-ImaginaryInsider
Member
They do, but there are numerous differences. MS as a company is very profitable, and the 360 has been turning a profit most of its life and massively grew its Xbox 1 userbase. Xbox doesn't have to pay anything back to MS.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Xbox 3 Rumor: Dev Kit Silicon In Prod, IBM CPU/HD 7000 Series GPU, 2013 Release
- Thread starter McHuj
- Start date
They do, but there are numerous differences. MS as a company is very profitable, and the 360 has been turning a profit most of its life and massively grew its Xbox 1 userbase. Xbox doesn't have to pay anything back to MS.
Melchiah
Member
Sony certainly didn't need to "invest" 4 billion dollars, when they started from scratch with the PS1, against two competitors as well.
As for the other part, like I said before:
Now they have few more internal development studios, and a couple of relatively strong franchises of their own, that they can carry on to the next generation.
In a sense, they had to rebuild the brand, after the image had been tarnished.
Yet the Xbox department is still on the red. If your point of view applies to MS, would it apply to Sony if PS4 turns out be a success, eventhough PS3 was a money drain?
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
Yet there is no Xbox department, cause its lumped into their Entertainment division... The 360 has been profitable for a while now. If the PS3 had improved the brand from the PS2, it would apply, but thats just not the case.
Melchiah
Member
Potato, potaeto.
http://venturebeat.com/2011/11/15/the-making-of-the-xbox-part-2/
PS3 didn't improve the brand, but they've managed to shake most of the negativity away, and grow their internal studios in the meanwhile.
Isn't Sony Pictures dead? Sony mobile phones are in very very bad position, Sony TV's too. They won't die anytime soon, but they are going downwards. If Samsung released console they would defeat them on all fronts I think.
Melchiah
Member
Where would Samsung get games the other competitors don't have?
They could do something similar to MS. Give money to couple good studios for couple exclusives, and in meantime buy couple in process for next few years. No need to go crazy like Sony, just bought exclusives for start.
Judging by their phones, MS and Sony would get slaughter in terms of tech.
I think they'd look at previous efforts by companies like Panasonic and decide against it.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Kinect will be in. 100% certainty here.
They've probably already got their next life extending peripheral in R&D for Fusion.
They've probably already got their next life extending peripheral in R&D for Fusion.
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
Since your rehashing ancient arguments, MS also spent an additional billion setting up Xbox Live which part of that figure and was obviously also a planned on long term investment. The PS3 is a great console, but it hurt the brand, which is the exact opposite of the 360, which is why they aren't comparable. If you want to learn more about how Sony/MS/Nintendo fiscal statements work, search for a poster named "Arne"... I promise I'm not making it up.
Buddha Beam
Banned
You'll see them ALL pile on the console bandwagon this generation, probably after Apple releases a TV/revised set top box. Everything will be downloadable though, and possibly integrating a service like OnLive.
This will be the last generation of consoles as we know them.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
There's a little movie called "The Amazing Spider-Man" coming out this summer.
Their top-of-the-line phone's processor is still outrun by Apple's.
pieatorium
Member
Doesn't Samsung make Apples processors?
DX12 will be available when next generation of GPUs hit the market and that is late 2013 or early 2014. (Maxwell comes 2014 not sure about AMDs chips)
Those new architectures have been under design phase for years now and they should have pretty undestanding know what they will be able to do with them.
Also current gen of GPUs are already quite decent in ray tracing and next generation should be a lot faster.
This paper/video should give the answer. (subpixel polygons are smaller than pixel and drop performance quite badly with current gen GPUs.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2012/jan/31/xbox-720-rumours
Collection of the rumours onto one page.
Collection of the rumours onto one page.
Another reason why I think the next Xbox is coming out next year is based on Call of Duty. The Microsoft exclusive on map packs expire this year and the way I see it is that Microsoft will be alright with getting map packs in the 1st half of 2013 and in the Fall of 2013 they can launch the next Xbox with Call of Duty being a launch title.
jeff_rigby
Banned
IBM and Stacking chips This generation 3D stacking with a unique feature, gluing layers together with special glue to dissipate heat.
Possibly Sony is waiting for the above at 20nm and Xbox using the same at 28nm or some combination of the two. A wafer layer containing 2 gigs of memory would be exactly the same process for both PS4 and next Xbox...IBM, Sony and Microsoft could be sharing parts of the 3D stack wafer designs with each other.
Interesting design with twist if you think about it. IF GPU, memory and CPU were in one chip, they generating the most heat and needing the most interconnects can be at the top in direct contact with the heat sink with interface chips like networking and southbridge at the bottom resulting in fewer connections to the motherboard resulting in less production cost and greater reliability.
Possibly Sony is waiting for the above at 20nm and Xbox using the same at 28nm or some combination of the two. A wafer layer containing 2 gigs of memory would be exactly the same process for both PS4 and next Xbox...IBM, Sony and Microsoft could be sharing parts of the 3D stack wafer designs with each other.
Interesting design with twist if you think about it. IF GPU, memory and CPU were in one chip, they generating the most heat and needing the most interconnects can be at the top in direct contact with the heat sink with interface chips like networking and southbridge at the bottom resulting in fewer connections to the motherboard resulting in less production cost and greater reliability.
You can't possibly believe that the next set of home consoles will have that.
IBM and Stacking chips This generation 3D stacking with a unique feature, gluing layers together with special glue to dissipate heat.
This was discussed as a possibility in the WiiU speculation thread.
Considering Nintendo's pursuit in keeping consoles small, as well as the vague
wording IBM used to describe the WiiU CPU.
Let them so their dreams are crushed when it never comes or it will cost $1999
Price and hopes of a high tech console aside...
The 3M and IBM pressrelease is dated 6 months ago, it states that there will be a joint venture to start planning to develop a potential adhesive that could be used to glue these chips together. It's going to be a long while before something like that hits consumers.
People are non-ironically discussing the merits of the Wii U potentially having this? :lol
NemesisPrime
Banned
Why?
jeff_rigby
Banned
It's a logical progression from the last Xbox refresh which had RAM attached electronically on the top of the CPU and packaged in a heat sink compatible shell.
There is nothing technologically advanced in this....it's a logical progression using TSV, it's nothing like the Intel FinFETs going to be used in next generation 22nm. If this is 28nm and Intel literature seems to indicate issues going to 22nm that they are addressing with FinFETs then 28nm is a hump in the road that IBM is stalled at but appears to be bypassing issues using this stacking process.
For Sony, Microsoft and WiiU (may be too early to use this process) it solves manufacturing issues as well as reducing capacitance which can allow a reduction in Vcc making the chips more efficient.
McHuj
Member
The stacking technologies will really help with very large dies by allowing the manufacture to lower costs by producing smaller ones and stacking them to get the same performance as large a die but at a lower cost and much better yields.
However, I don't believe the next gen consoles will have large dies to begin with so I don't think this 3D stacking would give them significant savings (if any).
However, I don't believe the next gen consoles will have large dies to begin with so I don't think this 3D stacking would give them significant savings (if any).
jeff_rigby
Banned
Remember it's two large wafers produced by two different foundries are going to be combined (maybe three with memory).
It does mention Game Consoles....Is IBM expecting 100 layer game console chips or is the article taking license to draw our attention, 100 layers and 1000 times faster are both insane claims. 5 layers 10 times faster is a practical reality today.
I get your point that modern SOC is not much different from the process in the article I quoted but remember there are two foundries (Global Foundries AMD offshoot producing the AMD GPU) mentioned producing the IBM (CPU) OBAN chip and the method they are to be combined has not been addressed. So two wafers produced by two different foundries are going to be combined...that's not traditional SOC..sounds and I imagine it looks more like my quoted article.
That the chip is named Oban which is a Japanese name for a large stamped coin might indicate Sony-Toshiba involvement.
1) "The earliest ôban had no inscription" Silicon wafers start with no inscriptions, they are blank and are written on.
2) "Weight 165.28 grammes" this could be a subtle reference to the 28nm process.
3) Goto is a popular game
4) "Large stamped piece" is self explaining
iamshadowlark
Banned
Any body who thinks Samsung could come in and make any considerable headroom in the console space in one gen is delirious. Let alone coming close to sony.
This is more about using fewer individual packages, and smaller circuit boards, to carry more silicon logic. Reduced unit size in exchange for increased power density, reduced yields and higher costs.
This is an answer to rack server problems, where unit size is at a premium, but nobody minds 10000rpm fans and high initial price tags. It doesn't immediately apply to the needs of consumer electronics.
Exactly. If cost and power budgets already keep the chips small enough to build them in a completely traditional fashion, stacking them is merely an extra expense with little benefit.McHu said:
Xbox eDRAM and RSX on-package memory are cost savings because they keep the memory traces off the circuit board. But they are still side-by-side on a plane. Just on the chip package plane, not the board plane. This isn't quite comparable to proper chip stacking.
