Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games) Entertainment Games Hardware

IBM To Design Technology For XBox 2 CPU 151

Posted by simoniker from the the-audience-is-watching dept.
An anonymous reader writes "According to Biz Ink, 'Microsoft has licensed leading-edge semiconductor processor technology from IBM for use in future Xbox products and services to be announced at a later date..' IBM are already working on the PlayStation 3 CPU alongside Toshiba, and have a relationship with Nintendo after making the GameCube CPU, though there's been no official announcement on GameCube 2's hardware. Is the next-gen hardware war heating up?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM To Design Technology For XBox 2 CPU More

IBM To Design Technology For XBox 2 CPU

Comments Filter:

  • Tough Luck, Intel! (Score:3, Funny)

    by stevesliva ( 648202 ) on Monday November 03, 2003 @11:36AM (#7377600) Journal
    All your console are belong to IBM.

  • Is it still going to be X86? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Random832 ( 694525 ) on Monday November 03, 2003 @11:37AM (#7377614)
    Is Microsoft abandoning its "Intel compatibility" policy? I remember the original reason was to make it easy to port between PC and X-box, to attract developers
    • Just because IBM specializes in PowerPC chips, does not mean that they cannot design an x86 compatible chipset. Their facilities will just as easily manufacture a x86 wafer as they would a PPC wafer. Still, it'll be interesting to see what kind of chip ends up in the xbox 2.
    • I think it is the API that matters. No matter which CPU the XBox uses, the OS will be Windows based (Windows CE). So it will be very similar to the WIN32 API and I believe it uses DirectX too. That provides portability between PC and XBox.
      • the OS will be Windows based (Windows CE).

        Just a minor nit, the XBox is Win2k based, not CE based (as the DreamCast was), so it's more than likely that the XBox 2 would be XP-based, especially with XP Embedded having taken a lot of the hype away from CE-based devices in the last couple years.
        • Just a minor nit, the DC was not CE based, it had a CE sticker and could boot it from a CD, but almost no game ever used it cause it sucked.
          • Yeah, I thought about that after I hit post and figured I'd just take the nit when it came ;)
          • Anyway, there were a few good games that were ce based. The biggest reason was network compatibility, ce could use the modem before sega's libs. So Sega Rally, Chu Chu, Armada and most other network able games were CE based.

            Yeah it was slow, yeah it kinda sucked but it sure didn't make Chu Chu Rocket any less fun.

            I was actually reminded of this benefit the last time someone said Dreamcast was Win CE based :p

    • It all comes down to compilers. You can design and build a game on one platform then compile it to run on another.
      • --Didn't exactly work too well for Halo on the PC now, did it?

        (I speak from experience.)

        (rant) Nvidia needs to get their act together. There's too much app-specific optimization going on. ATI cards are reported to run the game better out of the box, and there's an Nvidia card IN THE XBOX!! I happen to be an Nvidia loyalist at the moment because of their Linux drivers, but they need to make sure their Win drivers don't *have* to be optimized for particular games or they'll go bust!
        (/rant)
    • It seems that perhaps the "ease of portability" came back and bit them because of the modder scene. Perhaps they are looking at a non x86 platform to try to stem the tide of xbox hackers and homebrew apps.
    • I don't see how they could abandon compatibility, since they've claimed backwards compatibility with the XBox. Hmm...

      --Dan
  • I would much rather see the XBox whither away and die than see Nintendo go the way of Sega.
    • I'd would rather see Xbox prosper and grow and see Nintendo do likewise.

      But then I'm a nice person and don`t really see why the Xbox should whither just to stop Nintendo from becoming a games producer.

      Especially given that there are 6 billion people in the world, That's probably enough for 3 consoles.

      CJC
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:Sucks to be Nintendo (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yeah, and Mercedes Benz should drop the car business and jump right into the hood ornament industry. I already have a Toyota, and it sucks that it didn't come with a tripoint star on the damn hood. :(
    • Another dumb comment modded as Insightful.
      What's going on today people!!!
    • At first I agreed with this type of argument, but lately I have moved away from this thinking. Nintendo has never really been about the hardware... it's been about the games.

