WSJ: Playing the Fool

[Queasy]

Link - REALLY interesting read about a book on IBM's development of the Cell processor and the Xbox processor. Covers how time and cost-intensive developing a chip from the ground up is and how MS came in later to contract with IBM for a chip and IBM used the lessons learned from making the Cell to make MS's chip.

Mr. Shippy and Ms. Phipps detail the resulting absurdity: IBM employees hiding their work from Sony and Toshiba engineers in the cubicles next to them; the Xbox chip being tested a few floors above the Cell design teams. Mr. Shippy says that he felt "contaminated" as he sat down with the Microsoft engineers, helping them to sketch out their architectural requirements with lessons learned from his earlier work on Playstation.

Worth the click through for a read.

 

[Baked]

To summarize, IBM fucked Sony in the ass behind their back, people don't care about high failure rates, and the gaming market belongs to consumers who like to swing their Wii around. What happened in the contract between IBM/Toshiba/Sony that allowed IBM to sell R&D data to MS? It was rather vague in that article, or should I say, an ad to buy the book high-lighted in that article?

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Wow

 

[Maximilian]

It all seems pretty fair, might as well learn from mistakes made, even if its to improve a clients rival companys product design order.

No idea what they could have learned from cell to improve the 3 core thing in the xbox though. From what i gathered the xbox's CPU is just a basic 3 core G5ish thing? Whereas cell is this crazy new 8 core wonder CPU that didnt turn out so great.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Baked
To summarize, IBM fucked Sony in the ass behind their back, people don't care about high failure rates, and the gaming market belongs to consumers who like to swing their Wii around. What happened in the contract between IBM/Toshiba/Sony that allowed IBM to sell R&D data to MS?

This:
"All three of the original partners had agreed that IBM would eventually sell the Cell to other clients. But it does not seem to have occurred to Sony that IBM would sell key parts of the Cell before it was complete and to Sony's primary videogame-console competitor."

It was rather vague in that article, or should I say, an ad to buy the book high-lighted in that article?

Imagine that, an article about a book in the Books section. 😕

 

[Kromis]

For Sony, the Cell processor was such a debacle that two weeks after the Playstation 3 finally appeared in stores, the company fired Ken Kutaragi, the head of its gaming unit, who had championed the Cell and built the Playstation line.

Wait...WHAT THE FUCK?

Kutaragi got his ass booted from Sony? I thought he stepped down for his own reasons?!?!?

That is so fucking bad ass.

 

[bearxor]

Yeah, it's not a complete stuffing here by IBM. Xenos is a Tri-Core PowerPC chip whereas Cell is a Single-Core PPC chip with 8 SPU's attached. They're very similar architecture at the core, and architecture that was already mostly developed. What Microsoft most like benefited from was IBM and Sony's work on heat and process reduction.

 

[Queasy]

I think it's safe to say that the winner in the console war is not Nintendo but IBM. Their processors are in all three consoles.

 

[tatteredpotato]

They make it sound like the delays caused by the processor were what caused the PS3 to launch a year after the 360, but IIRC it was more an issue of BluRay.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian
They make it sound like the delays caused by the processor were what caused the PS3 to launch a year after the 360, but IIRC it was more an issue of BluRay.

They cite a delay that caused MS to get their chip back six weeks before Sony's. They do say go on to say that the delay wasn't just because of the Cell though.

Because of various delays, the Playstation 3 was pushed back a full year.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: bearxor
Yeah, it's not a complete stuffing here by IBM. Xenos is a Tri-Core PowerPC chip whereas Cell is a Single-Core PPC chip with 8 SPU's attached. They're very similar architecture at the core, and architecture that was already mostly developed. What Microsoft most like benefited from was IBM and Sony's work on heat and process reduction.

HOLY HELL!!! This implies that the failure rate on the 360 could've been worse than it is today. I find that impossible.

 

[erwos]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: bearxor
Yeah, it's not a complete stuffing here by IBM. Xenos is a Tri-Core PowerPC chip whereas Cell is a Single-Core PPC chip with 8 SPU's attached. They're very similar architecture at the core, and architecture that was already mostly developed. What Microsoft most like benefited from was IBM and Sony's work on heat and process reduction.

HOLY HELL!!! This implies that the failure rate on the 360 could've been worse than it is today. I find that impossible.

I don't see how that implies anything about failure rates. Dealing with heat is something that every semiconductor manufacturer has to figure out. Besides, _AMD_ made the part that's failing on the 360, not IBM.

As for Ken getting fired for the Cell being a debacle - well, duh. For all the PS3 fanboy love of the Cell, Sony would have done far better to have killed that thing in the cradle.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: Kromis

For Sony, the Cell processor was such a debacle that two weeks after the Playstation 3 finally appeared in stores, the company fired Ken Kutaragi, the head of its gaming unit, who had championed the Cell and built the Playstation line.

Wait...WHAT THE FUCK?

Kutaragi got his ass booted from Sony? I thought he stepped down for his own reasons?!?!?

That is so fucking bad ass.

Ya, it was reported that it was Kutaragi's decision to take a different role with the company, but it was always heavily rumored that he was forced to change positions. This is the first time I've seen someone out-right say that he was fired, though.

 

[CKDragon]

Originally posted by: erwos

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: bearxor
Yeah, it's not a complete stuffing here by IBM. Xenos is a Tri-Core PowerPC chip whereas Cell is a Single-Core PPC chip with 8 SPU's attached. They're very similar architecture at the core, and architecture that was already mostly developed. What Microsoft most like benefited from was IBM and Sony's work on heat and process reduction.

HOLY HELL!!! This implies that the failure rate on the 360 could've been worse than it is today. I find that impossible.

I don't see how that implies anything about failure rates. Dealing with heat is something that every semiconductor manufacturer has to figure out. Besides, _AMD_ made the part that's failing on the 360, not IBM.

I see what Dari is saying. Whether the IBM processor or AMD video card is the failure point, the combined heat from all components is important.

More heat from the CPU = more overheated GPUs
Less heat from the CPU (because of IBM's experience with Sony) = less overheated GPUs

 

[Eeezee]

I'm surprised Sony didn't force IBM into some sort of contract that would prevent this sort of bullshit. Something along the lines of "You can use these specs as a core for other chips three years from now and not a day sooner." Oh well, live and learn I guess.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
I'm surprised Sony didn't force IBM into some sort of contract that would prevent this sort of bullshit. Something along the lines of "You can use these specs as a core for other chips three years from now and not a day sooner." Oh well, live and learn I guess.

With how fast the CPU industry moves, the chip wouldn't have been worth much at that point. Maybe IBM Would have agreed...for a way higher price.