How did Kinect make any difference to the performance in relation to cost. The 10% reservation is not tied to a cost, and they showed it was easily reclaimed if wanted in an XDK update.
Baseless Next Generation Rumors with no Technical Merits [post E3 2019, pre GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
How did Kinect make any difference to the performance in relation to cost. The 10% reservation is not tied to a cost, and they showed it was easily reclaimed if wanted in an XDK update.
The wrong memory architecture caused their bad cost/performance ratio. The BOM was similar to PS4 without Kinect.
They can't know whether they are "sacrificing performance for price" from the point of view of consumers unless they know what the competitors are doing.
They have internal targets for their products. They don't always end up with the best solution. They don't always meet their BOM. They don't always meet their performance expectations.
The price target will be interesting regardless. I think there's an expectation of similar hardware for similar price from both this time around.
They can't know whether they are "sacrificing performance for price" from the point of view of consumers unless they know what the competitors are doing.
They have internal targets for their products. They don't always end up with the best solution. They don't always meet their BOM. They don't always meet their performance expectations.
The price target will be interesting regardless. I think there's an expectation of similar hardware for similar price from both this time around.
Nvidia's RSX was it's most expensive component according to this article, followed by the BD drive, then the Cell.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/16/isuppli_prices_up_ps3/
Edit:
EE+GS was about $27, rather much just to add psx/ps2 BC.
Once again, here's more appropriate take on their numbers ...
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/production-cost-comparison-ps3-360-elite.37270/
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/ps3-production-cost-breakdown.33069/
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/production-cost-comparison-ps3-360-elite.37270/
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/ps3-production-cost-breakdown.33069/
That was caused by their design goal to be lower power, low noise and long time reliability for their always on TV/Ads plans. They sacrificed performance for that.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Right, that's why I said that people would drift to different interpretations.
You couldn't buy an Xbox without Kinect and it was the most expensive console. Microsoft were neither performance focussed nor price focussed when launching Xbox One - within the realm of what a console can sell for in numbers. What is that ceiling? PS3's initial launch price gives us an idea.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Yes, which is why I mentioned how some might jump to the immediate interpretation that MS are going to have the most power console. It may or may not. But the interesting thing is that it could also mean that whatever their internal hardware target costs, they will price it relative to what they think the performance of their competition will be.
There's obviously a lot of PR talk involved here. Especially if you look at the sections where Eurogamer attempt to pin down what Phil Spencer meant with "consoles." They tried very VERY hard to get him to commit to saying that they will only be launching one console and Phil used a lot of PR speak to not commit to saying they will only launch one console. IE - there may still be more than one console design in play.
Yes, and perhaps I should have quoted more of the previous response when I made the post that started all of this.
So to put the whole thing into perspective from the article... The first part of the quote is from a response to whether there would be multiple next generation Xboxes. Which led into the part I quoted before.
PR is PR, and it's always tricky trying to tease out what they mean versus what they want you to hear. There's so many different ways a person could interpret what Phil Spencer actually meant. And, of course, there's always the cynic that will say Phil Spencer didn't mean to say anything at all.
However, he does have a history of saying things that have come to pass. IE - he isn't one to just say empty platitudes just for good PR. More often it turns out that he's wanting to tell people something but he can't come right out and tell them everything that he wants to tell them.
Hence, why this is in the Baseless Next Generation Rumors thread and why I'm having fun speculating on something I found particularly interesting.
- From Phil's perspective, XBO sacrificed both on performance AND price.
- If we assume that Kinect added 100 USD to the price (thus making it a sacrifice WRT to price) then the base console was likely meant to be priced similarly to what the PS4 launched at.
- At that price point, performance was obviously sacrificed to reach that price point. Both in terms of the SOC power and the overall bandwidth from using DDR3 outside of the special use cases where the SRAM could be used. DDR3 being obviously chosen due to cost reasons. Which led to needing the ESRAM for situations which require high bandwidth. Which led to an SOC that was seriously lacking in GPU and memory performance compared to the competition due to the need to dedicate silicon space for the ESRAM.
- In other words, a sacrifice of performance for price that Phil Spencer implies he doesn't want to do again.
- So, the implication here is that the plan is to make an Xbox that is the best that can be put into a console without making hardware choices (due to costs) that might hamper it, as was the case with the XBO.
- Especially when you look at the question that already acknowledges that this generation more than any previous one might be quite expensive to make a console stand out WRT performance. IE - are they going to have to cut corners (sacrificing performance for price)?
- But there's also the mention that not only was XBO less powerful, but it was also more expensive. So, they don't intend to be at a price disadvantage to the competition again. Which could mean...
- If the PS5 ends up priced lower than their target for Project Scarlett, they'll price it similarly to the PS5 regardless of how much it costs to manufacture a Project Scarlett console.
- Alternative, considering how hard Phil Spencer worked to avoid saying they are only launching one console...there might still be 2 console designs in play.
- One for price parity or price advantage.
- One for pure performance.
And while it's obviously easy to just wave that off as something that is expected from a PR answer to a question, Phil has generally avoided saying things only for PR value without some actual "thing" behind what he's saying.
I think he's been in his position long enough with a good track record (WRT what he said his intentions are and how he's delivered on what he's said) that he can be considered as something more than just a PR mouthpiece.
But it's still just speculation on my part. Hence, in the Baseless rumors thread.
Regards,
SB
While I don’t know which rumours are true or not; it does appear that MS finally has its leaks plugged.
We used to know absolutely everything before announcements; they’ve been really good at keepi Scarlett under wraps at least from a technical perspective.
We used to know absolutely everything before announcements; they’ve been really good at keepi Scarlett under wraps at least from a technical perspective.
"It's a monster powering Goldman Sachs cloud compute needs. 10 TF GPU; 5 TF double precision, unprecedented in a console. You won't turn the console off and MS will use your internet and console for cloud computing."
Why post this?
Why post this?
Last edited:
Scarlett high end is always online because during hours when your console isn't in use, it'll be used by MS for edge computing to provide XCloud / Azure for your neighborhood.
Haha, then they have to pay ME to get one
Edit: Nope - i'm willing to pay. Will hack it and then trade with Goldman Sachs business secrets.
Haha, then they have to pay ME to get one
Edit: Nope - i'm willing to pay. Will hack it and then trade with Goldman Sachs business secrets.
It would be a death knell for MS if they just did not present a straight forward console that plays games for launch. Thus replicating their mistakes from XBO. Any discussion about what else it could or designed to do would have to come the years following.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Can we agree that the general idea of being able to get your hardware to provide a service while you're not using it is good but the suggested implementation is, like the rest of the pastebin, pretty terrible?
I assume you can play any game distributed via gamepass for upto 8 hrs a month. This would be similar to the 10hr trial you get on many new games via EA Access, only resetting every month.
It seems a strange perk as the user cannot increase it without getting gamepass at which point the benefit is useless.
Probably over analysing a pastebin at this point.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ne...h-thread-ot7-nm.148625/page-135#post-26645549
This is referring to the latest SDKs:
Kleegamefan said:
This is referring to the latest SDKs:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
