hard would it be to make a piece of code pertaining to DirectX run with the Mac OS... I mean they make and add stuff to Windows all the time... In a sence IBM could rewrite one file that pertains to the way graphics are handled and tell it to point to the code that IBM and Microsoft will write up for DirectX to work on the PowerPC CPU that will power neXtBox.
bad bad news for intel. also i think in general it was bad move for msft as well (unless they got some extremely great deal). i think most people would agree that xbox2 will do better than xbox 1 (in terms of sales). for xbox1 it didn't matter much if the cpu was intel or amd. the biggest prize was brand recognition. however in xbox 2, it would have been great for intel if they could have gotten their cpu in. not just for recognition, but to help them in the pc world as well. by 2005 an intel cpu will definitely have hyper-threading, and possibly be 64bit or have 64bit extensions. with such a cpu in xbox2 and many developers writing games for xbox2 it gets more people behind intel cpu's in the desktop world as developers are used to it. they already have to write for intel 64bit, and work regularly work with that, so optimizing for amd 64bit would seem like an extra step not normally taken.
likewise for msft, dx10 or whatever is in xbox2 will be more different than the disparity that exists today between xbox1 and pc dx8. having games written for xbox helps get people behind dx instead of opengl. but if msft turns xbox2 in some unique platform separate from pc like gamecube or ps2, it means less for dx support.
the other thing is that this is yet another confirmation that xbox will most likely not be backwards compatible. perhaps that fate was already sealed as nvidia doesn't want to give up rights to xbox1 design. and if msft jumps back to intel/amd or nvidia for xbox3 then that means no backwards compatibility again. to me it's not important, but to the masses it is, as evident in the success of gb-color, gba and ps2. a big mistake if it happens, and somewhat ironic, because i would have thought xbox would be easiest console to make backwards compatible.
likewise for msft, dx10 or whatever is in xbox2 will be more different than the disparity that exists today between xbox1 and pc dx8. having games written for xbox helps get people behind dx instead of opengl. but if msft turns xbox2 in some unique platform separate from pc like gamecube or ps2, it means less for dx support.
the other thing is that this is yet another confirmation that xbox will most likely not be backwards compatible. perhaps that fate was already sealed as nvidia doesn't want to give up rights to xbox1 design. and if msft jumps back to intel/amd or nvidia for xbox3 then that means no backwards compatibility again. to me it's not important, but to the masses it is, as evident in the success of gb-color, gba and ps2. a big mistake if it happens, and somewhat ironic, because i would have thought xbox would be easiest console to make backwards compatible.
Originally posted by: Chadder007
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
AMD did not get the contract
WTF, the xbox is going to be a gamecube with IBM and ATI
Yeah??...WTF? Its going to be Gamecube 2. Not XBOX2
No no... Microsoft doesn't have the mind set that Nintendo has... In no way will the neXBox be a "Game Cube 2"... who cares who makes the components... What matters is that they are better than the previous systems components and that the company backing up the system isn't still stuck in "pull-ups"
Okay ah heck head... obviously you didn't read much to this thread... Microsoft aquired technology from Connectix to allow emulation on PowerPCs the running of X86 software. This is the biggest clue as to Microsoft keeping its promise of backwards compatibility.
Sounds like there may be a Windows port for Mac now doesn't it?
The Xbox 2 and the net Nintendo may be very similar. Different encryption and same hardware since I believe ATi is making the Northbridge chipsets for each console and IBM will most likely be making the CPU. Looks like MS is going for cheap manufacturing cost and seeing that the Cube seems to be the cheapest, it further proves that is what they are looking for. So the Xbox 2 may be a Nintendo plus a hard drive used for games and Tivo stuff.
The Xbox 2 and the net Nintendo may be very similar. Different encryption and same hardware since I believe ATi is making the Northbridge chipsets for each console and IBM will most likely be making the CPU. Looks like MS is going for cheap manufacturing cost and seeing that the Cube seems to be the cheapest, it further proves that is what they are looking for. So the Xbox 2 may be a Nintendo plus a hard drive used for games and Tivo stuff.
MadRat
Lifer
- Oct 14, 1999
- 11,999
- 308
- 126
I predict that the XBox2 will...
1) Implement the same processor that PS3 uses.
2) Use dual cores at the least, possibly even four.
3) Cost upwards of $500 at the launch.
