Author Topic: what partner should Nintendo get for builting the gc2 Processor? (Read 42537 times)

)Dark-LInk( · « **on:** February 12, 2003, 12:59:23 PM »

ive been thinking on which companies nintendo should ally TO built the BEST(try)
i think they should ally AN AMERICAN COMPANY(WEIRD) the great NVIDIA! then theyl have the best GRAPHICS for sure! what do ya think?(hopefully NVIDIA wont go MAD like with MS for the reduction cuz then THERE IS A LAWSUIT for IT!)

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2003, 01:12:27 PM »

ATI is far superior to NVidia...no comparison...Nintendo made the right choice and will most likely go with ATI in the future

Perfect Cell · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2003, 03:07:25 PM »

Ati will also make the chips for Xbox 2 so it will be interesting. I wouldnt mind Nvidia actually if it was more powerfull than the Xbox 2 chip, that way we wouldnt have to listen to people like Tecmo say I only make games for the Xbox because its the most powerfull console

Darc Requiem · « **Reply #3 on:** February 20, 2003, 05:38:37 AM »

As for a the graphics processor goes Nintendo should stick with ATI. ATI has gotten more impressive on the PC front of things and with ArtX's best minds working with ATI's on the next GC graphics processor things can only turn out stellar. As far as the CPU goes, since Sony has allied with IBM, I think Nintendo should look into Motorola. Motorola and IBM has partnered for the PowerPC standard for Mac's and when it comes to floating point calculations Motorola built Power PCs with there AltiVec technology actually outperform IBM built PowerPC's. Plus keeping a PowerPC based CPU along with an ATI based GPU will allow for the possibility of the next GC being backwards compatible.

Darc Requiem

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2003, 09:50:48 PM »

ATI made GCN's processor? O_o That's news to me. I always thought it was IBM...

Anyways, I would just like to say that ATI wasted nVidia recently, and I am hoping for more of the same out of them in the future.

But that being said, ATI did NOT make the GPU in the GameCube. It was ArtX. ATI bought ArtX right as Flipper was being taped out.

mrbojangos · « **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2003, 01:23:52 PM »

doesn't that seem odd? Sony sides with IBM who created the gekko for the gamecube. Microsoft with all they're computer stuff... goes after ATI for a chip on XBOX2. And ATI made the flipper chip for Gamecube. ITS A CONSPIRACY!

Berto2K · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2003, 10:49:37 PM »

Just a little correction for you, ATI is a Canadian company. And yes I think Nintendo should stick with ATI for the next round too. They have jumped ahead of Nvidia because of Nvidia's tight involvement with MS on the Xbox. As for the main processor, I don't really know. Maybe pickup AMD with their 64 bit chips with 32 bit emulation. They damn fast.

Darc Requiem · « **Reply #7 on:** February 27, 2003, 02:25:16 PM »

AMD chips are faster than Intel chips at the same clock speed but they aren't close to the speed of IBM and Motorola's Power PC chips. Since IBM is with Sony I think Motorola would make the most sense for Nintendo. Not only would the CPU be powerful but it would be easier to make the Next Nintendo Console backwards compatible with the Gamecube if it used an ATI GPU and a PowerPC based CPU.

Darc Requiem

Riotamus · « **Reply #8 on:** February 27, 2003, 02:57:33 PM »

I don't or wouldn't claim to be an expert on computer programming or know the ins and outs of console excellence, but of the next generation consoles i chose the Gamecube, because of the GAMES that were to be available on the console. The most impressive was Star Wars Rogue Leader : Rogue Squadron II, not because i am a Star Wars fan, but because it was the most breathtaking, console/arcade/computer/abacus lol, game, i have yet to see on my or any other television set. So i suppose what i am trying to say is, it not so much matters on the hardware, but what the ''experts/amateurs/or just plain gamesplayers'' can come up with by way of imagination and talent.

Pilotwings · « **Reply #9 on:** March 04, 2003, 09:10:22 PM »

the next Nintendo console will be using an ATI designed GPU, probably mass produced by NEC.

the CPU will probably be co-designed by NEC-Cray and possibly Fujitsu. maybe as a joint effort to counter the Sony-IBM-Toshiba designed CELL for PS3. an NEC-Cray-Fujutsu partnership is not much better than wild speculation though. perhaps just NEC or IBM. but the GPU is probably a lock with ATI if you have seen the latest news on any of the Nintendo websites or www.ATI.com > press releases.

