| steven787 said: Okay, I read the whole interview and have stewed on this for a day. I wanted to really think about what this means for the game industry and not necessarily games directly.
Going further than that its a simpler In-order execution design much like the Xbox360/PS3 CPUs. It is fully capable of being a GPU or a CPU because it is based off of x86 but has the added instructions for graphics. It is designed to use open GL, Direct X, and proprietary libraries. Yup For Intel to sell this as a GPU it has to be good for consoles. Really good. Better and cheaper. It's a hard sell. Price isn't actually as much of an issue as you might think. Intel "Needs" to put it into a Console, the Consoles don't "Need" them. What better way to tackle the programming library, software development implementation and achieve the required production levels to make it worthwhile than getting their silicon into a console? For this they would have to price it cheap, and there is no chip fabricator with lower per die cost on high tech silicon than Intel. For their best case scenario they would want Microsofts involvement as they can immediately break into both the PC and the Console market at the same time, and furthermore it is generally accepted that Microsoft makes some of the best tools available in the industry. Who better to get your new chip running than one of the biggest software development companies in the world? Where this might truly revolutionize the console industry is the idea of using it in a higher number core single processor gaming console. If they can get a bunch of cores in the machine, doing all the things they say it can, with the libraries for programming on a multicore processor as well as they imply, then this would very good for getting next-gen performance down to prices that are realistic. A $400 price (at a loss for the manufacturer) are not realistic, this will help fix that next gen on non Sony consoles (Sony has a brighter future, too but for a different reason) - maybe MS and Nintendo. Perhaps the Holy grail would be an implementation of both their next generation CPU technologies - system on a chip, the Core I7 aka Nehalem mated with Larrabee would be extremely formidable and extremely cheap to produce relative to a multichip design as it would vastly simplify the motherboard design/layout between the trace lines and the power supply circuitcry as well as make the cooling solution simpler/cheaper. So long as the design of Larrabee is sound, a system on a chip design implementing both Larrabee and the new Core I7 architecture would also be wickedly powerful. A 2 core (4 thread) Core I7 with 16 cores of Larrabee would be wonderfully powerful and extremely flexible. This is most likely for MS, because they currently use an Intel CPU. IBM actually! :) Nintendo may go with this or they may go with a multicore PPC, but it wouldn't be called a Cell - this would allow for an easier transition and easier BC. Yup Sony will not use this, unless it has fireworks coming out of its ass. The Cell (and programming for the Cell) will evolve and become easier. Playstation is the show peice for the tech. Sony will not give up the revenue stream from owning part of the tech, and getting licensing fees. Having the Cell in a "4D" gaming console is great way of getting into the mindset of the geeks up in procurement from various militaries and banks that use supercomputing. It will get cheaper to put in the console. Yup Being x86 architecture will be great for future generations by eliminating a lot of the growing pains involved in going from one console to another. Yup |
Tease.
