Intel wants in on next-gen console race: motion-sensing, markets

Intel might have missed out on the current gen consoles, thus allowing IBM to lend its hand to the PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii. No doubt, IBM has proven itself to be more than capable of moving mountains – or at least map interstellar space with the help of eight PS3 units. But will this faze Intel? Not by a long shot. They approached video games console makers and presented their microchips that could be incorporated into future consoles. Read more for details from Intel’s chief tech officer. Hint: it’s about motion-sensing and markets.

Intel might have missed out on the current gen consoles, thus giving IBM the opportunity to shine by providing their processor technology to Sony (Cell microprocessor, anyone?), Nintendo, and Microsoft. No doubt, IBM has proven itself to be more than capable of moving mountains – or at least map interstellar space with the help of eight PS3 units.

But will this faze Intel? Nope. Not by a long shot.

Intel has now approached video games console makers and presented their microchips that could be incorporated into future consoles. Which isn’t all that bad, considering that Intel’s chips could execute 1 trillion (that’s 1,000,000,000,000; a million millions) calculations per second.

Justin Rattner, chief tech officer of Intel imagines a future without analog sticks and buttons, with the help of their chips in processing cameras to track body movement as a form of interacting with the video game.

We imagine some future generation of [Nintendo’s] Wii won’t have hand controllers. You just set up the cameras around the room and wave your hand like you’re playing tennis.

This might lead you to think that Rattner sees the future of video games going up the path of motion-sensing (Will Wright might agree with him on that). We’re not sure; Rattner didn’t say otherwise in any case. But if you check the results of a survey just recently, motion-sensing has gotten the popularity vote against high def.

Do note that Rattner just gave an example, and doesn’t necessarily mean that that’s the only type of future he foresees. Regardless, there’s still an obstacle they have to face. Right now, they have a question in mind. Is all this push for next-next-next-next-gen performance worth it?

Is this whole infatuation with performance something that has moved beyond what the vast majority of users really care about? Are there really a set of applications that require ten, a hundred, a thousand times the performance we have today? And if we have it at an attractive price point, will it drive high volumes? It’s still to be determined. There are still people who question whether the volume markets are there for all this performance.