-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rumor: ATI already won next gen Xbox deal
- Thread starter TheOddOne
- Start date
Onix said:True, to an extent.
nVidia doesn't make the RSX. Sony not only owns the IP, but actually fabs the chips as well. As long as nVidia can make the design, it doesn't really matter what happens to them after.
nVidia's recent designs (the entire GT200 line) have been a disaster -- huge chips that have had poor manufacturing yields, leaving nVidia unable to make a profit on the GTX 285 even when selling it at over $300. This, of course, is why they just dropped the GTX 260, 275, and 285 from market as they just can't profitably compete with ATI's 58xx until the GT300 models come out. Rumor has it, though, that nVidia is still having major problems with the 40nm process.
I hope they get it together, as it would be terrible to let one company dominate the market. In the meantime, I just picked up an XFX 5850...
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Fersis said:
He wrote part of the renderer of Jak & Dexter too (I think it was the foreground objects part).
I think this one is fairly believable also.
I'm sure MS wants to avoid the complaining about BC as well as the fact they probably don't want to work with nVidia :lol (also vice versa)
Judging by ATI's latest cards it seems a no-brainer.
Also doesn't the 360 have the highest attach rate of games per console for this generation? That certainly should count for something BC-wise.
I'm sure MS wants to avoid the complaining about BC as well as the fact they probably don't want to work with nVidia :lol (also vice versa)
Judging by ATI's latest cards it seems a no-brainer.
Also doesn't the 360 have the highest attach rate of games per console for this generation? That certainly should count for something BC-wise.
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
Yoboman said:
Not atm they are not.
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
Yoboman said:
Have a skim through my thread - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=376346, it should help get you up to speed.
I'm a big fan of Nvidia, I just hope their next big GPU is a stonker and helps bring them back in the game.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Let's be honest. If they do go BC it will only be so they can sell digital copies. They don't make any money on the secondary market.Vormund said:
godhandiscen
There are millions of whiny 5-year olds on Earth, and I AM THEIR KING.
Unless you got a GTX285 There is no category on which ATI didn't offer a better videocard priced similarly. That is what is hurting Nvidia, that they are not competent in the sub-$200 market which is where the money is made.Yoboman said:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
goomba said:
No, there is something better for them (backward compatibility wise too)... (same people who worked on Xenon/Waternoose)
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...AN/"International+Business+Machines"+AND+SIMD
http://aiw2.uspto.gov/.DImg?Docid=us20080082783ki&PageNum=9&IDKey=34CEFFF8C473&ImgFormat=tif
http://aiw2.uspto.gov/.DImg?Docid=us20080082783ki&PageNum=3&IDKey=34CEFFF8C473&ImgFormat=tif
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
goomba said:
If you learned to code very high performance engines on CELL then you have learned some lessons on parallel processing that are beyond managing a Local Store and using SPU ASM/Instrinsics... IMHO.
Still, would I prefer a CELLv2 with real caches that would allow at least 256 KB of them to be locked to also allow for easy backward compatibility while giving an easier platform to code for to developers? Yes... but I think PS4 will have LRB and an Intel x86 core as main CPU.
Panajev2001a said:
I'm sure many developers would open champagne bottles for a system with an x86 core and LRB. The good thing is that they are already very familiar with x86 and Intel has already started the evangelization of LRB, so in three years it should be a familiar scenario for any studio, which would make the transition easier.
Given the state of industry, I'm pretty sure that top priority is avoiding alien architectures and make things easier for studios and publishers, so I think you are spot on your prediction Panajev. The times where companies could put some strange architecture to ransom developers on it died with PS3 failure to follow PS2 legacy.
charlequin
Banned
SapientWolf said:
I am quite glad that many game executives are apparently not as myopic as the people who push this meme about BC. :-/
intheinbetween
Member
pr0cs said:
pretty much
btw: http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/f...d-make-its-own-cpu-for-next-xbox/69582/?biz=1
SimpleDesign
Member
And what do you think will power the next Xbox?Panajev2001a said:
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
Hopefully they dont launch until any and all heating problems are 100 percent solved. Next gen hardware is gonna be a nightmare to try to cool. This gen's hardware is still running hotter than it should.
