More I think about this, the more I doubt its true.

Xbox and Nintendo are a given, but Nvidia will not want to be excluded from the console market so I see them going after Sony. They have been involved since 32 bit days (Saturn, Xbox, PS3). They also have a lot of interesting things coming up such as kal-el chip which is benchmarking some really impressive numbers at low power (according to Nvidia).

AMD is friends with IBM, and IBM is friends with Sony? :P
Anyway, as much as I like AMD, it would be bad for the overall GPU industry.
On the Xbox using "Cell IBM processor", this could be as true as the current IBM processor in the Xbox360 is a "Cell processor", that is, it's not.

^How so? Nvidia is not exactly in dire straits, and AMD could really use the extra revenue.

Well there would be kind of a monopoly in the consoles space on graphics hardware, that would enable AMD to try to marginalize Nvidia in relation to other players in the game's industry. Well, on the other hand, if based on the product offering and perspectives, ATI is the current logical choice, then Nvidia lost a battle and they would need to come up with some thing really good. But I doubt Nvidia would let that happen.
Don't forget that if AMD is in the lead technologically for a few years, it starts to lose pace in innovation.

Nvidia will end up fine either way... personally, I want everyone to simply take the best hardware out there. Even if you are the best for a very long time, you don't necessarily wane and weaken. Look at Intel - C2D and on, it's hard to say that they are not better and less innovative than AMD.

Thanks for the link! (not that I could read it as I'm not registered but I could see the date, 07/12/2004)

The xbox 360 already uses an IBM CPU based on the Cell chip, so going for a Cell chip with the nextbox wouldn't be much surprising (even more now that developers are finally able to develop for it with the PS3).

And if Sony is smart they can force Nvidia to lower their price given that they will be the only ones using their chips.

@n_nod2012 I'd go with DarkSiders. There aren't many adventure games that resemble a Zelda game, but there are a lot more FPS that are better than Resistance (although if you have played the first and want to play the third then this is the one you should get).

The blded is not true. The general purpose processing core (1) of the CellBE is simmilar to the general purpose processing cores (3) of the Xbox360 CPU. Then the CellBE has 8(7) higly specialized cores blablabla...completely different.

Surely you are right, I assumed that both chips had something in common as I read that IBM used some of the knowledge they gained when developing the Cell to develop the chip of the xbox360.

My bad.

So now MS fanboys will be talking about how amazing the Cell is, and Sony fanboys will be trashing it.

Oh irony...

Wow.. logic is not your friend, is it? Considering the XBox360 appeared over a year before the PS3, it is pretty obvious the development cycles were at least running in parallel. More likely Sony cut off the multicores from the IBM design line (that ended in the 360) to make room for the SPUs..