Xbox 1 was a sunk cost, not an economic loss. After 10 years of people beating the drum, I really wish people would act like they have a brain and try to get some understanding of what this term means and how it applies to Microsoft getting into the console race.
There is no scorecard that measures how profitable the Xbox project is when you compare the current Xbox financials with what it cost them to get into the console race. Saying that the Xbox project is overall unprofitable because they haven't made back the money they spent to get into the race, has no basis in economic or financial reality because the initial costs are considered sunk costs.
They only thing that matters to investors and Microsoft management is that they turn profit on a quarterly and fiscal year basis. The fact that they put 5 billion dollars down to get into the race 10 years ago matters to no one that is a stakeholder in Microsoft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs
There is no scorecard that measures how profitable the Xbox project is when you compare the current Xbox financials with what it cost them to get into the console race. Saying that the Xbox project is overall unprofitable because they haven't made back the money they spent to get into the race, has no basis in economic or financial reality because the initial costs are considered sunk costs.
They only thing that matters to investors and Microsoft management is that they turn profit on a quarterly and fiscal year basis. The fact that they put 5 billion dollars down to get into the race 10 years ago matters to no one that is a stakeholder in Microsoft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs
jeff_rigby
Banned
If the GPU wafer produced by Global foundries can be tested or enough on the wafer spot tested to insure quality before installing the GPU wafer with the IBM CPU wafer then reduced yields are not an issue.
Shorter connections reduce capacitance which can allow lower Vcc which reduces heat and increases efficiency. The combination of both 28nm and lower Vcc could allow both GPU and CPU in one package.
Everything in one package reduces labor costs. So far a win-win-win. 4 layers with the bottom layer having Southbridge, USB, programmable DSP, Audio, Video and pin count for the OBAN chip to mother board can decrease thereby increasing reliability (remember the temp cycling failures).
A detailed description of issues and advantages would give the above more weight. IBM is saying that 2013 will see the first Stacked wafer 3D rather than "apartment building" 3D.http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=458527 said:
What?
I mean, I agree Sony is in deep shit. but Samsung releasing console? Not in million years. They focus on hardware, not a software, and it is software that drives the console.
Samsung + Google + Cloud Gaming
iamshadowlark
Banned
=vast majority of people still buying playstations, xboxs, and nintendos.
There's a percentage chance that chips will be damaged in the stacking process, and there's a chance for misalignment "defects" on the individual pieces that prevent them from working, even though they would have passed as standalone chips. That's what I was going for, not the base chip yield. I agree that dead chips should never enter the stacking process.
The power reduction would only apply to the interface parts, not to the logic portions of the chip.jeff_rigby said:
Which brings me to another issue that hasn't been properly considered: size mismatches between layers. All of IBM's presentations assume all chips within a stack are of the same size and shape. Which would mean you'd have to fill the simple I/O layer with lots of dead space to make it fit the other layers.jeff_rigby said:
Time will tell.
Never been fond of Sony franchises, hated anything MS and loved Nintendo.
Now I love Uncharted, have several XBOXs and a Windows phone, finally sold my Wii and will not get a new one and barely plays 3DS.
I love games and I will support the companies that provide me games I like
Console world doesn't really work like rest of the industry.
McHuj
Member
That's true. It all depends on the yields for each process. If you have poor manufacturing
yields for very large chips it may make sense to make a 3D stack of smaller chips. The overall yield of that process has potential to be better than that of the large die. The smaller the initial chip, the less sense it takes to stack. See slides: 8-10
jeff_rigby
Banned
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=37578976&postcount=1549
Of note is a PDF from the April GSA global memory conference that shows 3D stacked and Ultra wide 3D stacked memory attached to logic in Game Console SOCs manufactured in 2013-2014.
In a AMD Fusion APU both the X86 CPU (in our rumored PS4 2 CPU cores and 400 GPU cores) and GP GPU can be used as a CPU. Combined they exceed the performance of 24-30 Cell SPUs and with other efficiencies discussed may be 113% more efficient at some tasks....that's equal to 60 SPUs or at some tasks 1200 times faster than a X86 processor alone. Far from weak this supports another model (CPU bound UE4) for games. (Example: bundled Ray tracing for lighting)
This is why I think rumors of Xbox 720 having 2 GPUs suggest Microsoft is also going to have a Fusion CPU-GPU plus second GPU. 4 X86 or 16 PPC or even 24 SPUs pale in comparison to a Fusion CPU-GPU.