      In fact, they tend to not rely on any special or flashy hardware at all to make great games. This is why their consoles don't outsell competitors offerings, they aren't as flashy. I'd be just as happy playing a Mario title on a Sony console, because the focus is on the game and the gameplay NOT the system that is spinning the disc.
    • It's all about the games and right now I own 3 times as many game for my Xbox as I do for my Cube. If you like Nintendo games then you buy more because you are their market. Same goes for Xbox.

  • um...i don't think so.... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Blob Pet ( 86206 ) on Monday November 03, 2003 @11:44AM (#7377664) Homepage
    Under the agreement, Microsoft has licensed leading-edge semiconductor processor technology from IBM for use in future Xbox(R) products and services to be announced at a later date.

    That's all the detail that the article really gives. The rest is typical corporate marketing. No where did I see anything that says that IBM is designing the central processing unit for the XBox 2.
    • Well, if you license a technology from someone - the design you derive is at least somewhat designed by the original designer of the license.

      But could this be a tactical move to improve IBM's relationship with Microsoft? IBM has been pushing Linux quite a bit as of late...EVIL CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUND!

    • Every time the press release mentions "processor," they're talking about the CPU.

      It is a god-awful press release written by someone in Microsoft, though. "Semiconductor processor technology." They might mean process technology, but last time I checked, MS wasn't interested in process technology. Look for the IBM press release to actually be coherent.

      • The word processor is mentioned exactly twice before you get to the 'About IBM' blurb, which is tacked onto the end of every press release that has anything to do with IBM.

        The first time it's mentioned, it's in the context of processor technology, the blurb most-cited so far in this thread. The second time is as follows:

        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 process
      • Every time the press release mentions "processor," they're talking about the CPU.

        It's easy to assume that I suppose...except that modern computers typically have other processors such as for sound and video. I'd rather have it state "CPU" explicitely, because I found the text to be far too vague.
  • So they're developing a new xbox platform already? I thought one of the nice things about consoles was that they didn't become obsolete technology as quickly as PCs. If they release a new xbox soon, 1)They're going to lose sales of their current xbox (oh wait, they already are). But more importantly, 2) if consoles are going to start becoming obsolete in just a few years, it seems to me that it's just going to cause a huge market fragmentation if new consoles come out too soon.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Absolutely, Sony dropped the ball BIG TIME with their stupid announcement of the PS3 WAY to prematurely. Now all the fanboy's are so concerned with what will be that they lose interest in what is. Then they had to eat their loss with their acceptance that it will be 2006 or later before it actually can be mass produced.

      How many sales were lost to the people who thought the PS3 would be out in a year or two???

      This whole console race was initiated by Microsoft, because the perception was that they were
    • So they're developing a new xbox platform already?

      They have to be ready when Nintendo and Sony release their next platforms, even though Sony's platform is the oldest of the 3. Most people are looking at 2005/2006 for the next generation, though it's hard to say as no one's announced a release date yet (though everyone's made some sort of announcement regarding some of their hardware partners).

      I thought one of the nice things about consoles was that they didn't become obsolete technology as quickly as P
  • IBM already took their Power4 and stripped it down for Apple(G5), next logical step is to do the same with the Power5 while ramping the clock speed.

    I imagine that the move by Microsoft in purchasing VirtualPC may be related to this announcement. Take an already proven PC emulator, port it for Xbox2 use.

    • You think all of the PC ports for the XBox 2 are going to run in emulation??? There's no reason that IBM can't produce a x86 chip. The article doesn't even state that much evidence to show that a PowerPC chip will be involved. Come on...

      But if you're a gambling man, I'll take that bet.

      • If they did use VirtualPC I would bet it would be for XBox I games. XBoxII games would run in native PPC mode. What is interesting to me is will MicroSoft port XP to the PPC chip?
        NT was supposed to be multi-platform and XP is built off the NT codebase. Could we see XP for the PPC?
        An alternative could be a hardware translator that converts Intel to PPC. Sort of like the Transmeta chip.
        Could be... Very interesting. The big question is will Microsoft let IBM do the same thing for the G6 chip? Apple could be a

  • Uhh, so which is it? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Monday November 03, 2003 @11:55AM (#7377734) Homepage
    So is IBM "Designing and building" the x-box 2 CPU, or is Microsoft "licensing technology" from them? That's a pretty big friggin difference. And it looks like it's the latter.

