Topic: Could the next Game Boy ditch the ARM architecture for x86?

[hypersonic5]

Check this out. It is Via's recently announced ultra-small x86 processor. Not only is this thing fast(1 Ghz with lots of built-in instructions for stuff like mutimedia etc.), but it only put out around 7W of heat! Wow! For comparison, a Pentium 4 puts out about 90W of heat(This is from what I remember, might be incorrect, but I'm sure its close).

The first thing that came to my mind when I saw this thing being announced a few weeks ago was, "Wow! Imagine this thing powering the next Game Boy! With a nice ATi graphics chipset this thing would probably run better than a Gamecube!"

Now there are a number of reasons for Nintendo to use a mini-x86 proc for the next Game Boy. First of all, it is the platform most developers are familiar with. This in turn means that there would be more PC developers and those developers that are more experienced with programming with x86(The types of procs all Wintel machines use) to the next Game Boy. Also this would mean even more games. If you think the GBA has a lot of games now, imagine the chaos as literally thousands of developers publish games for it. Another reason why using this chip or something similar would be good is the sheer power. I know that Mhz does not always equal performance, but Via's processors have been pretty good so far, especially for their size and low heat output.  I think that 1 Ghz Eden CPU would probably equal an 800 Mhz or so Celeron. Then again it has those built in multimedia instructions like Coolstream and Vinyl Audio that could handle things better than a stock Celeron. In any case, the processor is probably faster than Gamecube or Xbox's chips, even though it might not be optimized for gaming as much as those processors are. But imagine the kind of power this thing can put out when coupled with a high end 3D ATi graphics processor. PSP eat your heart out!

Although the only thing I see that culd be a downside to this is that x86 based processors are not compatible with the ARM type that the Game Boy systems use. This isn't a problem if Nintendo would just write a software emulator that would be stored on the system's internal memory.


w00t first post!

[Koopa Troopa]

The biggest problem, besides the x86's convoluted architecture, would probably be the price, I'm willing to bet it is pretty expensive.

Quote
Although the only thing I see that culd be a downside to this is that x86 based processors are not compatible with the ARM type that the Game Boy systems use. This isn't a problem if Nintendo would just write a software emulator that would be stored on the system's internal memory.

Well, the GBA is backward compatible because it has two processors, the main ARM chip, and then a second for GB/GBC(a Z80 "clone", I believe). So if the ARM chip became inexpensive and small enough they could do the same thing with the next GB.    

[KDR_11k]

> But imagine the kind of power this thing can put out when coupled with a high end 3D ATi graphics processor.

This is where the problem lies. Your CPU might be fast, but modern GPUs eat TONS of power. I heard the GF2MX ate 4W, but a modern r300 has something like 50W and the GFFX reaches the area of 100W!

[Koopa Troopa]

That is true, but I'm sure a viable alternative could be found. Nintendo usually has custom chips made anyway, so I doubt we'll see any of this off the shelf stuff in any of Nintendo's consoles.

You can bet if Microsoft made a hand-held this mini x86 would be in there

[Grey Ninja]

I swear that some people just have no sense of style or design.  Even the idea of putting an x86 CPU in a GameBoy strikes me as vile and hideous.

I am not familiar with too many systems, but I know the GBA inside out, and I find that it's simply a masterpiece of hardware design.  Such a masterpiece wouldn't be possible with an x86 processor.  You would have messy DOS style code that doesn't do anyone any good.  Oh, I am sure that Nintendo would make it nice and all, but the x86 is seriously a REALLY horrid little chip.  There are plenty of better things out there I assure you.

But seriously, what's the big deal with putting off the shelf PC Parts in a console?  It's half the reason the Xbox is selling so well, and it REALLY pisses me off.  The Xbox is a masterpiece of LAZY design, and people buy into it.  That seriously irks me.

[Pale]

Exactly...the whole point of a console is that the manufacturer can completely customize the hardware so you get the best bang for your buck.  I believe the Gamecube is a marvel of hardware design as well.  Just the fact that Nintendo can price it at 99 bucks and yet its still so powerful astounds me.  Everyone bashes the Phantom thing because he is supposedly just trying to sell everyone another PC, when that is EXACTLY what the X-Box is, yet everyone buys that.

edit: sometimes the randomness of my thoughts thrown together kind of confuses me, but I think you all get the point.. =P  

[hypersonic5]

Quote
Originally posted by: Grey Ninja
I swear that some people just have no sense of style or design.  Even the idea of putting an x86 CPU in a GameBoy strikes me as vile and hideous.

I am not familiar with too many systems, but I know the GBA inside out, and I find that it's simply a masterpiece of hardware design.  Such a masterpiece wouldn't be possible with an x86 processor.  You would have messy DOS style code that doesn't do anyone any good.  Oh, I am sure that Nintendo would make it nice and all, but the x86 is seriously a REALLY horrid little chip.  There are plenty of better things out there I assure you.

But seriously, what's the big deal with putting off the shelf PC Parts in a console?  It's half the reason the Xbox is selling so well, and it REALLY pisses me off.  The Xbox is a masterpiece of LAZY design, and people buy into it.  That seriously irks me.

You do realize that, unless you are using a Mac, the computer you posted on runs on an x86 compatible processor. I don't understand your reasoning when you say "the x86 is seriously a REALLY horrid little chip." If there are "plenty of better things" out there, why don't you show me any, or at least back your ridiculous comments with proof or some type of logical reasoning.

There is no one "x86" chip. There are many different ones that utilize different technologies (pioneered by Intel or AMD). That processor I linked to in my first post was an example. That VIA chip is hundreds of times faster than the processor in the Game Boy Advance.

I'm sorry, but your lack of knowledge about this matter "strikes me as vile and hideous." If you do not understand what an x86 processor is, I don't know why you care to reply and bash my post instead of discussing the benefits or disadvantages of the x86 architecture in a mobile platform like the Game Boy Advance.

The Game Boy has to evolve. Nintendo doesn't have time to wait for ARM to evolve with it.  

[manunited4eva22]

Heh, via blows, go to Transmeta.  I like the efficeon, I wouldn't mind a scaled down version (say a tad slower, but keep the 256bit words) and you have a 8W beast.  It also is not x86 particularlly, it emulates it, but it can be made to emulate more than a few ISA's. Besides, Nvidia made the southbridge for the mobos, and I'm sure they wouldn't mind paying microsoft a little reminder of what not screwing them over can deliver.

Edit:  To call a Pentium 4 a x86 chip is a bit of a stretch, as it is IA32 now.  It does have some support for some of the older apps, but most of it is done in emulation now, and has eliminated the circuits forever.