It will be higher volume than Apple's G5 or IBM pSeries kit. Much higher. IBM have got the fact that their CPUs are going to be in every new console on the first page of every presentation remotely mentioning hardware that they've done at my office. This is just one of the many pronged push that they're adopting against Intel.
Regarding the cache, I'd expect a small amount per core and that 1MB to be L3. I hope I'm wrong, but as you say, it's a little unrealistic currently. IBM are definitely ramping up their CPU offerings massively though.
G5 hasn't been out for a year yet, and it's already at 2.5Ghz. IBM have had dual core in their big tin for longer than that.
Not that we're necessarily talking strictly about G5 here. I doubt if the version in this console will have as much L2 cache as in an Apple workstation. It's perfectly feasible. Cost of the current stuff is irrelevant compared to this kind of mass production.
But they're early kits, to give developers time to get used to the architecture switch. Given that the next Xbox isn't even a twinkle in a chip fabs eye, it's hardly relevant. Microsoft have said that proper kits will be shipped when they're available.
Besides, I doubt they'll be putting workstation class amounts of L2 cache on them, which should allow them to up the clock speeds.
I think you're wrong about the whole 'second place' thing. I believe the Xbox passed the Gamecube at Christmas and has been pulling away ever since (look at the month before the PS2 price drop to see it as leading sales of all three).
Are you sure you're not counting Gameboy sales? If so, then Nintendo is the clear winner, but that's hardly a fair comparison.
Yeah, and the rigid memory size is easier for game developers to optimise for. Xbox only has 64MB, PS2 32MB. Gamecube has somewhere inbetween I believe. Certainly much less than the average PC would require to run something similar.
make sure you've got some loud speakers to overpower the 20+ fans this thing will need to not overheat!
As the CPU doesn't exist yet, and they have full control over the physical specification of the box, that's not really a given. They could just turn the thing into an enormous heatsink, heatpipe, w/e.
audio being coded by the CPU seems like a huge waste too.. why not just include a cheap AC97 audio chip and reduce some of the CPU overhead? I don't know much about audio chips but I can't imagine it would be that hard since it seems every MOBO you buy now has onboard audio (I picked up a mobo for $8.11 that had on-board audio!).
I don't believe that there is such a thing as AC97 for PowerPC. Not that it isn't basically software driven audio anyway. Do you really think it's going to be much of an overhead on a triple core 3.5Ghz SMT CPU?
Also, why would you include a VGA out port? Arent' they trying to keep this thing away from modders? That just incourages it... plus, why use a port that's 3+ decades old.. why not a DVI port?
Why would it encourage modders? It's just a display output... this box is going to be capable of much better resolutions than the average TV is going to be capable of, so why not provide a better port? An easy argument against DVI is lack of market penetration, although as these are still rumours it doesn't actually deny that DVI is there (maybe a DVI port that can be converted to VGA?).
It's just a shame Rebel Strike wasn't much good really.
Having the privilege of owning all three (four?) of the current generation I can't argue that the Cube certainly seems as capable as the Xbox, but no-one's really used that capability, just like the PS2, but the PS2's excuse is that it's so hard to develop for.
One could argue the lack of mature-market aimed titles is the key behind this. The Gamecube lacks exclusives in the genres that have traditionally pushed hardware, like driving, FPS (Metroid is bloody marvellous, but it's not an out and out FPS, and anyone purchasing it expecting that is going to be disappointed).
The Xbox is continually touted as the most impressive simply because it is in practice. It has more texture memory and hardware compression to consistently top the PS2 for looks in cross platform titles, and simply the range of hardware-pushing software that trumps the Gamecube, especially now that so many publishers aren't even bothering with a Gamecube port.
The PSP looks more like the Atari Lynx/Sega Game Gear than anything else I can think of, in terms of (relative to current technology) capabilities, battery life, form factor and screen.
If they weren't broke then could I please have my own reality back?
You're still vulnerable to recent viruses which directly attack your machine through no fault of your own with SP1. Using autopatcher lets you get the relevant fixes (and everything else) offline, before you connect to the internet.
You acknowledge yourself that you're comparing hardware from different eras.... move along.
Plus connections != users. I'm talking about people doing things, not poxy IMAP connections which my VIA mini-ITX could handle. Of course you'd use an x86 for that, it's so trivial a task it's not worth investing in real kit, when multiple x86 cheapy boxes will do.
Digital, lossless duplication, time after time. Combine this with the internet and you've got an anonymous delivery method that is potentially better then their own distribution network, and from which they receive no revenue.
As far as I can see, the latest graphics card costs twice as much as a new console...
I don't think I've ever purchased a new TV or couch because of my console, but if I did I'd have the benefit of something decent sized to watch films and TV on too, not really a major drawback, I'd certainly rather have a 42" TV than an 18" monitor for my PC.
In terms of games numbers, maybe I would have more games on the PC if that many good games ever came out for the damn thing; and there are plenty of console games with massive longevity that is there for a good reason, as opposed to having to go there in order to prop up the PC gaming industry in the monthly gaps between decent releases.
Consoles help programmers, as they're a much bigger market for them to sell to. The PC hardware market has been up its own arse for so long selling unnecessary incremental upgrades (I'm talking massive 66Mhz rises in CPU speeds, releasing 4 different graphics cards within 10% of each other, Hard drives with 5% more storage than the last model), that it deserves to be in a slump. Finally they're innovating now, I feared we'd be stuck with Megahurtz, PCI and AGP for far too long. Face it, anyone using a PC for mainstream tasks don't need the extra 2Ghz that Intel want to sell them, they're bringing it on themselves.