FunnyBunny
Member
I envision the XBOX becoming the gaming equivalent of a PC. I know it sounds silly (because PC's play games), but let me explain.
NXE is essentially the operating system (like Windows). As Microsoft integrates more features (Netflix, Facebook, etc), the less likely it is to make significant changes moving forward. What it has works too well. Non-gamers are even familiar with the dashboard; my non-gamer wife navigates it flawlessly.
Using a highly upgraded version of the 360's current chipset also makes sense. If I buy a new computer, I expect to install software I already own and use (Quicken, for example). If I buy a new XBOX - especially a console with using similar design - I expect to play my favorite games. That includes XBLA titles.
When I buy the next XBOX, I want it to feel as if I'm buying a super-charged version of what I currently own. Sure, there will be new features... but I am tired of each generation abandoning what came before it.
I don't have to re-learn a new web browser each time I buy a new computer and I can use iTunes on any PC I come across. If XBOX is a proper brand, I should be able to play XBOX games on all XBOX's.
NXE is essentially the operating system (like Windows). As Microsoft integrates more features (Netflix, Facebook, etc), the less likely it is to make significant changes moving forward. What it has works too well. Non-gamers are even familiar with the dashboard; my non-gamer wife navigates it flawlessly.
Using a highly upgraded version of the 360's current chipset also makes sense. If I buy a new computer, I expect to install software I already own and use (Quicken, for example). If I buy a new XBOX - especially a console with using similar design - I expect to play my favorite games. That includes XBLA titles.
When I buy the next XBOX, I want it to feel as if I'm buying a super-charged version of what I currently own. Sure, there will be new features... but I am tired of each generation abandoning what came before it.
I don't have to re-learn a new web browser each time I buy a new computer and I can use iTunes on any PC I come across. If XBOX is a proper brand, I should be able to play XBOX games on all XBOX's.
brendanrfoley said:
I suspect that's the plan for both MS and Sony. I highly doubt either will throw away what they have.
From an interface POV, I suspect their next systems will be an evolution of what we see now. Granted, they may change the look a bit, but the functionality and feature-set will be an evolution where possible.
FunnyBunny
Member
Onix said:
Thank goodness. Each console is an investment now. My 360, XBLA titles, games library and hard drive are worth well over a thousand dollars. Starting over - especially with disc-based mediums - isn't justifiable anymore.
Not to me, at least.
I remember that. The opinion was by nAo/Nostromo, about using an improved Cell with a 2011 GPU: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=50037FirewalkR said:Regarding the Cell2+LRB hypothesis, I remember asking about this quite some time ago at B3D and someone (experienced, like nAo/Nostromo,DeanA,DeanoC, perhaps even our own Panajevbut I can't recall for sure) said it would be extremely unlikely given quite some overlap in functionality, meaning you would have quite different microarchitectures (low vs big-endian, x86vsPPC) being used and you could run certain code in either chip. And devs seem to be having a pretty hard time (though possibly quite fun for the hardcore) this gen already.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
LOL at cell being in the next gen Xbox or any future mainstream consumer electronic device(besides PS4) for that matter.
Opus Angelorum
Member
Opus Angelorum
Member
Slayer-33 said:
Indeed, along with IBM.
Not that I fully understand all of this, but I was under the impression that concerns about backward compatibility when it comes to Xbox 360 (and Xbox Live Arcade) titles were, basically, little to no concern, due to Direct X usage or whatever else is running 360 gaming on a software / programming level. That because Direct X and whatnot handle everything instead of games being programmed directly to the hardware, that so long as Direct X (or whatever) is present in the new platform, that everything should (in theory) go smoothly.
I mean, that's the way things work on the PC side, right? You've got Direct X or OpenGL that serves as the middleman between the games and the hardware, and so the games really don't care so much what hardware exists so long as (a) it is supported by Direct X / OpenGL and (b) it's powerful enough.