    Seeing as IBM does so much research these days, it seems that "licensing technology" could possibly mean something really minor. Well, it could mean almost anything.

    Personally, I predict that the GC2 will be the first Nintendo console to feature backward compatibility, and will also feature an IBM chip. Which would make it really wierd if IBM made the x-box chip as well. But what do I know..
    • ATI is also slated to make processors for both Nintendo and MS.
    • First Nintendo console to feature backward compatibility? The entire GameBoy series is backwards compatible - GameBoy Color runs GameBoy games, GBA runs GBC and GB games...
      • Quite right. I was using the definition of "Console" that excludes handhelds, though. The definition doesn't make much sense to me-- it's all just dedicated game systems, isn't it? But defining "console" as "it plugs into a television and has detatchable controllers" seems to be common these days, and I wound up using it without thinking. Sorry :)
        • You were quite right to do so. Handheld gaming devices are just that; handhelds. Singular: Handheld. They've also been called portable and such, but the companies who have done that have either stopped calling them that, or have gone under, which amounts to much the same thing for our purposes here today.

          Interestingly you can now get a game boy [color] emulator for the game boy advance; not the built-in stuff, but a port of some other emulator. This lets you do neat stuff like store a bunch of games, or s

    • GC2 will be the first Nintendo console to feature backward compatibility

      Well... at least in theory SNES was also compatible with NES games. SNES uses an updated NES CPU and it was originally Nintendo's plan to sell some kind of adapter like Sega's Master System --> Mega Drive or Master System --> Game Gear.
      That adapter was never officially released, but there was an unofficial NES --> SNES adapter called Super 8/Tri-Star.

      and will also feature an IBM chip

      Motorola could also make a PPC chip

  • Better Question: (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by Asprin ( 545477 )

    Why doesn't IBM just cut out the middle-man and get into the console business for themselves?
    • HAH! Big Blue in the console biz? I know, they'll name it OS/3 and it'll be better than all the other consoles, but it'll run like shit on current hardware and it'll have maybe 5 games.

      IBM selling game consoles would be like Apple selling OSX for the x86. There's just too much competition right now for such a huge gamble.
    • Because they can just sell all three companies CPUs for a sure profit. Risking 3 large contracts only to try to compete with them (MS, Sony & Nintendo), in an already well established market is kind of dumb - that's why.
      • IBM's current corporate strategy is to make money off of providing tech services. They have the economies of scale to supply and develop tech for other companies rather than deal directly to the everyday consumer. It's a lower risk position to let other companies do the speculation about consumer trends, and just provide services to the risk takers.
    • They could...

      IBM manufactured the first production runs of the Atari Jaguar. So they have the experience. But, I just don't think they could do it cheaply enough to be viable in this cutthroat market.
      • and that experience probably taught them pretty well that they were in the right place in the console business. Manufacture the parts (or license technology), cash the fat check, and sit back while the company that owns the consoles tries to sell them at a profit, or sell them at a loss and profit from games sales. As it stands, IBM makes a profit from all 3 consoles, regardless of which ones do well, and they have no need to put out a bunch of their own money to make sure that one console does make money.
    • Why doesn't IBM just cut out the middle-man and get into the console business for themselves?

      The hardware is not always sold at a profit. IBM will make money selling componets to Ninendo, MS, or Sony if it can. From IBM's point of view, why change?
      • Hardware is almost never sold for a profit, as far as I know. Most consoles make money from licensing games, and the sales of those games. Most console companies take a loss on the hardware itself. That's exactly what got MS in so much trouble: they had the same model as everyone else, but with no track record. They were bleeding money on the X-Box, but they were still having a hard time luring developers (especially in Japan, where they're still having big problems).

    • Re:Better Question: (Score:5, Funny)

      by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) on Monday November 03, 2003 @02:33PM (#7379168) Homepage
      Why doesn't IBM just cut out the middle-man and get into the console business for themselves?

      Egad, man--imagine it! Big Blue with their own console--hell, just the tag line alone would be enough to induce acute narcolepsy:

      Introducing the new IBM IES/90 Interactive Entertainment System. IBM IES/90: the right solution for your personal entertainment needs.

      (System ships with Advanced Tactical Defensive Missile Systems Operator 1.0. Click here for a list of authorized IES/90 vendors and resellers.)

  • Is the next-gen hardware war heating up?