Oh, I don't know about that. I suspect I'll be too busy with Doom 3, Half Life 2, Halo 2 and Far Cry Instincts to worry about another GTA game that really doesn't yet sound like it's done that much to the gameplay. I'll change my mind if there's a solid online mode, but I haven't heard good noises about that yet.
I doubt it. People don't like changing their e-mail address, any more than they like changing their phone number, and anyone stuck with 4MB will find the new 100MB ceiling massively bigger. Yahoo are very effectively protecting their installed userbase.
Slashdot Mirror
I think basic economies of scale will apply here. The Xbox is going to sell in far higher quantities than the G5.
Regarding the cache, I'd expect a small amount per core and that 1MB to be L3. I hope I'm wrong, but as you say, it's a little unrealistic currently. IBM are definitely ramping up their CPU offerings massively though.
Not that we're necessarily talking strictly about G5 here. I doubt if the version in this console will have as much L2 cache as in an Apple workstation. It's perfectly feasible. Cost of the current stuff is irrelevant compared to this kind of mass production.
I don't really care that much. IBM call it something different to Intel. Probably didn't want to be associated with Intels effort.
Besides, I doubt they'll be putting workstation class amounts of L2 cache on them, which should allow them to up the clock speeds.
Because they're talking about a smaller process and a chip that won't even see the light of day for 15 months?
Not forgetting that we're talking about hardware that probably won't hit the market for about 15 months.
Are you sure you're not counting Gameboy sales? If so, then Nintendo is the clear winner, but that's hardly a fair comparison.
Yeah, and the rigid memory size is easier for game developers to optimise for. Xbox only has 64MB, PS2 32MB. Gamecube has somewhere inbetween I believe. Certainly much less than the average PC would require to run something similar.
SMT is IBM's name for Hyperthreading, which is probably an Intel patented term.
Having the privilege of owning all three (four?) of the current generation I can't argue that the Cube certainly seems as capable as the Xbox, but no-one's really used that capability, just like the PS2, but the PS2's excuse is that it's so hard to develop for.
One could argue the lack of mature-market aimed titles is the key behind this. The Gamecube lacks exclusives in the genres that have traditionally pushed hardware, like driving, FPS (Metroid is bloody marvellous, but it's not an out and out FPS, and anyone purchasing it expecting that is going to be disappointed).
The Xbox is continually touted as the most impressive simply because it is in practice. It has more texture memory and hardware compression to consistently top the PS2 for looks in cross platform titles, and simply the range of hardware-pushing software that trumps the Gamecube, especially now that so many publishers aren't even bothering with a Gamecube port.
If they weren't broke then could I please have my own reality back?
You're still vulnerable to recent viruses which directly attack your machine through no fault of your own with SP1. Using autopatcher lets you get the relevant fixes (and everything else) offline, before you connect to the internet.
I of course meant Microsoft's Xbox, way to blow a pun fr0d.
Plus connections != users. I'm talking about people doing things, not poxy IMAP connections which my VIA mini-ITX could handle. Of course you'd use an x86 for that, it's so trivial a task it's not worth investing in real kit, when multiple x86 cheapy boxes will do.
Yep, take it past ten concurrent users and I'd take the E450 every time.
Digital, lossless duplication, time after time. Combine this with the internet and you've got an anonymous delivery method that is potentially better then their own distribution network, and from which they receive no revenue.
It doesn't do RAID, but it does have built in UPS. Oh, and it plays music, nice side effect.
I don't think I've ever purchased a new TV or couch because of my console, but if I did I'd have the benefit of something decent sized to watch films and TV on too, not really a major drawback, I'd certainly rather have a 42" TV than an 18" monitor for my PC.
In terms of games numbers, maybe I would have more games on the PC if that many good games ever came out for the damn thing; and there are plenty of console games with massive longevity that is there for a good reason, as opposed to having to go there in order to prop up the PC gaming industry in the monthly gaps between decent releases.
Consoles help programmers, as they're a much bigger market for them to sell to. The PC hardware market has been up its own arse for so long selling unnecessary incremental upgrades (I'm talking massive 66Mhz rises in CPU speeds, releasing 4 different graphics cards within 10% of each other, Hard drives with 5% more storage than the last model), that it deserves to be in a slump. Finally they're innovating now, I feared we'd be stuck with Megahurtz, PCI and AGP for far too long. Face it, anyone using a PC for mainstream tasks don't need the extra 2Ghz that Intel want to sell them, they're bringing it on themselves.
Oh, I don't know about that. I suspect I'll be too busy with Doom 3, Half Life 2, Halo 2 and Far Cry Instincts to worry about another GTA game that really doesn't yet sound like it's done that much to the gameplay. I'll change my mind if there's a solid online mode, but I haven't heard good noises about that yet.
It seems ok on my cellphone....
I doubt it. People don't like changing their e-mail address, any more than they like changing their phone number, and anyone stuck with 4MB will find the new 100MB ceiling massively bigger. Yahoo are very effectively protecting their installed userbase.
Well done slashdot, Apple just open the European music store and you post this day old story.