Early leaks only mentioned one or both might go with AMD X86 processors and AMD GPUs. Without the Fusion of the two it does not make sense, PPUs + GPGPU or Cell + GPGPU makes more sense. My bad for not being up on AMD Fusion (HSA) & Fabric computing and what it brings to the table. Nvidia is combining an ARM CPU core with a GPGPU to offer the same Fusion and resulting efficiencies.
It's possible that IBM is providing a PPU + AMD GPU fusion chip, AMD has said this is possible for a ARM + AMD fusion or any CPU.
The OBAN mentioned as being used by IBM to produce the Xbox 720 can be what it was named for, a blank that is written on or rather a LARGE substrate with bumps upon which 3D stacked and 3D wafers are 2.5D attached. With proper software design tools and standards (IBM, Global Foundries and Samsung) for wafer sub assemblies it should be very easy to design custom SOC without large lead times. AMD has been working on this for 5 years.
This is starting in 2012 with full production scheduled for 2013.
OBAN Japanese Coin
PPUs do not require a redesign to be used in a Fusion APU but Cell's ring cache will require a redesign, an older heterogeneous (PPU + SPUs) inside a modern Heterogeneous Fusion design with Fabric computing memory model creates issues.
Wikipedia on SOC a must read. Slightly out of date as it doesn't take into account 3D wafer stacking and it's impact on SOC.
Wikipedia article on FPGA (glue logic and configuration after testing a wafer, Security and more)
FPGA is the Programmable logic array mentioned by the Sony CTO for Coming Playstation Tech. The smaller the array the faster it can run (heat again) and it also benefits from a HSA design where A CPU can load pre-configured designs into the FPGA dynamically as well as (same model with a HSA GPU) pre-fetch data using the branch prediction abilities of the CPU. (Both PPU and X86 have branch prediction abilities, a SPU does not. This may have been why a PPU was included in the Cell with SPUs.)
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Alas. A Fusion CPU-GPU combo is not functionally equivalent to a fat muti-core CPU setup. While the GPU part of the combo surely beats everything else in flops, 16 CPU cores are 16 CPU cores, and there are workloads that would benefit from that and not so much from a GPGPU. Question is, what ms/sony deem important for their upcoming setups. Clearly, if it's flops then 16 CPU cores are a waste compared to a Fusion setup. If it's something else then Fusion might not cut it.
Dear god, pls, let MS delay til 2014 and deliver the messiah of beastly consoles.
jeff_rigby
Banned
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=1549
Of note is a PDF from the April GSA global memory conference that shows 3D stacked and Ultra wide 3D stacked memory attached to logic in Game Console SOCs manufactured in 2013-2014.
You are also missing this:
It makes sense given standardized building blocks mentioned above in the quote to have a design tool in place to make a blank substrate (Oban) with bumps and traces to allow the building blocks to be attached. This can reduce the time to market and allow for tweeking the design which must be the case as there are rumors of the Oban 720 chip being produced two months ago but redesign rumors last month. This is not possible any other way.
And when I quoted and used LARGE Oban substrate as a descriptor we could have a SOC that's huge and explains how Heat is going to be dissipated. Motherboard complexity is reduced and we might see some of the game consoles manufactured in the US. Again with labor costs as they are only a huge SOC with most of the Game console in one chip could the rumors of Xbox720 being made in Texas be possible.
True, General Purpose PC designs are not game console designs. This was my original reason for not believing a X86 would replace Cell or PPU. I've not read anything that indicates the AMD x86-GPU fusion won't work and there is a rumor that the A8 APU Fusion (4 steamroller X86) - GPU + southern islands GPU rumored to be in PS4 Developer machines has changed and is now 2 energy efficient Jaguar X86 without FPU and with 2 megs of cache each not 4 more powerful X86 CPUs.blu said:
Or IOS is simply more efficient than Android due to the fact its designed specifically for one line of phones.. Iphone 4S specs certainly don't look too impressive in comparison to Galaxy SII outside of its better GPU.
Galaxy SII:
CPU - 1.2Ghz A9
GPU - Mali-400 MP4 275Mhz (9.9Gflops)
RAM - 1GB
Iphone 4S:
CPU - 800Mhz A9
GPU - PowerVR SGX543MP 200Mhz (12.8Gflops)
RAM - 512MB
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll