http://news.com.com/2100-1043_3-5101146....g=nefd_top
Very interesting, and surprising... seems that Wintel is gone for good. IBM, the dominant game console chip maker? That would be amazing... but they're going after all three companies quite strongly. It'll be interesting to see how many of those three deals go through...
Also, I've heard before that ATI, the makers of GCN's graphics processor, is making the XBox 2 processor.
If ATI makes both the X-Box 2 and N5 it'd be a big blow to NVidia...
ATI only helped make the GC graphics chip. They made it with ArtX and Nintendo themselves.
Huh? Why does the fact that ArtX made it matter at all? ATI bought them, after all, so its them that actually made it and will profit from it... and ATI and NVidia are the only two big video card makers out there.
The Flipper chip isn't just a GeForce 3 slapped into the Gamecube like the X-Box chip is. It's a custom-built chip that ATI made along with ArtX (before they were bought out, I believe), Nintendo, and Factor 5 (I'm not sure how much F5 contributed).
Uh, the N2.5 that's in the X-Box is custom, not a GeForce3... I'd think you'd know that...
I believe Factor 5 mostly aided in making the graphics development tools, or that's what I remember reading.
I think Factor 5 was mostly doing sound... I know they did a lot for sound on the GC. Didn't remember them really working on graphics, though...
Well they did.
The X-Box CPU is a slightly modified GeForce 3. It's not a completely custom chipset like the Flipper one is. Big difference.
But wasn't the X-Box GPU finished well before the GeForce3 was, and is different from it? Of course they have a lot in common but I don't know if they're really similar enough to call them the same... it looks a lot more like another version of GeForce, like the GF1, 2, and 3.
Though of course that is definitely less of a change than anything related to the GC.
No, the X-Box GPU is basically a modified GeForce 3. It's better than most of the GeForce 3's, but not by a whole lot. The Flipper is unlike any ATI card.
Well of course, since ATI had nothing to do with making it and only bought the company after they were done... :)
Let me rephrase that for the tenth time:
The Flipper chipset is nothing like any of the PC GPUs that ATI makes. It is a completely unique chipset designed specifically for the Gamecube.
Um, I know what you are saying... and am not disagreeing much... why do you keep rephrasing yourself?
As I said, of course Flipper isn't anything like an ATI card! ATI didn't make it! And of course the X-Box GPU is like a GeForce since that's what NVidia is making right now... its a unique GeForce just for the X-Box, but its a GeForce so of course it'll have plenty of similarites. I was just pointing out that its not IDENTICAL to a GeForce3. :)
It's the X-Box GPU is much, much closer to the GeForce 3 than the Flipper GPU is to any card from ATI or ArtX.
Well obviously! Why do you seem to sound like you think I disagreed with that fact?
You sounded like you were disagreeing with me!
*continues eating popcorn*
*wispers to someone else* Hey, I thought it was obvious ABF agreed with OB1, didn't you?
Other person: Um, who cares?
It's the tone in which he writes and how he says it. He didn't say "yes I agree", he said "yeah but...".
I think you should look at the WORDS! I was just making a statement, and then you respond with some bizarre heated attack when I wasn't disagreeing with you... try reading what I say before you take offense!
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about when I said you constantly assume I mean something I don't and have a very hard time being convinced that I indeed know what I originally said better than you do...
"heated"? Boy, aren't we sensitive now?
It's comments like these that sound very sarcastic that made you sound like you were disagreeing with me. You do this all of the time:
Quote:Well of course, since ATI had nothing to do with making it and only bought the company after they were done... :)
*walks into room*
*holds hand up Neo style and stops the masses of fecal matter flying through the air*
Actually, Intel is a big supporter of Linux now, so the days of Wintel are definently gone. Long live Lintel!
Now please continue the poo-flinging as if I was never here.
*Opens a gateway and Travels to somewhere that smells better*
Um, OB1, I think ABF actually MEANT that and wasn't being sarcastic.
*follows LL through portal into weird room with upsidedown broken old man NPC*
I was replying to this:
"Also, I've heard before that ATI, the makers of GCN's graphics processor, is making the XBox 2 processor."
with this:
"ATI only helped make the GC graphics chip. They made it with ArtX and Nintendo themselves."
ABF must have thought that I was replying to this post:
"If ATI makes both the X-Box 2 and N5 it'd be a big blow to NVidia..."
So he started to question why I said that, and that is where the confusion began. On both sides.
Nintendo should get a graphics card made by 3DFX for the N5. That would be awesome.
Sarcastic? I really don't get you at all, OB1... do you live in some twisted place where you see insults around every corner or something? Its the only explanation I can think of...
I mean, your comment was irrelevant. ATI only helped make it? Huh? I mean... we aren't talking about the specifics of which dev team makes the product, we're talking about corporations and which ones will get the big win here! Why does whether ArtX or the main ATI team made the card matter at all? I just don't get why you think it does... or how you thought I was saying something else...
Oh, you were answering DJ's post? No, I didn't know that, and since it was after mine of course I'd think it was responding to mine... makes more sense then. But still...
I say "why does which team made it matter?'
You respond with "The X-Box GPU is just a GeForce while the Flipper is a unique chip!"
Seriously, we were NOT talking about the same topic. And since I made the thread... you were not talking about the right thing. Could you re-read the thread now and explain how you managed to mess that up? Its not obtuse about what I'm talking about!
And, of course, if you're going to compare the uniqueness of the Flipper vs the X-Box GPU (a completely different issue that I don't understand how you confused with the one I raised in my post)... you could at least be accurate and not call the X-Box GPU a GeForce3 when I know for a fact it is not.
Okay then... let's go back somewhat. :)
Here are my points
1)ATI technically did make the Flipper since they were the company that actually produced the chips and owns the company (and owned it before the release of the Cube) that developed the chip. Did they develop it? No. But they own it and built the physical chips.
2)NVidia made its chip itsself, making it as a better, specifically designed (single-chip) version of the GeForce. It isn't a off-the-shelf GeForce2 nor is it a straight GeForce3; its a unique chip that has a lot in common with those two but has enough unique things that it can't be called the same. Which is why its the NV25, not the NV20 like the GeForce2 or the NV30 like the GeForce3.
3)If ATI wins the X-Box and the NGC, it'll help its profits a lot... NVidia better hope that it takes a commanding lead in the PC market to try to keep up, and given the way things there are going now that doesn't look likely... right now ATI has the best board in the PC market, after all, and the GeForce has been playing catchup for a while now.
:bummed: Okay okay, enjoy your fight you two :D.
Anyway GR, I think you MAY have been joking, but 3DFX is DEAD now.
http://www.3dfx.com/ In fact what remained of them was bought out by NVidia, so the GeForce is the only real succesor the 3DFX has.
Given that 3Dfx died years back, I certainly hope he was joking.
ABF, we're not even talking about the same thing. I'm not talking about Nvidia, I'm talking about how the fact that ATI will probably be developing the chipset for both Nintendo's and MS's next consoles shouldn't worry anyone as Nintendo's input will make it unique enough to seperate it from the X-Box 2's GPU, and that it won't be a matter of "which company gets the 9900 and which one gets the 9900 Pro?". I know that's not exactly what DJ said, but this has been brought up before and I said that before someone went out and commented on it.
No, we weren't talking about the same thing. I hadn't really thought of that question much, actually... how about before you answer a question not mentioned before in the thread you mention what you are talking about, okay? It'd have avoided all this if you had just explained what in the world you were talking about... I was quite confused...
Anyway, if you're talking about THAT...
Hmm, good question. I would assume that for Microsoft they'd want a relatively conventional card that provides good compatibility with the X-Box'es NVidia card and is more powerful than anything else on the market... while Nintendo's input would have a different team (the ArtX one, maybe, if its still together?)... though I would expect it'd be somewhat more like a normal ATI card, I would think it'd be quite different because of the differing requirements of MS and Nintendo. Especially if the ArtX guys make it. :)
There... have we straightened this out now? And you say that I'm the one who isn't clear... :bang:
Oh yeah and DJ this really wasn't a fight... it was a misunderstanding. Go back and read it and you'll see how the two of us are talking about completely different things...
She always assumes that we're fighting whenever we use quotes.
Quote:Yeah yeah
I guess this means that we're also fighting, right? :p
Yeah, of course!
Oh, and nothing to argue about now that we understand what the subbjects are? :)
Quote:Anyway GR, I think you MAY have been joking, but 3DFX is DEAD now. http://www.3dfx.com/ In fact what remained of them was bought out by NVidia, so the GeForce is the only real succesor the 3DFX has.
No, I was completely serious.
I know, I was just playing along.