News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[James Car]

10 million consoles sold in the first year?


They aren't selling a standalone chip for $500. Even in a non-loss scenario, why would they not want to make more money?

I think 10m is reasonable for the first year.

And yes, I know they aren't selling a standalone chip for $500. I think it is fairly safe to assume the entire BOM (including 250mm2 GPU and 150mm2 CPU, BRD, MB, RAM, kinect2 (as we know it from the leaks), controller, packaging) would not exceed $500.

Why would they not want to make money? Fair question. Like I said, if their analysis/research led them to believe that they stand to lose more money by going with the rumored spec (and assumed losses in xbl + ad + game revenue) than they stand to gain by saving X dollars per console, then the spec will change.

If not, then we get the spec everyone expects.

Of course, this is assuming that MS has done this research in the first place. For a company as large as they are and with the xbox business as large as it is, I have to assume that is the case.

 

[Bagel seed]

Plausible as a response to PS4? No. There's already been indications they don't care about any possible power difference. Also, massive projects in the works for years tend not to change directions at the drop of a hat, and moreso uncharacteristically at a company as slow to react as MS usually is.

 

[xJumPeRJumPzZ]

Oh, dont be so sure.

I heard another thing from a pseudo-insider today in my pm box at GAF. That's now two incredibly vague references from separate sources recently that something is up with the Durango hardware.

The words were along the lines of "Durango hardware should surprise, I can say nothing else sworn to secrecy"

hmm, the surprise part makes me wonder at even more than clocks/ram fiddling.

That would be awesome if the final console is nothing like the Vgleakz specs. Neogaf would explode lol

 

[James Car]

Plausible as a response to PS4? No. There's already been indications they don't care about any possible power difference. Also, massive projects in the works for years tend not to change directions at the drop of a hat, and moreso uncharacteristically at a company as slow to react as MS usually is.

In general I agree, however, the competitive landscape outside of the direct Sony comparison may be what steers MS to a higher spec...

As I stated above, I doubt it would solely be a response from what Sony showed (if indeed we do get a spec bump).

The other much bigger factor is that the "casual gamer" has almost completely abandoned the console scene. They are happy to get free/cheap games on ios/android.

If MS' strategy was to lure them away from Nintendo while straddling the line with core gamers, I think they are a bit late to that party.

This leaves the core gamer. As is, the core gamer is being wooed heavily by PS4. Not saying this means MS must change spec or die, I'm just saying that is is a factor which must be considered. I don't have the research to quantify exactly how this scenario (as we know it) will play out at retail, but having a visibly weaker console launching day and date with a competitor which also does not (yet) charge for online play, will have an affect on current and future prospects of the platform.

It really boils down to the simple equation of expected losses of future revenue/profit from gamers vs expected losses of HW profit up-front.

Each of which is a variable which neither of us have access to.

 

[expletive]

It's certainly possible, but it would be a sign of desperation. And the basis of all this questioning seems to be Orbis and this theory that MS have seen Orbis's specs and pooped their pants and are now running around panicking. I don't believe that management's strategy wasn't more solidly considered than that and that the whole Durango system and experience wasn't considered value except in competition to a hoped-for weaker PS4. Just going by the 10x performance upgrade per generation, MS must have expected something considerably more than 1.2 TF from Sony, yet despite that, chose their lower spec'd hardware.

I don't think MS are overly concerned about the performance differential, and I don't think they'll be motivated to do something about it in hardware.

It doesn't have to be 'running around panicking' for them to tweak the hardware though, could just be a compelling reason, similar to the one EPIC gave them when they doubled the RAM at the last minute in the 360.

Agreed that MS surely had considered a more powerful configuration than what we think now, and had good reasons for not going in that direction to begin with, but what matters is if any of their initial assumptions have changed drastically.

 

[3dilettante]

Why would they not want to make money? Fair question. Like I said, if their analysis/research led them to believe that they stand to lose more money by going with the rumored spec (and assumed losses in xbl + ad + game revenue) than they stand to gain by saving X dollars per console, then the spec will change.

What is the population of web forum readers that know what a GFLOP is, and how many of them will stake their gaming life on an abstract number?
Microsoft will likely have no shortage of other numbers, buzzwords, and marketing might to throw out there to counter a dry argument about peak GPU performance numbers.

I would like a stronger correlation in revenue versus complaints on web forums about peak specifications, 99% of whom have no clue what they mean.

They can save X dollars per console, and then spend an incremental amount massaging the press.

 

[MTd2]

the thing is, If the specs are presumably weak, why would they want to show them? why go publicly to expose an Achilles tendon? I don't think they're that dumb enough to shoot them selves in the foot.

PS4 was not shown either. Maybe it was not ready and still had half the memory as promised. So, just a devkit was shown. Microsoft could just thrown a machine with 2x 7990 running and say something about games and do not show the real hardware either.

 

[kots]

What is the population of web forum readers that know what a GFLOP is, and how many of them will stake their gaming life on an abstract number?

They may not know what a GFLOP is , but they surely have eyes to see the on screen differences .

 

[3dilettante]

I think we could spend an entire thread, and I know we have, on just how many of those core gamers whose visual perception matches their technical knowledge.

edit:

There's also not as strong a correlation in the loss of visual fidelity to a few microarchitectural measures as some people would like to think.

 

[AlphaWolf]

They may not know what a GFLOP is , but they surely have eyes to see the on screen differences .

The same people who all ditched consoles to game on PC in 2010 because of the massive iq difference? Oh wait...

The difference between next gen consoles won't be anything near current pc and ps360.

 

[(((interference)))]

Not true.

From what I understand, developers up to this point have been told to code to the api layer. (not that they need arm twisting)

They have to code to the API, since they have no direct access to the hardware anyway.