That, if anything, is one of the major benefits that console gaming can receive from the PC gaming mentality, because really, games should not be tied to specific pieces of hardware. And I think there's a different mentality between on-disc games and digital downloads, where consumers are going to be FAR harder to convince that digital downloads can't be moved to a new console without anarchy breaking out. No way do I see a new Xbox coming out that can't play the current generation of Xbox Live Arcade games, and I'll be shocked if it also doesn't play 360 games. Sony may or may not be stupid enough to try that, but no way is Microsoft going to abandon that stuff.
OS / software / hardware for console gaming is evolving into something far different than it used to be, and I think we're reaching the point where the idea of throwing all three out with the jump to a new hardware platform is becoming an idea of the past. Not that I expect the current 360 interface to be moved over just as it is to whatever new Xbox comes along, but I don't expect to see a total rewrite of the interface, and I certainly expect to see elements like Avatars come along for the ride.
I mean, that's the way things work on the PC side, right? You've got Direct X or OpenGL that serves as the middleman between the games and the hardware, and so the games really don't care so much what hardware exists so long as (a) it is supported by Direct X / OpenGL and (b) it's powerful enough.
That, if anything, is one of the major benefits that console gaming can receive from the PC gaming mentality, because really, games should not be tied to specific pieces of hardware. And I think there's a different mentality between on-disc games and digital downloads, where consumers are going to be FAR harder to convince that digital downloads can't be moved to a new console without anarchy breaking out. No way do I see a new Xbox coming out that can't play the current generation of Xbox Live Arcade games, and I'll be shocked if it also doesn't play 360 games. Sony may or may not be stupid enough to try that, but no way is Microsoft going to abandon that stuff.
OS / software / hardware for console gaming is evolving into something far different than it used to be, and I think we're reaching the point where the idea of throwing all three out with the jump to a new hardware platform is becoming an idea of the past. Not that I expect the current 360 interface to be moved over just as it is to whatever new Xbox comes along, but I don't expect to see a total rewrite of the interface, and I certainly expect to see elements like Avatars come along for the ride.
tinfoilhatman said:
While I don't think it's likely to be in the nextBox, I wouldn't rule it out entirely. It will come down to costs, and strategic value. With the 360, MS gained a nice lead over the PS3 due to launching first and having a better pricepoint. This lead to devs using it as the lead platform. That is obviously not guaranteed for the next console gen.
If MS is under the impression it may not have that same advantage, the strategy gets a bit interesting. Due to the nature of current transistor tech, everyone is obviously going to use an even more parallelized CPU than they did this gen. With that comes a lot of complexity for devs. Assuming again that MS has no reason to think nextBox will automatically be the lead development platform, strategically, MS will have to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of going with something different. It is quite possible they may feel it's in their best interest to go with something quite similar to PS4, as it will help preclude serious issues with porting in the event PS4 is the lead. They were obviously quite happy with the problems PS3 has had with multiplatform ports, and similarly, would like to avoid being being on the receiving end of it next gen.
As for mainstream CE devices, that too remains to be seen. Again, it will come down to price. In certain CE segments we are actually moving to a point were a powerful CPU would be beneficial, though again it will come down to price.
For example, look at the trend Televisions and set-top boxes are moving in. Consumers are demanding more and more diverse content available to them. Devices are now streaming content from a variety of web sources, playing back networked or USB content, etc. Several devices are even using things like Yahoo widgets. Having a single processor that can handle numerous open tasks, including the potential for upgrades, is the direction we are likely heading in. Again though, it matters how pricing works (and that includes more than just physical chip costs).
intheinbetween
Member
regarding the BC issue for the next XBOX, iirc, Microsoft paid ATI to develop Xenos and owns the rights to the chip, it's not the same situation they had with NVIDIA and the original XBOX; in which they didn't own the rights of the GPU (or the CPU made by Intel), so they had to pay royalities to NVIDIA in order to make use of the BC.
afaik, both Xenon and Xenos' designs are owned by MS, not ATI, so they can make use of anything related to them for their next system.
afaik, both Xenon and Xenos' designs are owned by MS, not ATI, so they can make use of anything related to them for their next system.