4) Implement full DirectX 9.0 compatibility via its ATI-designed GPU. (making licensing of technology in the video realm unnecessary)
5) Be geared as an "entertainment center" rather than just a game console
6) make Linux a real bitch to run on it.
The choice for ATI over NVidia lies probably in NVidia's lack of IP licenses for integrating some of the current DirectX 9.0 video standards into their GPU.
1) Implement the same processor that PS3 uses.
2) Use dual cores at the least, possibly even four.
3) Cost upwards of $500 at the launch.
4) Implement full DirectX 9.0 compatibility via its ATI-designed GPU. (making licensing of technology in the video realm unnecessary)
5) Be geared as an "entertainment center" rather than just a game console
6) make Linux a real bitch to run on it.
The choice for ATI over NVidia lies probably in NVidia's lack of IP licenses for integrating some of the current DirectX 9.0 video standards into their GPU.
No numb nuts... sheesh... Does Xbox run Windows? Noooo!!!! Maybe a few Dlls or a main Dll. But in no way does it run Windows. So why would they put an entire operating system like that of Windows on a gaming machine? Think!
All I said was that it would be very likely to have DirectX on Macs in the future with the way things are going between IBM and Microsoft... Nothing about Windows on Mac
What are you smokin? Okay... we already said that MS now has rights to an emulating technology that emulates X86 code on PowerPCs... not the Cell Technology... So if we were to keep with the backward compatibility promise MS has given us... then we can assume that it will be a PowerPC processor... not Cell. Did you even read the thread?
4 cores? For what? It wouldn't be needed? Maybe two... maybe!
500 bucks! No one can predict that. You don't even have a clue do you?
Geared as an 'entertainment center'... hello we already established that a long time ago... You Predict! Microsoft already said it would be... and before you predicted it!
do you think they can run a software emulator for games developed and optimized for xbox1 like halo1 or halo2 in real time? or would ibm create a x86 chip specifically for backwards compatibility like ps2 has done for ps1 games? or is there some other possibility?
and if that were possible wouldn't there still be legal problems with nvidia, as so far nvda is unwilling to give up rights to the chips they designed for xbox1? (this isn't related to ibm, but deals with the backwards compatibility issues)
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,165
- 1,809
- 126
Virtual PC as it stands right now does not support 3D gaming, nor does it support the G5. It could be updated, but not soon enough if they want to release the Xbox2 in 2005.
I suspect that if IBM designs a PowerPC based system for them, the machine will simply not be backwards compatible, unless they go to great lengths to make it so, which seems counterproductive to me (because the cost of the hardware may outweigh the benefits). If you have Xbox games you want to play, you probably already have an Xbox.
I suspect that if IBM designs a PowerPC based system for them, the machine will simply not be backwards compatible, unless they go to great lengths to make it so, which seems counterproductive to me (because the cost of the hardware may outweigh the benefits). If you have Xbox games you want to play, you probably already have an Xbox.
okay.. once again... Microsoft already bought the emulation software they needed to run X86 code on PowerPCs (IBM). There will be no need for an X86 processor on neXtBox. The PowerPC will handle all main CPU code. It will have to be incredibly fast, however, in order to emulate the X86 code that would have run on the 733MHz CPU in Xbox because it would have to run the emulation software which would in turn run the X86 code.
And my two cents on Nvidia: If it wasn't for Microsoft then where would NVidia be... Microsoft helped put NVidia where it is... The whole custom GPU that Microsoft and NVidia came up with for the original Xbox... It used some APIs that were DirectX 9 if you will. Microsoft basically gave NVidia the head start over ATI because of the extra DirectX APIs that would be need to run Xbox Games... In a sence the GPU in the Xbox was a DirectX 8.5. That gave NVidia a big leap over ATI as far as where Microsoft was headed with the DirectX Spec... Probably explains why NVidia jumped the Gun with directX 9 and now there Hardware doesn't run DirectX 9 games as well as it could.
But to answer the question... No... NVidia's rights over the Xbox GPU doesn't mean that ATI can't take over. Remember that all PC games are designed first with the current DirectX spec in mind 1st. Then the hardware of the different companies in mind 2nd. That being said the Games that run on the current Xbox all use Microsoft's DirectX... Meaning as long as those same APIs are applied in neXtBox... the games will still run on any future machine regardless of the GPU provider.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter