The Next Xbox May Use AMD Chips
Looks like ATI has signed on to create the GPU for the next Xbox console.
It's always fun to read speculation on what's coming in future gaming consoles. Yesterday it was reported that Nvidia signed on to bring Tegra to the next Nintendo handheld system. Today we're hearing that AMD has secured a deal with Microsoft to create the graphics processor for the next Xbox.
But this bit of news shouldn't be surprising: after all, AMD supplied the Xenos GPU for the current Xbox 360. Because of the console's overall performance and success financially, Microsoft is supposedly "keen" on the idea of collaborating with AMD/ATI again for the next generation hardware.
According to Edge Online, Microsoft originally intended to "refresh" the current Xbox 360 next year (2010), but instead decided to hold off on the upgrade until 2012. The site said that ATI's new GPU will allow the Xbox 360 software backwards compatibility, a feature severely lacking in the current console.
Currently Microsoft isn't talking about a new console, but rather is focused on throwing Project Natal on store shelves in Spring 2010. Recent reports indicate that the company will bundle Project Natal with every new Xbox 360 console sold at launch, but will also sell the controller separately for current Xbox 360 owners.
- Apple Shipping Jailbreak-proof iPhones
- Polaroid Will Make Instant Film, Camera Again
- God is Watching: Cinema Warns Torrenting Pirates
- iPhone 'Pwnage' Jailbreak Software Out for 3.1.2
- Internet Addiction Leaves Man Homeless
- Dyson Bladeless Fan Still Really Blows
- Modern Warfare 2 Goggles Are For Perverts
- New Firefox Will Use Accelerometers
- Apple to Unlock iPhone's/Touch's FM Radio
- Teen Set on Fire Over Video Game Debt
- Create Your Dragon Age Character in Advance
- Delta Accused of Hacking Passenger's PC
- Airport Body Scanner Reveals Genitals
- Gamers Turn to Downloads During Recession
- Wristband Wirelessly Tracks Kids, Spouces
- Wal-Mart to Offer Contract-free Cell Phone Plans
- Fugitive Busted Via Facebook Friend Request
- Colorado Boy Stuck in Hot Air Balloon
- Judge: No More Royalties for Ringtones!
ATI is embracing DirectX while Nvidia has repeatedly downplayed new versions. Not suprising that microsoft has a better relationship with ATI.
I could care less about what's in the console as long as the games are good and it's a good value.
well it better be good. *thinking* They better make that power brick smaller. *thinking*
I could care less about what's in the console as long as the games are good and it's a good value.
The expression is "couldn't care less"
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/care.html
Whats that saying..........???
If it aint broken, don't fix it....
Oh yeah...
LOL, oh, wait, it was broke.....hahahahahahahahahahaha
The expression is "couldn't care less"http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/care.html
You're wasting your time, mate. He is likely to repeat the exact same mistake tomorrow, and you will be called a grammar nazi for your trouble.
You mean Sony's I sold a million consoles last month stance? Happy for AMD that they will stay afloat atleast until 2012.
I love my xbox. While I am a little sad they aren't going through with a refresh next year it will be that much better when it does arrive.
I love my xbox. While I am a little sad they aren't going through with a refresh next year it will be that much better when it does arrive.
And your RRoD experince will be better than ever!
Natal release in Spring 2010?
That's wrong! Absolutely no facts confirming that.
I track Natal release date info thoroughly so it looks like the end of 2010:
http://prnatal.com/blog/?p=83
It still can't play Crysis...
...and your point is what exactly? Crysis, unlike Crysis 2, was never coming to any console system to begin with.
Its the PS3 that's lacking backwards compatibility, the 360 does it just fine and does it in software. PS3 on the otherhand has never been able to emmulate even the much less powerful (relative to the original Xbox) PS2. This speaks to the real power differences between the machines.
"Its the PS3 that's lacking backwards compatibility, the 360 does it just fine and does it in software."
WRONG! actually the original ps3(20gig?)had full BC, the slim doesn't. The 360's BC is limited at best, not all titles work.