ATI will probably take their in-development R500 (West Coast team with many ArtX engineers) and modify that for Nintendo, incorporating parts to make it not only backwards compat with Flipper, but more powerful than the standard PC version of the R500 which could be out as early as fall 2004 using the .09 micron process. maybe ATI will use a R500 refresh, R550, as the basis for the Nintendo GPU with the additions i mentioned above. the newer the GPU the better, since this next Nintendo will be coming out in late 2005 or late 2006 and have to last until 2010-2011. HDTV resolution @ 60fps with exellent FSAA will be a must for this console. as will plenty of memory this time. at least 512 MB if not more.

BlkPaladin · « **Reply #10 on:** March 05, 2003, 07:38:43 AM »

It isn't really set who Microsoft is using. The rumor is ATi since they messed with nVidia so bad nVidia might not want to make the next GPU for the Xbox. It is pretty certin the next GPU for Nintendo will be designed by ATi though with the recent announcment and it being multiple projects. The interesting thing is though when IBM announced it partnership with Nintendo to make the MPU it was for multiple projects also but I think utilizing the Gekko processor.. So I might be reading a little into it. They could go with Motorola who is made the chip for the GBA/ GBA SP.
NEC will more than likely be producing the chips again. They did it for the N64, Gameboy, Gameboy Advance, and the Gamecube so I think that partnership is in no danger of collapsing anytime soon.

manunited4eva22 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 05, 2003, 10:42:59 AM »

God that Cray/NEC rumor got out of hand, now Fujitsu? Basically 3 companies who have built supercomputers based on other companies CPU's. I definately don't see a chip from AMD or Intel inside the gamecube. AMD chips are fun when I have a monster heatsink, but not so much when I am running off a heatsink. Motorolla wouldn't surprise me, nor would a smaller company. IBM is pretty much locked down with the PowerPCs as 8 will be on each Cell chip. (controlling 8 auxillary cpus each) VIA hasn't really made a CPU for a while so I wouldn't look that direction. Other things that would interest me is Bus maker, ram type, and drive mechanics.

[o]CUBE · « **Reply #12 on:** March 06, 2003, 03:10:25 AM »

ATi and NEC but not IBM anymore they are traitors it's better to have individual companies work on individual components and focus all their strengths to that like the ATI Flipper and IBM Gekko

manunited4eva22 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 06, 2003, 10:20:14 AM »

IBM are traitors for getting a lucrative deal from Sony? Are you insane?

)Dark-LInk( · « **Reply #14 on:** March 06, 2003, 12:29:05 PM »

they should stick with IBM but pay them MORE millions to make the "GEKKO 2" 10x faster!!(and of course abit stronger then the PS3 "CELL")
ALSO they should get NVIDIA and pay them ALOT OF CASH to make a GRAPHICS chip at least 3x better then the GEFORCE4 ti 4200!then N wil have a very strong console!

manunited4eva22 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 06, 2003, 03:26:44 PM »

That makes no sense though Dark Link. The cell is based on 8 PowerPC chips controlling 8 auxillary CPUs for a grand total of 72. They would literally have to build a CPU 64x more powerful than the PowerPCs right now to do what you say.

)Dark-LInk( · « **Reply #16 on:** March 06, 2003, 04:24:11 PM »

SO BE IT THEN! BUILT ONE IF IT'S NECESARY NINTENDO!

well if they cant they should at least make it 5x better(2.5 ghz low but alright....)

BlkPaladin · « **Reply #17 on:** March 06, 2003, 08:30:49 PM »

It will be interesting to see how Sony plays out the deal for the cell processor. Because the way it sounds like to get any advantage out of the thing you will have to have multiple MPUs onboard. Which if I remember correctly Rick said that would make it more difficult to program for. (Please clear this up for me Rick.) And if they make the PS3 harder to program for than the next offerings from Microsoft or Nintendo it will be interesting to see how they fair since all three consoles sould be out around the same time so Sony will not have an established user base to lure developers to keep at their system.

Tael · « **Reply #18 on:** March 06, 2003, 10:26:50 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: )Dark-LInk(
ALSO they should get NVIDIA and pay them ALOT OF CASH to make a GRAPHICS chip at least 3x better then the GEFORCE4 ti 4200!then N wil have a very strong console!

Why not get ATi to make a chip three times faster than the Radeon 9800 Pro?

BlkPaladin · « **Reply #19 on:** March 07, 2003, 07:40:15 AM »

The problem with that is money. Nintendo is a money concious company when it comes to making its consoles. No doubt they will sink millions of dollars into the GPU alone. But that doesn't buy you that much of a jump. Also the time need for R&D. What we will more than likely see is a hybrid of either a "current" chip (One that just came out about that time.) Or a hybrid of a chip that is soon to come out.

