Future PowerPC beyond 3.2 ghz?

In that video they say it has 3 Symmetric cores. In early reports M$ said the 360 would have 6 PowerPC G5 CPU cores. I'm just wondering if someone can clear up a little question of mine. Are these "Symmetric cores" the same thing as the "G5 CPU cores" mention earlier? I'm just trying to understand if M$ wanted at first to have six, then dropped it to three.
 
Reality said:
In that video they say it has 3 Semitic cores. In early reports M$ said the 360 would have 6 PowerPC G5 CPU cores. I'm just wondering if someone can clear up a little question of mine. Are these "Semitic cores" the same thing as the "G5 CPU cores" mention earlier? I'm just trying to understand if M$ wanted at first to have six, then dropped it to three.
Click to expand...
It's 3 Symmetric cores. 2 hardware threads per core. 2X3=6.
 
A little confusing but I think I understand it. In other news I was watching the video through one more time and noticed something in 360 prototype line.

screenshot_01.jpg

It's like a ugly Powermac or something. It's the crone and handles I think that just make it look like one to me.
 
Looks like it has no shell at all in the pic. I may get one. Would be nice if the SDK is available to anyone, but I hear it's no easy task to get ahold of. Not like picking up Visual Studio at CompUSA, nor is it part of Visual Studio.
 
Reality said:
A little confusing but I think I understand it. In other news I was watching the video through one more time and noticed something in 360 prototype line.

screenshot_01.jpg

It's like a ugly Powermac or something. It's the crone and handles I think that just make it look like one to me.
Click to expand...

What video codec were you using to play the movie in QuickTime? My QuickTime 7 Pro will not play the movie (neither will MPlayer or VLC).
 
It would be really nice if Apple and Microsoft really teamed up for once. And it would be nicer to play those xbox 360 games on your Apple G5.
 
I suppose what good can come out of this is that the code base for these games opens up opportunities for developers to support the Mac with much less of a financial risk than supporting two completely different platforms x86/PPC.
 
But won't the XBox use Direct X? I would think they would instead of OpenGL which would make porting games to OS X really hard.
 
The majority of worthwhile games for the PC will use DirectX instead of OpenGL, but it should cut down on development time than starting from an x86 code base.
Don't know for sure, I've never tried, but considerig the origins of OpenGL, I have a hard time believing that it can be so inferior that it's rarely considered for game development. I'd have to give both a try. Anyone have Halo for the Mac? Is it any less visually lacking than the PC or XBox?
 
direct x has only become the full standard since 9.0. it's still on 9.0. open gl for years was the standard, untill about 2 years ago
 
But the point is, the Xbox 360 is PPC. Development for the games is being done on G5s. That strongly implies that there's a DirectX for Mac now available from Microsoft.

Imagine THAT.
 
There no doubt is but is MS ever going to release it for OS X? I highly doubt it. Unless someone leaks it :D
 
Lt Major Burns said:
direct x has only become the full standard since 9.0. it's still on 9.0. open gl for years was the standard, untill about 2 years ago
Click to expand...

I'd have to say 8.0 is when DirectX came of age. It's then when I noticed the heavy duty GeForce and Radeon cards appearing with 8.0 support.
OpenGL shouldn't be in such bad shape, I think it's just the it doesn't get any recognition anymore. The opengl.org website always has plenty of activity.
 
MS does play nice with Apple to prevent becoming a monopoly. However, they dominate the computer game market and they know it. They'll most likely never release Direct X for OSX.
 
plus open gl under macOS is far superior to the support on pc. and direct will never be released on mac, because it has always been a core part of windows. it would be like offering a winders version of Quartz
 
Lt Major Burns said:
plus open gl under macOS is far superior to the support on pc.
Click to expand...
Must I pimp that BareFeats article again about Doom3 Mac port? OpenGL is not superior on the Mac, some might go as far as to say it is slightly hindered.

OpenGL is great... but it only does graphics. I love OpenGL because I do 3D modeling for fun, and I can't imagine using DirectX in the viewports. But as a programmer, when it comes to something such as a game, DX has a lot of built in functionality specifically for games. So my stance is "pick the right tool for the job."

Forget DX on Mac, I'd be much happier if Apple does form that gaming division, and spends time making a toolkit like DX and make it a FREE kit. I know there are SDKs, middleware, game engines etc. for Mac but it'd be great for a "common" toolbox of functionality that we pick and choose from.

If anyone has given DX programming an honest chance, ask yourself "wouldn't it be great to have something *like* that for OSX?"
 
Lycander said:
Must I pimp that BareFeats article again about Doom3 Mac port? OpenGL is not superior on the Mac, some might go as far as to say it is slightly hindered.

OpenGL is great... but it only does graphics. I love OpenGL because I do 3D modeling for fun, and I can't imagine using DirectX in the viewports. But as a programmer, when it comes to something such as a game, DX has a lot of built in functionality specifically for games. So my stance is "pick the right tool for the job."

Forget DX on Mac, I'd be much happier if Apple does form that gaming division, and spends time making a toolkit like DX and make it a FREE kit. I know there are SDKs, middleware, game engines etc. for Mac but it'd be great for a "common" toolbox of functionality that we pick and choose from.

If anyone has given DX programming an honest chance, ask yourself "wouldn't it be great to have something *like* that for OSX?"
Click to expand...

respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top