It's not possible that they are developing a high snd low spec APU simultaneously as people would know about it (and no one does). Well, to be fair they were developing Yuma/Xbox TV as well but that makes Durango the high powered design (and we know about Xbox TV from way back)

I seriously urge all the fanboys to try and keep their sh*t together until the 21st, your rampant speculation and handwringing isn't going to get MS to change the specs.

About the best you can hope for is an clock increase, that is definitely possible - I've heard up to 1.5TF might be doable, that's more than enough to narrow the gap to PS4.

It will cost them money though (yields will go down) and so I don't think it is particularly likely - especially as MS were expecting the PS4 to be more powerful and intended to compete in ways besides pure specs.

 

[expletive]

It's not possible that they are developing a high snd low spec APU simultaneously as people would know about it (and no one does). Well, to be fair they were developing Yuma/Xbox TV as well but that makes Durango the high powered design (and we know about Xbox TV way back)

In my view, the only group that it would behoove MS to inform about higher spec final hardware is 1st party studios. They have nothing to lose with 3rd parties/multiplatform devs being in the dark because the *worst* that MS could do by bumping the spec is have a (launch window) title that is identical to the PS4 version since devs were planning for that power anyway.

I'm assuming all 1.2tf corroborating leaks are not coming from 1st parties but rather 3rd parties?

Personally i'd just like to see the RAM available to games be in parity across the consoles so we get better quality assets. Display planes could offset the visual impact of a lower resolution but i think i might notice textures that are lower quality. (Not to mention it might drag down the the overall quality of multiplatform titles since studios may not create two versions of every texture just so ps4's could look ever so slightly better)

 

[warb]

They may not know what a GFLOP is , but they surely have eyes to see the on screen differences .

They might have to get pretty close to the screen to spot the difference as things stand.

It could be the same game running at 1/3 less resolution, or more dips with a dynamic resolution. Games could look otherwise identical and with most people playing on <46" TVs at reasonable distance, the difference may not be all that obvious.

 

[Cyan]

according to aaron greenberg's tweets E3 is where it's at, but they're going to show what they can next week. i'm expecting still some constraint on the info.

If they feel embarrassed because of the specs they are going to say the essential details that match any other console out there.

If that was the case it would be a good idea to say the console feature a 8 core CPU, 8 GB RAM and that's it.

If they only mention that then you know what to expect.

You gotta watch everything you say and do today, once something like that is online, it is viral.

5 days and 17 hours until reveal, according to this countdown:

http://majornelson.com/2013/05/14/one-week-until-xboxreveal/

 

[bbot]

Xenios:

I noticed your sig. Superdae now says ps4 is the better console.

 

[Cyan]

Michael Pachter says that the next Xbox will change the world.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/microsoft-next-gen-xbox-change-world-pachter-164527184.html

 

[expletive]

From major nelsons blog:

PLUS, today I announced that we’ll be teaming up with Twitch and I’ll be hosting an exclusive post-show at 3p ET/12m PT. You’ll only be able to watch the special show via the new Twitch app on Xbox 360 and also online globally on www.twitch.tv. During the show I’ll be joined by some guests who will go into more detail about our #XboxReveal announcements.

Hint of twitch.tv integration in new os?

 

[Bagel seed]

Michael Pachter says that the next Xbox will change the world.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/microsoft-next-gen-xbox-change-world-pachter-164527184.html

Maybe his prediction will pan out, after ABC declared war on cord cutters by delaying recent shows from going up on Hulu.

 

[dagamer]

They have to code to the API, since they have no direct access to the hardware anyway.

It's not possible that they are developing a high snd low spec APU simultaneously as people would know about it (and no one does). Well, to be fair they were developing Yuma/Xbox TV as well but that makes Durango the high powered design (and we know about Xbox TV way back)

I seriously urge all the fanboys to try and keep their sh*t together until the 21st, your rampant speculation and handwringing isn't going to get MS to change the specs.

About the best you can hope for is an clock increase, that is definitely possible - I've heard up to 1.5TF might be doable, that's more than enough to narrow the gap to PS4.

It will cost them money though (yields will go down) and so I don't think it is particularly likely - especially as MS were expecting the PS4 to be more powerful and intended to compete in ways besides pure specs.

Wow, I think I wrote that exact same post a few weeks ago.

The reason why I think spec bumps are unlikely is that vague PS4 specs have been available for over a YEAR: http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-ps4-in-deep-first-specs/

Sure some stuff has changed (Steamroller not being ready yet, 8GB RAM instead of 2GB, bandwidth now 176GB/sec instead of 192GB/sec) but there's enough stuff right here: 18CUs, AMD APU, 1.84 Teraflop target, video hardware encoder/decoder, etc.. that if Microsoft thought their 1.2 Teraflop target wasn't enough, they could have bumped up specs without adversely affecting their launch. I'd like to think that Microsoft has a better idea of what Sony was doing than VGLeaks. And it's pretty easy to ask without breaking NDA, that's how Sony knew Microsoft had 8GB of RAM in Durango.

 

[dragonelite]

What is the population of web forum readers that know what a GFLOP is, and how many of them will stake their gaming life on an abstract number?
Microsoft will likely have no shortage of other numbers, buzzwords, and marketing might to throw out there to counter a dry argument about peak GPU performance numbers.

I would like a stronger correlation in revenue versus complaints on web forums about peak specifications, 99% of whom have no clue what they mean.

They can save X dollars per console, and then spend an incremental amount massaging the press.

Shouldn't be a problem all they have to see is
ps4 > durango and 1.8 > 1.2
Then there are quiet some folks that do know the difference and they will have no problems explaining it.