NickNiteQ93 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 07, 2003, 01:32:25 PM »

Personally, I hope Nintendo plops down as much, or more, money than Microsoft to ATi for the GPU. I'm sure MS is happy to call their console "the most powerful console available", so it wouldn't suprise me if/when ATi decides to make GPU's for the Xbox Next that they'll make a huge donation to ensure superiority. And even if the next Nintendo system does have powerful specs, it still won't be the most powerful. The Big N, as stated earlier, is money concious, and money concious doesn't equal extreme power. Get your head out of the clouds. Unless Nintendo changes its tune about its money, then I'm looking for the next console from them to be the budget one, as always. But that's fine with me. And if it is the most powerful thing available, then rock on. I'll only buy Nintendo no matter what, so it doesn't matter. Personally, I think ATi should make the GPU for the next Game Boy.

Having a portable PS2-type console wouldn't bother me one bit.

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #21 on:** March 07, 2003, 02:27:01 PM »

I really doubt that Nintendo is going to be touting the highest specs next time around.

Xbox2: we can do 600 billion polys per second!
PS3: we can do 700 billion polys per second!
GCN2: we can realisticaly do about 700 million polys per second

Which console will have the best looking graphics?

Nintendo's of course.

GameCube is far from a budget machine, it's just treated as such because Nintendo tells the truth about their specs.

Christberg · « **Reply #22 on:** March 07, 2003, 02:29:49 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: NickNiteQ93
Personally, I hope Nintendo plops down as much, or more, money than Microsoft to ATi for the GPU. I'm sure MS is happy to call their console "the most powerful console available", so it wouldn't suprise me if/when ATi decides to make GPU's for the Xbox Next that they'll make a huge donation to ensure superiority. And even if the next Nintendo system does have powerful specs, it still won't be the most powerful. The Big N, as stated earlier, is money concious, and money concious doesn't equal extreme power. Get your head out of the clouds. Unless Nintendo changes its tune about its money, then I'm looking for the next console from them to be the budget one, as always. But that's fine with me. And if it is the most powerful thing available, then rock on. I'll only buy Nintendo no matter what, so it doesn't matter. Personally, I think ATi should make the GPU for the next Game Boy. Having a portable PS2-type console wouldn't bother me one bit.

Well, thing is both MS and Sony's next systems are most likely going to be "convergence devices" meaning that they'll have a bunch of extra stuff packed in there that has nothing to do with gaming. Because of this, their systems are going to not only be more expensive to produce, but very likely also less durable than Nintendo's. That said, Nintendo can pack more potent gaming hardware into their next system than the competition because they won't be blowing cash on things like DVD licensing fees, ports for digital cameras and recorders, TV tuners for TiVo-type support, and really large hard drives to store digital video on.

All that stuff is really expensive, especially the big hard drive. Granted, Sony and MS will be willing to lose more money than Nintendo on their next systems, but that doesn't mean that this isn't a golden opportunity for Nintendo to launch at the same time with more powerful hardware if MS and Sony really do intend to do convergence devices, which seems very likely. The chances of Nintendo having the most powerful hardware next generation is looking pretty good to me, maybe 50-50 right now, even despite their cash conscious ways.

Look at what Nintendo did with the GC and think about that level of hardware efficiency versus a convergence device and ask yourself "who wins?"

Getting back on topic though, Nintendo should probably go with IBM again and have them make them a modified Power5 processor with the same instructions Gekko had, and maybe a few more little gaming related tweaks. It makes for easy backward compatibility and also easier development for developers returning to the system.

)Dark-LInk( · « **Reply #23 on:** March 07, 2003, 06:17:23 PM »

IF nintendo is to get IBM for the GEKKO chip again they should tell them to make one 10X faster to compete with the PS3
(lets just say 500mhz for gekko since ts SO NEAR)500X10=5000 MHZ(5GHZ) which should be powerful enough to compete hehe

NickNiteQ93 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 08, 2003, 11:47:32 AM »

I said budget because it's the least expensive. To me, budget means cheapest, but not cheaply made. I know that GC is more powerful than PS2, and only a tad-bit less powerful than the Xbong. And, I've got a collection of 25+ games for the GC, so people who wanna say that the games are dumb need to play before they speak. I've thoroughly enjoyed every single game I own. Back to the subject, I think that Nintendo will perhaps be more aggresive next time, but I still think it won't be the most powerful. It's a dream of mine that sadly will never come true :-\ However, I do think them staying with ATi was a great decision. As far as the processor goes, I'd like to see what NEC-Cray can come up with, if the big N decides to go with them. The Cell sounds pretty cool, but things can sound cool, but wind up being pure crap, right? I eagerly look forward to the next war.

News:

Author Topic: what partner should Nintendo get for builting the gc2 Processor? (Read 42537 times)