By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Emily Rogers: NX not gonna use X86 architecture, raw power close to XBO

fatslob-:O said:
Darc Requiem said:

That's not actually true each GPU had it's own advantages and disadvantages. GC GPU was superior at lighting, single pass multi texturing, and it had faster higher bandwith RAM. The Xbox GPU had a higher fillrate, more ram, customizable shaders, and it cache data from it's hard drive. A game built from the ground up that pushed the GC too its limits would not run on Xbox without significant concessions. The same held true for a game built from the ground up for Xbox being ported to GC. The lower bandwith and inferior single pass multitexturing were why the Rogue Squadron port to Xbox was ultimately canned.

There weren't many third party games that were built for the GC and ported to PS2 and Xbox. The few that were ran best on GC. Off the top of my head I can only thing of Sonic Heroes. The PS2 version looked graphically inferior and struggled to maintain 30fps frame rate. (The GC version ran at 60fps). The Xbox verion matched the GC version graphics but the frame rate fluctuated between 30 and 60fp.

The original xbox is literally a superior version of the gamecube, spec wise ... 

At the time of 6th gen xbox had relatively NO disadvantages compared to PS2 or gamecube. In what way was the ATI Flipper superior in lighting when the NV2A had PIXEL SHADERS ?! 

The Xbox is arguably better at multitexturing than the GC, you could easily see more bump mapping and speculars or decals on the former rather than the later ... (Don't even get me started on the shadow mapping or the revolutionary 3D texture support.)

The ePSRAM was faster than the xbox's system memory but if we were to compare only the main system memory, xbox had a significant advantage in both bandwidth and capacity! (Remember how well the alpha effects turned out in the PS4/X1 face-off despite X1 having a similar setup like the GC did ? )

A game that is built from the ground up for gamecube would've run another lap on the xbox without any sort of concessions ... 

The system has more memory, higher CPU SIMD performance, and a much more advanced GPU ...

I've tried to find the Factory 5 articles on their Rogue Squadron 2 and Rogue Squadron 3 game engines to no avail. Since I can't back up my claims. I'll drop it.



Around the Network
Wyrdness said:
spemanig said:

Emily's post was about the console, and the Nvidia comment was meant to clarify why NX wasn't using x86. Also, another source said the NX console is using Nvidia. Sooooo AMD looks out of the picture. Sounds like it was Neo all along.

Considering AMD's report on having 3 custom wins entering production I doubt this.

Didn't AMD say at least one of them wasn't gaming? So no reason to doubt it at all. Neo and XB2 and I dunno, smart windshield whipers.



spemanig said:
Wyrdness said:

Considering AMD's report on having 3 custom wins entering production I doubt this.

Didn't AMD say at least one of them wasn't gaming? So no reason to doubt it at all. Neo and XB2 and I dunno, smart windshield whipers.

False.  Company CEO Lisa Su did say, that all three chips are destined for the world of gaming



craighopkins said:

False.  Company CEO Lisa Su did say, that all three chips are destined for the world of gaming

Link?



thismeintiel said:
Miyamotoo said:

You are very wrong if you think they will release around XB1 power console for $299-349 and basically repeat Wii U mistake (several time they stated Wii U had higher price than they wanted). If they releasing around XB1 power console it will have $249-299 price point. Also PS4 Neo will not have price point below $399.

We'll have to see what kind of deal Nintendo can make with manufacturers.  If the Wii U is any indication, taking a loss on outdated HW at $299+, they probably won't be getting the best cost per part.  It'll probably be even worse if manufacturers look at only 15M Wii Us shipped, lucky if it hits 20M+.  But, maybe they can pull off at least $299.  Of course, that still doesn't change that not only will it have to compete against a $299 PS4 OG, which will still be more powerful than it, but it'll also look even more outdated once the PS4 Neo is shown.

It wasn't problem with manufacturer deals, problem was gamepad because Wii U had higher price for around $50, and also huge problem was exchange rate back then when they manufacturing Wii U, Nintendo several times said Yen was to blame why Wii U didnt had lower launch price.

Also if they really ditch disks for cartridges (flash memory), console can have even lower price point.



Around the Network
spemanig said:
craighopkins said:

False.  Company CEO Lisa Su did say, that all three chips are destined for the world of gaming

Link?