"This speaks to the real power differences between the machines"
WRONG! it doesn't say shit.
Its the PS3 that's lacking backwards compatibility, the 360 does it just fine and does it in software. PS3 on the otherhand has never been able to emmulate even the much less powerful (relative to the original Xbox) PS2. This speaks to the real power differences between the machines.
I'm sorry, you are completely misinformed. The PS3 can't emulate the PS2 anymore because of a completely different architecture. The first models actually had a complete PS2 processor in it for backwards compatibility purposes, but they had to cut it for cost.
The 360, on the other hand, needs a patch to play a rather paltry list of original xbox games.
Oh, and the PS3 could actually eat the 360 for a late night snack. The 360's processor is actually a dumbed down (and ripped off) PS3 cell processor. Get your facts straight.
No surprise about the potential switch to AMD, they're totally kicking ass in the graphics department lately. Now the CPUs on the other hand . . .
Get your facts straight.
Ok, that didn't quite come out right...
What I mean is that it is a good idea to keep up so you aren't seen as a just some idiot spamming the comments.
Ok, that wasn't much better, but I tried. :-D
i fucking love amd/ati.
I don't care wuts in the Xbox...as long as the girls in the pix above come along with the new Console.
I hope the really beef up the Xbox 360, make it super powerful and increase it's memory while they are at it, not that I give a shit about the actual Xbox but at least the games that come out for the PC will start to improve considering everything is just a fucking Xbox port these days and restricted to its current shitty hardware
I hope console makers will stop using IBM CPUs and go with x86 Intel and AMD next generation. Im sure it will be good for them finacially aswell because they would save on development costs and porting would be easier. Also it would be nice if they werent so stingy with the edram next time. Make it big enough to give 4xAA at 1920x1080.
I'm going to keep things relatively simple while providing (hopefully) enough detail to illustrate my point. So please forgive any oversimplifications.
The 360's CPU is a tricore PPC. The cell is 8 SPE's (one disabled for the PS3) + one PPE (similar to the PPC cores of the 360) largely for task scheduling. Both run at 3.2GHz. In theory, the PS3's Cell can execute 10 simultaneous threads (1 per SPE + 2 per PPE), while the 360's CPU can execute only 6. In reality, one of the SPE's are disabled, and the PPE of the PS3 is mostly relegated to task scheduling. This drops the usable thread count to 7. Even then, the PS3 only nears it's maximum performance with parallel matrix multiplication. The 360's CPU also has architectural limitations to reaching its maximum performance, but it isn't as much weaker in practice as you might think.
The PS3 certainly has more potential to execute physics calculations. I would argue, however, that the 360 makes up for this (at least in part) with a superior graphics capabilities. The PS3's RSX GPU is effectively a Geforce 7800 series chip. The 360's Xenos GPU is effectively an X1900 series chip. Without going into an ATI vs nVidia battle, I'll just state simply that the X1900 series was clearly superior than the GF7800 series.
I would surmise that the 360s architecture is better balanced for current games than the PS3. I base this off the fact that the PS3 has yet to release a title that makes the 360 feel obsolete. The argument that the PS3 is harder to program for is hardly relevant. That simply means that the hardware was too specialized to be adapted (with in a reasonable amount of time) to the task. The 360's more generic (even if weaker) architecture has allowed developers to make better use of the hardware. It seems that, by the time the PS3 is fully exploited, a new, much more powerful Xbox will likely be available.
What I mean is that it is a good idea to keep up so you aren't seen as a just some idiot spamming the comments.
Ok, that wasn't much better, but I tried. :-D
Don't go getting all politically correct on me. Contrary to popular belief, having strong opinions of your own is a good thing. People constantly riding the fence never get to play in the field. Though, it is usually more helpful to be specific with comments (politically correct or otherwise).
Disclaimer: I own none of the current consoles myself, but, I've seen more than enough game play on all three. My gaming systems have been and will remain the PC due to superior hardware and more control options. I was gaming at 1080P+ before HD consoles ever hit the market. :')
This was a bussiness decision, people it has nothing to do with who has currently the fastest GPU in the pc market! Other Nvidia/ATI fanboy arguements are completely irrelevant.
Nvidia scammed MS for the first Xbox. MS will unlikely work with Nvidia again. They switched to ATI for the 360s GPU (xenos), so why are people talking as if they only now switching? They are STAYING with ATI for their GPU, because MS continues to have a good working business relationship with them.
Why the hell are people arguing about PS3 vs 360 vs PC here?! It is completely unrelated, and all the arguments have been exhausted a million times over.
The problem with these consoles these days is that they are the lowest common denominator for game technology. Most games use the consoles as a base for game engine capabilities (with slight tweaks here and there for PC versions) so most PC hardware sits there unused at full, because nowadays the consoles are primary targets for game developers.
The sooner they release the next gen consoles the better, that will raise the bar for game technology and PC hardware will get more use.
ATI is embracing DirectX while Nvidia has repeatedly downplayed new versions. Not suprising that microsoft has a better relationship with ATI.
Not sure if you realize this, but there is bad blood inside of MS in regards to Intel, so this I'm sure plays a good role as well. It's win win and I think closer collaboration between the two will mean good things for all PC consumers as the console stuff is just derivitive from PC tech anyways...
No surprise about the potential switch to AMD, they're totally kicking ass in the graphics department lately.
AMD = ATI
Xbox 360 is powered by ATI
Did I miss something with your post?
Who are those girls in the picture? When I saw them the last thing I was thinking about was AMD, Intel or ATI!
Where's the xbox bashing, Kevin?
I like this pic better
http://media.bestofmicro.com/xbox- [...] 6966-3.jpg
well hopefully the CPU will be cooler to make up for how badly designed the new Xbox will be just like the 360
I'm going to keep things relatively simple while providing (hopefully) enough detail to illustrate my point. So please forgive any oversimplifications.The 360's CPU is a tricore PPC. The cell is 8 SPE's (one disabled for the PS3) + one PPE (similar to the PPC cores of the 360) largely for task scheduling. Both run at 3.2GHz. In theory, the PS3's Cell can execute 10 simultaneous threads (1 per SPE + 2 per PPE), while the 360's CPU can execute only 6. In reality, one of the SPE's are disabled, and the PPE of the PS3 is mostly relegated to task scheduling. This drops the usable thread count to 7. Even then, the PS3 only nears it's maximum performance with parallel matrix multiplication. The 360's CPU also has architectural limitations to reaching its maximum performance, but it isn't as much weaker in practice as you might think.The PS3 certainly has more potential to execute physics calculations. I would argue, however, that the 360 makes up for this (at least in part) with a superior graphics capabilities. The PS3's RSX GPU is effectively a Geforce 7800 series chip. The 360's Xenos GPU is effectively an X1900 series chip. Without going into an ATI vs nVidia battle, I'll just state simply that the X1900 series was clearly superior than the GF7800 series.I would surmise that the 360s architecture is better balanced for current games than the PS3. I base this off the fact that the PS3 has yet to release a title that makes the 360 feel obsolete. The argument that the PS3 is harder to program for is hardly relevant. That simply means that the hardware was too specialized to be adapted (with in a reasonable amount of time) to the task. The 360's more generic (even if weaker) architecture has allowed developers to make better use of the hardware. It seems that, by the time the PS3 is fully exploited, a new, much more powerful Xbox will likely be available.Don't go getting all politically correct on me. Contrary to popular belief, having strong opinions of your own is a good thing. People constantly riding the fence never get to play in the field. Though, it is usually more helpful to be specific with comments (politically correct or otherwise).Disclaimer: I own none of the current consoles myself, but, I've seen more than enough game play on all three. My gaming systems have been and will remain the PC due to superior hardware and more control options. I was gaming at 1080P+ before HD consoles ever hit the market. :')
thank you for education.
to me it just sounds like another win for amd/ati. good for them. nvidia it getting they're ass handed to them on a regular basis now. carma's a bitch.