    Sounds like it's cooling down, for IBM at least...

  • It makes perfect sense (Score:4, Informative)

    by GreatDrok ( 684119 ) on Monday November 03, 2003 @12:29PM (#7378034) Journal
    Why should Xbox2 use x86? The x86 32 bit family will still be around, or a 64 bit decendent anyway, but I think the experience with the Xbox is that building a games system based on commodity PC hardware actually works against you in the long run as it doesn't get cheaper over time in the same way that the more custom designs such as PS2 and GCN have. Besides which, the next Xbox will likely not be a 32 bit chip so it is sensible to move to another platform and use x86 emulation (eg virtual PC/Xbox) to allow the playing of old games. A move to something based on Power5 would likely give the necessary increase in processing grunt to take on the PS3 and that is going to be something MS will really want to do. The only reason the Xbox was slightly more powerful than the PS2 was it was so late.

    Of course, it is still debatable that MS should even bother to do an Xbox2. The move into media PCs, along with a standardisation on games that can run directly from a DVD-ROM rather than installing on the HD would negate the need for the expense of selling an Xbox system. Get a standard PC into the living room and make it play games as well as a console and you would have a winner........
    • ...building a games system based on commodity PC hardware actually works against you in the long run as it doesn't get cheaper over time in the same way that the more custom designs such as PS2 and GCN have.

      What? Are you claiming that x86 chip and mobo prices have remained constant for the last few years? How naive of me to believe that they were getting cheaper over time just because the numbers after the pound signs were shrinking so fast!

      • ...building a games system based on commodity PC hardware actually works against you in the long run as it doesn't get cheaper over time in the same way that the more custom designs such as PS2 and GCN have.

        What? Are you claiming that x86 chip and mobo prices have remained constant for the last few years? How naive of me to believe that they were getting cheaper over time just because the numbers after the pound signs were shrinking so fast!

        Not at all, what happens is that when you go to a shop to buy

        • Not at all, what happens is that when you go to a shop to buy some new kit you end up getting just that; something that is newer and faster than the previous equivalent for the same money. The older stuff just gets discontinued.

          Poppycock. Top of the line Desktop PC hardware is simply getting cheaper over time. You used to pay $3500 for a 386 from Tandy. If you spend that today, you can get a dual processor G4 or Xeon fer chrissakes, AND some addons. And those Tandys weren't the best of the breed eithe

    • Xbox 2 will use x86 because it's the only feasible way to play Xbox 1 games. Seriously, what is going to be able to do software emulation of a 700mhz P3 perfectly enough to handle the variety of Xbox 1 games?

  • Make things short... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 03, 2003 @12:34PM (#7378083)
    1) XBox and PS2 fans: "Nintendo Sucks!"
    2) XBox and Nintendo fans: "PS2 Sucks!"
    3) PS2 and Nintendo fans "XBox Sucks!"

    It's great that I'm a IBM fan and can afford all three consoles :)

    Good night!
    • I'm pretty sure it stems from some desire to justify their purchases.

      Probably like how people with Apple Computers brag about how fast they can run photoshop because there aren't any other programs for them. -Zing!-
  • Imagine the implications of DirectX running on non-Intel CPUs.
  • Will it run OSX? /g5 reference
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • What this means is that the next PS, presumably the next GC (who currently uses IBM chips), and the Xbox2 will all be using IBM chips that will presumably be similar in capability - or at least no one will have a tremendous advantage over anyone else.

    The result? The consoles will have to get an edge over each other in other areas - like having DVR capabilities, better 3d implementation and technologies, online play, and, of course, better games. We will be less likely to face a decision now of 'more good g

  • why Even Microsoft wants G5s [slashdot.org] - and doesn't want Intel to know ;-)
  • According to the Yahoo version [yahoo.com] of the article that I read, The next version of Xbox is expected to be announced in January by Microsoft founder and Chairman Bill Gates and to be on sale next fall ahead of the holidays, according to Doherty..

    So does this mean that we should expect...

    • Xmas 2004: XBox2
    • Xmas 2004: PSP
    • "sometime in 2004": PSX
    • Xmas 2005... if we're lucky: PS3

    'cause if so then I'll need to make sure that I have $299 for the XBox2, $700 for the PSX, $200 for the PSP, and enough time to s

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close