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/

 

Just one of many. Lisa Su was talking about three semi custom gaming chips. Speculation like at arstechnica.com was that NX might get a seperate chip for the controller. But that's just that, speculation.



captain carot said:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/

 

Just one of many. Lisa Su was talking about three semi custom gaming chips. Speculation like at arstechnica.com was that NX might get a seperate chip for the controller. But that's just that, speculation.

I stand corrected. I still don't think this indicates NX when there are reports that directly contradict it from reliable sources. The different sources have come out saying it's Nvidia.



I hadn't seen this, but this article was published 10th of Jan 2015:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-in-theory-nintendos-next-gen-hardware-and-the-strategy-behind-it

"Around 18 months ago, during an informal chat with an extremely well-placed individual in the hardware manufacturing business, an interesting nugget of information dropped into the conversation - Nintendo was already accepting pitches from third parties on the hardware make-up of its successor for Wii U. Two names were mentioned: AMD and Imagination Technologies, creators of the PowerVR mobile graphics tech. With the lack of backing sources, that little aside never made it to print, but as Nintendo strives to bounce back from the Wii U sales disappointment, eyes inevitably turn towards future platforms."
So no mention of IBM or NVidia.

For the record if Nintendo went with AMD they could still have an ARM CPU, depends on when K12 is going to be ready, but given that 3rd party asked Sony and Microsoft to go with X86 and Nintendo were making decisions based on 3rd party input it seems highly likely that X86 would be the CPU of choice for a new console.

I hope Nintendo doesn't wait too long after E3 to announce NX and announce exactly what NX is and what tech it's using.



JustBeingReal said:
I hadn't seen this, but this article was published 10th of Jan 2015:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-in-theory-nintendos-next-gen-hardware-and-the-strategy-behind-it

"Around 18 months ago, during an informal chat with an extremely well-placed individual in the hardware manufacturing business, an interesting nugget of information dropped into the conversation - Nintendo was already accepting pitches from third parties on the hardware make-up of its successor for Wii U. Two names were mentioned: AMD and Imagination Technologies, creators of the PowerVR mobile graphics tech. With the lack of backing sources, that little aside never made it to print, but as Nintendo strives to bounce back from the Wii U sales disappointment, eyes inevitably turn towards future platforms."
So no mention of IBM or NVidia.

For the record if Nintendo went with AMD they could still have an ARM CPU, depends on when K12 is going to be ready, but given that 3rd party asked Sony and Microsoft to go with X86 and Nintendo were making decisions based on 3rd party input it seems highly likely that X86 would be the CPU of choice for a new console.

I hope Nintendo doesn't wait too long after E3 to announce NX and announce exactly what NX is and what tech it's using.


AMD doesn't need K12 to throw out an ARM chip.
They are a full ARM Licensee, they have a license to use all of ARM's IP and freely customize it... If a company apparoches AMD and says "We want this ARM CPU" AMD can take ARM's IP and go straight to the fab and start producing chips almost straight away. (Provided there are no modifications outside of ARM's design.)
A company can also approach AMD and say they want "This and this" in their ARM chip and AMD can add/customize it to any extent they want.

If Nintendo was going to use an ARM chip though, it is likely they will not go for a heavily customized CPU core, in order to reduce time-to-market and R&D costs.

AMD already has a few ARM CPU's on the market such as the Opteron A1100, which used 8x Cortex A57 cores, DDR3 and DDR4 memory controllers, PCI-E 3.0, Sata 3, built on 28nm etc'. - Which is ready for prime time.

We also cannot forget AMD Skybridge which has an ARM+x86 CPU+Graphics Core Next GPU all on the same chip, unfortunately it got cancelled, but the R&D for that was mostly done, which is also the R&D that was leading into K12, Nintendo could be the design win for this.

Basically the rumors of x86 or ARM or Both are all as equally as feasible as each other.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

spemanig said:
captain carot said:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/

 

Just one of many. Lisa Su was talking about three semi custom gaming chips. Speculation like at arstechnica.com was that NX might get a seperate chip for the controller. But that's just that, speculation.

I stand corrected. I still don't think this indicates NX when there are reports that directly contradict it from reliable sources. The different sources have come out saying it's Nvidia.

Well, AMD has three different gaming chips. There might as well be another customer. But AMD has ARM designs as well, so NX could be from AMD without being x86.

All those reports of Nvidia seem to come from semiaccurate. Or at least from the same source. At the same time sources point at AMD, with AMD definitely having three different designs for gaming.