It’s an interesting question regardless. Either there are no additional savings to be found in the console, therefore already efficient as possible (unlikely imo). Or they are bound to xcloud and cannot revise the chips (possible?) as they are linked to specific blade specifications.
I really expect that I'm wrong but I don't remember any revisions last gen for X1. Apart from 1S and that's a major revision.
I was more pointing out the fact that they may actually be producing same amount of chips as PS5 but a chunk isn't making it into consoles.
There were four versions of the Xbox One.
This seems to be Sony's approach with many new high volume products. They do a run of x volume, assess Q&A/cost, revise and repeat. There were five generations of PS3, with the third generation PS3 appearing just two years after initial launch, and about eight distinct revisions of the PS2.
This is a Sony thing. There are no less that 13 revisions of the PS3 controller, for example. There are tons of revisions of the dual shock 4 as well, including minor changes like changing the position the ribbon cable plugs into from the charge port, changes to the internal shape of the PS button and it's corresponding silicon conductive pad. Shoulder buttons have sometimes minor, sometimes major changes. They are constantly re-engineering their stuff. There are a ton of revisions of all of their own home consoles as well.
They changed the power supply already as well.
Yeah I would call half different skus more so than revisions.
I'm pretty sure that Sony had far bigger pressure to decrease the heat with a 6nm SOC than MS had with the XSX. It surely wouldn't help MS to do so to increase production. IMHO a waste to do incremental steps for MS until there is a real monetary and production benefit for an old product which I can't see at the moment with the rising price level of 5nm and beyond.
nintendo too IIRC. albeit less often than sony.
Why not though, versus PS5? And PS in general? Is Sony overspending on making revisions, or is MS missing out on cost-cuttings, and if so, why are they okay with that? Or is the manufacturing pipeline so different for the two of them that for Sony, revisions make sense, but not for MS?
I suspect the main purpose of revisions is to reduce defect rates. Then there is cost savings following.
This has always been the Sony way. Even with PS1 there were a bunch of revisions, although many of the changes were internal and didn't alter the look of the console until the PSone. But while Saturn and PS1 were both on the market, off the top of my head, you had 2 versions of Saturn (model 1 and 2) and at least 3 versions of PS1. Launch PS1s had the AV jacks on the back, then they removed them and went with just the multi AV out. And then the Dual Shock system that came bundled with the controller. There were hardware changes inside (IIRC it used a different laser for the disc drive as well), but the firmware also changed with different CD player software that added visualizations. Technically they both had 3 versions of controllers, but that's only because Sega had a different controller for the NA market vs Japan, and then included the Japanese style controller with model 2, and then the 3d controller. Sony had the original controller, the analog controller, and the dual shock controller. There are revisions to the dual shock but I don't know if they came out before Saturn exited the market.
If they were a game: this is one of their Core strengths. Lol.
