Topic: specs (unoffical)

[Nephilim]

http://www.unika.com.cn/article/article.php/2572

translation

- CPU: IBM G5 Custom x 4core (respectively 2.5GHz), level 1 cache 128KB, a level 2 cache 512KB share

- GPU: RN520 x 2core (16MB eDRAM), N are the meaning of Nintendo, PC R520 AMR technology, Are different in ATi R500.

- Memory : 512MB. CPU GPU share

- PPU : the processor only for physical simulations (32MB)

- The independent audio processor

- 720p and 1080i HDTV standards.

[kirby_killer_dedede]

shweeeet.

[Savior]

These are fake i think?

[MaleficentOgre]

yeah, these are fake.  

[KDR_11k]

Yup, one of the Aries imposters who even came out and told everyone that this was a joke. Unfortunately you always see idiotic websites repost rumors that have been denied five minutes later.

[stevey]

 Aren't those the xbox 360 specs 3 processor one processor only for physical simulations, 512 ram ,and 720p and 1080i HDTV standards xbox's?

[BlackGriffen]

Bogus!

If IBM could crank out PPC970s (the model # of the G5) anywhere near price, power, and engineering constraints facing a console, Apple computer would already be all over it. As it is, we'll be lucky if we see 4 core workstations from Apple between now and then, let alone 4 cores produced cheaply enough and running cool enough to be in a console.

I'm not saying it's impossible, mind, but in order to do it I'd bet Nintendo would have to absorb losses that would make Microsoft blush.

BlackGriffen

[Darc Requiem]

Well GameIndustry Biz is touting the same specs. So the specs definately are a possibility. They put the 360's specs out there well before they were official. I'm not saying these are the actual specs but I'm not going to call them fake either. If the 360 can have three 3.2 Ghz cores and launch this year, I don't see why the Rev can't have four 2.5 Ghz cores and launch a year later.

GameIndustry Biz Link

[BlackGriffen]

Yes, Nintendo could have 4 cores. Nintendo could probably have 8 cores if they really wanted.

The problem is this: just exactly what kind of cores are we talking about?

The rumor mentioned G5 cores. The XBox does not have G5 (aka PPC970) cores. What is far more likely is that XBox has what a modified version of what are called PPE cores. Sony will actually have one PPE core in the PS3, along with 8 SPEs (think of them as being about like the vector units on the PS2 on steroids).

Now, getting to Nintendo. I could potentially see Nintendo using 4 PPE cores. That is a completely different beast from 4 PPC970s, though. See, a PPC970 has a part of the chip which rearranges code on the fly to keep itself busy while some instructions stall (say, waiting for some data from main memory), increasing performance, especially on poorly optimized code. Intel's and AMD's Pentiums and Athlons, respectively, also have similar hardware. The PPE does not have this. It is what is called an in order processor. In order processors are considerably less complicated than out of order ones, thus smaller, cheaper, and with a faster clock. The tradeoff is that certain types of code, like a lot of AI, will run very poorly. For predictable code like graphics and physics, though, it works great.

Point is, we will not see 4 G5s in any console any time soon at anywhere near the stated speed. Just as I wouldn't expect to see 4 Pentium4s, Pentium Ms, or Athlon64s. 4 PPEs, maybe. I'm a big proponent of going asymmetric: one complex out of order core for doing what it's good at, and a mess of in order cores for doing what they're good at. I doubt we'll see anything like this, though.

BlackGriffen

[RickPowers]

Xbox 360 has three cores, and it launches at the end of the year.  Why couldn't Nintendo have four cores by mid-2006?

[Gamefreak]

Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
Xbox 360 has three cores, and it launches at the end of the year.  Why couldn't Nintendo have four cores by mid-2006?

Because the Xbox doesn't have G5 cores, and that's what this article mentions.

[RABicle]

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackGriffen
If IBM could crank out PPC970s (the model # of the G5) anywhere near price, power, and engineering constraints facing a console, Apple computer would already be all over it. As it is, we'll be lucky if we see 4 core workstations from Apple between now and then, let alone 4 cores produced cheaply enough and running cool enough to be in a console.

It's good to see that at least one guy knows something in this thread. I'd be upgrading my lousy iMac instantly if Apple had afforadble quad-core G5s.

I certainly seems like the person who oringally made up the specs jsut thought for a moment "Oh hey Xbox has 3 cores, Rev will have 4! And the processor can be a G5 running at speeds it can't go!"

[Darc Requiem]

I still think its plausible. I mean Nintendo would be order those four core G5's in the millions. The economies of scale would bring down the cost greatly. I mean a lot of us though that the 360 wouldn't be able to have a three core CPU and launch this year. Granted they aren't G5 cores but still. Besides didn't Nintendo sign a 2 billion dollar deal with IBM a few years back. Thats a lot of R&D money : )

[jasonditz]

And you don't think Apple orders G5's in the millions? I wouldn't look for Nintendo to cram that much power into the system, not just because they probably don't want the launch price to be $1500+, but also because it just flat out isn't neccesary. If we're talking "more bang for the buck" there are a lot better ways to spend that much money on a dedicated game console.

[Artimus]

I admitedly know very little about all this but there's a good reason why the Apple Powerbooks are just G4, not G5.

[BigJim]

Apple doesn't order G5s in the millions because they can't be supplied in the millions. Half of their product lineup doesn't have G5's yet, and most users are still using G4 equipment.

Three and quad-core PPCs are in the realm of possibility by then, but not G5s, and they wouldn't be cheap enough for a console anyway.  Whatever they are, they'll be less sophisticated than the 970's, and better suited for gaming.

[KDR_11k]

As BlackGriffen said, those PPCs aren't PPC970s (aka G5). MS is able to put that many on one core by cutting out the out-of-order-execution system, which is huge (size-wise). Without the OOOE a lot of applications will lose performance (that one guy at the GDC claimed as much as factor 10) so that means more difficult coding to take advantage of all the power (and the next-gen is already too expensive without that optimization). Sony is also cutting OOOE. Without OOOE the core is much smaller and can sustain much higher clock frequencies, which looks nice on paper but we're not playing on paper here. Compare a Pentium 4 3 GHz with an Athlon 64 2GHz. The Athlon is faster, even in 32 bit mode. Perhaps MS is hoping that hyperthreading can make up for the loss of OOOE but I have my doubts.

The only way Nintendo could get a quadcore (or dual-dual system) is by cutting OOOE as well. The difference here is that Nintendo are software developers and their coders and hardware guys have much more interaction with each other. Wouldn't surprise me to see Nintendo go with a dual or even singlecore 2.8 GHz system with OOOE and in the end beat both Sony and MS in the actual performance department. Look at the GC, nobody complains about any bottlenecks with that thing, except for maybe the little RAM. Compare that to the PS2's just-in-time caching which can completely trash your performance with the wrong data. That's because Nintendo makes its sysems together with their coders, who know what a system needs and what it doesn't.