No, x64.

A complete package would be a good idea. The fewer companies needed the easier to get everything sorted.

Is the evolution of PowerPC CPUs so dead (not counting Cell) that it ain't a good alternative no more?

I have been wondering if the low clock frequency on Wii CPU is because of it going to hot on a higher? If so, maybe a switch to AMD is good for Nintendo after all.

I hope you wanted to say x86-64, for then we would atleast talk about the same thing

intel is smashing amd in cpu area

nvidia dominated ati until 4870 x2 but they are winning now

I don't know, every time I think of AMD these days I think crap computer. AMD has really become more or less synonymous with four benjamin walmart boxes that underperform. I mean I'm not the biggest Intel/Nvidia fanboy in the world (especially Nvidia) but it seems like in processors AMD hasn't been competitive or relevant for years now especially since the very nice core duo and up processors started coming out of Intel.

AMD is not just associated with cheap as in inexpensive (which is a positive, I love that my iphone was only 199 dollars for instance, but is still an awesome piece of hardware) but cheap as in you get what you pay for (like buying one of those 50 dollar made and developed in china iphone knockoffs they show on engadget all the time). I would put my processor money on either A) Intel or B) IBM's power PC platform (now sort of merged into the cell system to an extent) every time. When I look at any/all computers I'd consider buying (IE not the 250 dollar 512MB RAM frys special with the AMD processor) I often forget AMD even exists.

In terms of graphics cards I had an ATI 2600 for a while in my mac pro tower and it wasn't too bad, but I've had much better performance from the GeForce Series both in the 8800GT I upgraded the ATI to and even more so in the 9600 thats in my new laptop. That new NVIDIA chipset that lets me choose on the fly whether I want a high performance gaming 512MB 9600 or a low power requirement 256MB 9400 for doing just about anything else (IE school work on the go where I don't have an outlet) is awesome. Like Intel, Nvidia seems to be where the new innovation and improvements are with AMD/ATI just staggering behind trying to play catchup (and sometimes like when competing with the core 2 duo release or the 8800 series falling WAY behind in quality).

To the above poster Power PC, even outside the Cell, is not dead and is used in a ton of high end computer and server installations. It is very scalable and gets a ton of performance quite efficiently in a lot of varied applications.

On the bright side whoever is willing to be saddled with ATI/AMD stuff can probably get great price concessions since AMD really needs the business.

 Why use 6 keystrokes when 3 will do the same job? I am lazy after all.

   When you sent the link you linked to one of the few game tests on which ATI was competitive, on the next one, dead space, ATI got blown away (half the frame rate of the high end Nvidia cards) and overall only won in one category, guess what one ATI won in.

  That's right, heat generation running at over 90 degrees Celsius when engaged and using way more power both active and idle then comperable Nvidia cards.  Not like any console makers have had trouble with cheap GPUs that produce excessive heat am I right?

   I hope its not Nintendo (I'm 99% sure its not Sony since they already have the cell going for them) since I want to see the new Nintendo system do well especially if they finally make it HD so I can rebuy it.

When you are thinking about manufacturing a console, how well two companies compare to each other in producing two graphics systems that are too expensive and run too hot for any console that are two to three iterations behind what you intend to put into your console is pretty meaningless. Realistically, I think that console manufacturers would be far more interested in what ATI is intending on offering with the HD6830/HD7830 or HD6850/HD7850 than what ATI is currently offering with the HD4870.

Engines have a much more difficult time working with AMD's GPUs, lots of glitch workarounds. Nvidia development is much smoother and faster. AMD taking hold of ATI was the worst thing that could have happened to the ATI brand name outside of going entirely bankrupt

a lot of tech-talk here. I don't know if Intel or AMD is superior. I know my Xbox360 has an AMD CPU and it works great. My PC has a Intel Core 2 duo in it and it works great as well.

All I am asking for is a powerful CPU that is easy to develop for. Just like the CPU in the Xbox360 now.