The challenges, rewards, and realities of a two tier console launch

I guess binning would be good reason to do 2 consoles. Use full chips with higher clocks for pro and cut down chips with lower clocks for base model. But would there be enough full chips at launch or would it be more reasonable from profit/volume POV to launch pro model year or two later and keep collecting perfect chips for a year or two?

This would avoid the usual console pitfall where clocks/redundancy has to be tuned so that there is as little waste as possible -> conservative clocks/silicon size. Also maybe put the pro model into bigger box with better cooling+power supply to be able to use higher power parts than usually is done in console space.

This should still be pretty reasonable for developers as fundamentals in different console models are still same. One model is just faster.

I for one would splurge for the pro model even if it would be worse value per pretties compared to base model.

Maybe the idea in this for sony would be to have stack with ps5 pro, ps5 and ps4. Replace ps4 pro with ps5 base model while keeping base ps4 as entry level option.
 
Every time I see multiple SKUs being floated, the part of me that deals with logistics break out in cold sweat. And the little we do, is so simple compared to a two sku release.
I am not sure having the 2nd sku will net enough sales to cover the extra costs. Both Sony and MS did it for the launch of the PS360 generation, but was it a success?
And those differences was minor, but we are most likely talking about different CPU/GPU capabilities this time around.
 
I still think the best case for 2 SKUs is a standard console & a lower cost tablet/handheld. If it's 2 standard consoles I would be surprised.

Tommy McClain
 
AzBat said:
I still think the best case for 2 SKUs is a standard console & a lower cost tablet/handheld. If it's 2 standard consoles I would be surprised.

Tommy McClain
Click to expand...

If you do a standard + lower cost tablet/handled, is it really the same ? I mean a handheld/tablet is a very different experience than a standard console. Just comparing controls? Should you enforce touch screen controls? Or should you enforce a handheld controller for the tablet/handheld version?
 
JPT said:
If you do a standard + lower cost tablet/handled, is it really the same ? I mean a handheld/tablet is a very different experience than a standard console. Just comparing controls? Should you enforce touch screen controls? Or should you enforce a handheld controller for the tablet/handheld version?
Click to expand...

I believe Microsoft has supported both methods with streaming. I'm sure their Xcloud plans will hint at how they could handle a next-gen mobile SKU of their own. Sony? No idea. I'm sure there are others here more qualified to answer that. Either way I think on the software end you'd just set a flag when it detects it's not running on a console. That's how Microsoft is handling it.

Tommy McClain
 
AzBat said:
I believe Microsoft has supported both methods with streaming. I'm sure their Xcloud plans will hint at how they could handle a next-gen mobile SKU of their own. Sony? No idea. I'm sure there are others here more qualified to answer that. Either way I think on the software end you'd just set a flag when it detects it's not running on a console. That's how Microsoft is handling it.

Tommy McClain
Click to expand...

I was thinking more about the game design, playing a game with touch screen controls needs quite different design (game?) then with a controller.
To me it feels like any game that is touch screen and controller based, would be to different experiences when playing, depending upon the control scheme in use.
 
JPT said:
I was thinking more about the game design, playing a game with touch screen controls needs quite different design (game?) then with a controller.
To me it feels like any game that is touch screen and controller based, would be to different experiences when playing, depending upon the control scheme in use.
Click to expand...

But that's a given for any game on any platform. For some games it might not translate well to touch controls and/or small screens. Maybe they don't support touch controls but you can use a XB1 controller? Maybe they support tablets but not phones? The question becomes does the platform holder provide developers with tools & options to handle different devices depending on their display & input? I can only speak of Microsoft & they do. It will be absolutely necessary because of their xCloud plans to make any game streamable. Next Gen will be given from the start. I wouldn't be surprised if they require developers to support at least alternate touch controls. Right now it's just optional. Will be interesting to find out how they handle it.

Tommy McClain
 
It is stupid idea.

IF it would be this:
Base console = weaker than it would be if it were the only model
Pro model = as fast as normal model would be, or there would not be two models

Aka they slow down the base unit to make pro be the fastest one.

If it is:
Base model is is fast as it can be without any compromises
Pro model is even faster
= Kind of impossible because base unit would already use the best available tech

Better to release "good as possible" model now and 2-3 years later "good as possible pro model" with new tech

Like what if ps4 would been 2 tier on launch?

Og with less perf than ps4 we got and Pro bit faster? Like 1.5tflops and 2.5tflops

Not possible to have OG 1.85 tflops and 4.2tflops pro when it launched
 
Wasn't it estimated that the SoC + memory of the PS4 came out at something like $190?

Of course, the cooling and power delivery would have to be more expensive too, but, in theory, a $200 difference between base and pro models could have given us a 3.68TF GPU, 16 core GPU, and 16GB of GDDR5.

That kind of performance would have made me pretty weak in the knees. Enough to fork out some more dough.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
What if it is (the most realistic option):
Base model is as fast as it can be without any compromises at $400 price point
Pro model is even faster at $600 price point.
Click to expand...

I don't think a system can be built for $400 that doesn't compromise too much to be considered a significant jump over the Pro or the X1X.

Another problem of the two-tier release is that it might make the bottom tier too weak for people to think the upgrade is justifiable over their current 8th gen.
 
A $400 price point might not mean a $400 BOM. Also, the end result only needs be better than a vanilla PS4/XB1 to get non-ProX owners to upgrade, even if mid-tier owners won't buy in. Also, those were only representative numbers. The argument is that the tiers would be:

Base model is as fast as it can be without and compromise at $n price point.
Pro model is even faster at $n+x price point.

That is, both machines will be limited not by compromises to make the other look better, but by the compromises enforced by their respective budgets, and given two different budgets, both machines will represent the best value the console company can make at that budget for that machine. There should be no second-rate, half arsed console.
 
A bit more from The Verge:

"Microsoft’s Anaconda console will be the true next-gen leap, and sources tell The Verge that Microsoft is targeting more than 10 teraflops of graphical power on this particular console. Plans for Lockhart may change, but currently this console will debut with around 4 teraflops of graphical power."

"Sources say that Lockhart will get a next-gen CPU, but that it will be clocked slower than what’s available on Anaconda."
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/4/...ect-scarlett-lockhart-anaconda-launch-details
 
It will need to have the same fast SSD. Otherwise games will be gimped.

If the only difference is a lower clock, smaller gpu (or disabled silicon) and no ODD, it's hard to imagine a price difference anywhere above $100.
 
Those rumours contradict. 4 TF for Lockhart, 1440p60, >10 TF for Anaconda, 2160p. Performance delta is way more than the resolution delta, meaning devs would have to cut back on Lockhart visuals, meaning the frame targets aren't any sort of targets at all. Plus a slow CPU on Lockhart could mean different game experiences.

The only realistic dual combo is the idea that ignores the 4 TF and 10 TF numbers and has Lockhart as a binned Anaconda.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Video Game Console Cooling - A Hot Topic (pun kind of intended).
Replies
14
Views
3K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Q
Prioritizing game exclusivity on console - as a hypothetical Xbox strategy
12 13 14
Replies
273
Views
25K
ZebMacahan
Z
R
Let's discuss the ways the future console architectures could potentially improve in efficiency
2 3
Replies
52
Views
6K
Miniature Kaiju
M
J
The Life Cycle of a Gamer - is gaming changing forever, or eternal?
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Tkumpathenurple
T
B
Xbox leadership and the Xbox brand evaluation *spawn
10 11 12
Replies
223
Views
20K
cheapchips
C
Back
Top