What HW cost reduction options does XB1 have?

[BRiT]

The IR hardware is inside the Kinect, so that offers no gain on Kinect-less models.

 

[Lalaland]

- Release an SKU with a cheap ass 120 GB SSD in instead of a more expensive HDD, and rely on users to juggle or use an external USB drive (like Sony and Nintendo are currently doing).

Not bad thoughts but from a BOM point of view I can't think of a single mechanical HDD that would be more expensive than a 120GB SSD (excepting enterprise class drives). The minimum mass market HDD platter size at the moment is 500GB and those can be had for ~30 or so, there will never be smaller as the floor for HDD size is what you can fit on a single platter. By the time 120GB ssd hit the ~$30 price point we'll be onto 1TB mechanical drives and 1TB looks better on the back of the box than the much faster 120GB drive does.

Moreover a switch to a 120GB ssd would mean the user would have space for ~2 games and if it's a pack in deal with 2 games (as a lot of mid cycle consoles are) possibly no room for any other titles. I've a 240GB SSD in my PS4 (170GB usable, seriously Sony what are you doing with my 70GB?) and I will have a hard time fitting BF4 + addons + Destiny + 1 other game in a few months.

 

[function]

DDR4 is said to remain rather costly for the foreseeable future, and DDR3 is so entrenched in the computer industry it's not going to be "deprecated" for a LOONG time.

DDR3 certainly does seem to be pretty entrenched. However, the graphics lead evolution of processors in everything from phones to APUs to even Intel's own CPUs is (finally) going to drive the market to DDR4. It won't be this year, but by 2016 I think the tipping point for high quantities and high densities could come. (The desire for less power per MB per second in mobile will drive this too).

DDR3 2133 may never even become the defacto standard for memory in any area of the market, and in the long term this may add to MS looking to source their memory from DDR4.

Additional to this is that, unlike in the PC space where DIMMs are used, MS are going to be stuck with a frikkin huge motherboard for as long as they stay with increasingly low density DDR3 chips.

If they wait long enough, MS may even be able to hit BW targets from DDR4 on a 128-bit bus ...

 

[Boxercide]

But that would require a more hefty redesign than just a shrink. And a lot of testing, thus wiping out a lot of cost savings.

 

[function]

Not bad thoughts but from a BOM point of view I can't think of a single mechanical HDD that would be more expensive than a 120GB SSD (excepting enterprise class drives). The minimum mass market HDD platter size at the moment is 500GB and those can be had for ~30 or so, there will never be smaller as the floor for HDD size is what you can fit on a single platter. By the time 120GB ssd hit the ~$30 price point we'll be onto 1TB mechanical drives and 1TB looks better on the back of the box than the much faster 120GB drive does.

For many (or even most) users 1TB will absolutely look better on the back of the box! But not, perhaps, for all.

The time for such a product isn't now, but I'm looking to the medium term. Perhaps SSD would always be prohibitively expensive, but eMMC might be able to support such a product in a couple of years, and given that a 500 GB laptop HDD is lucky to hit beyond 60 GB/s even in a benchmark, the time will probably come where a cheaper flash alternative to a physical HDD can be found.

I certainly wouldn't see it as the only SKU though!

Moreover a switch to a 120GB ssd would mean the user would have space for ~2 games and if it's a pack in deal with 2 games (as a lot of mid cycle consoles are) possibly no room for any other titles. I've a 240GB SSD in my PS4 (170GB usable, seriously Sony what are you doing with my 70GB?) and I will have a hard time fitting BF4 + addons + Destiny + 1 other game in a few months.

The tight limits remind me of PS3 16 GB and ...basically any WiiU configuration.

My thought is that you use this SKU to catch the very bottom end, and then allow internal or external upgrade of the device.

Not something for moment, but one day such an SKU will be viable, IMO.

 

[function]

But that would require a more hefty redesign than just a shrink. And a lot of testing, thus wiping out a lot of cost savings.

Yeah it's absolutely more than just a shrink. But if you can save $20 per console over 50 million consoles, that's one hell of an incentive for incorporating AMD's next "ambidextrous" memory controller.

 

[Rangers]

Great topic as it's something I've been thinking about.

I think they need to reduce build quality and sheer size a lot, for starters. Raw materials (plastic and metal) cant be cheap.

I was looking up how much video cards that are similar in die size to Xbox cost. I forget the name but the chip in R9 280/280X is perfect, 352mm^2. Anyways it starts for $220 ($240 maybe better estimate) for R9 280 and $260 for R9 280X on newegg, ewth 3GB GDDR5. I dont know, I'd guess $299 will be pretty tough based on that, as Xbox has a bigger board, a power brick, etc. But most of all three expensive things, a controller, a Blu Ray drive, and a hard drive. RAM costs might actually be a wash.

I'll have more thoughts later.

 

[djskribbles]

What about changing the audio profile, letting the machine get noisier and saving money on the heat management? Is there much to be saved from the cooling engineering that could warrant a non-silent console?

If they could shrink the box down just from a smaller/more efficient cooling design, that would save them on materials/packaging and shipping costs. That's worth it IMO. There's a lot of wasted space in the box, but even if they made a smaller cooling design, it looks like they might need to reconfigure the board layout to shrink the box.

 

[DieH@rd]

I still cant believe that they went with this dumbed down internal design, just plastic box with mobo and few elements placed over it [BD drive, HDD and cooler]. Zero attempt to control the internal airflow.

Why is Xbone mobo so large? PS4 has much more compact design of the mobo [and everything else].

 

[Shortbread]

Why is Xbone mobo so large? PS4 has much more compact design of the mobo [and everything else].

To avoid another costly RROD PR nightmare... hence the larger airflow design.

 

[shredenvain]

To avoid another costly RROD PR nightmare... hence the larger airflow design.

Yes. Im sure avoiding the biggest problem of the 360 was the number one priority.
The larger more expensive case along with all the power gating suggests that.
I for one am pretty satisfied with the build quality of the X One. It doesnt look or feel like the usual cheap plastic toy-like console. Sure it is slightly larger than the launch 360 but it isnt a deal breaker because of how quiet and cool it stays.

 

[djskribbles]

The size of the XB1 wouldn't really bother me that much tbh, but that's not the point. The point is that they need to cut the costs, and one way of doing that is by shrinking the box. The PS4 may be slightly louder in general (dunno if that's definitive or not), but there are very few complaints about noise or heat. Considering the PS4 naturally draws more power while operating, is physically smaller, and has an internal PSU... MS should be able to considerably shrink the XB1 if they wanted to. They may need to sacrifice the noise level slightly, but if it helps cut the costs, then it's worth it considering the position they're in IMO.

 

[AzBat]

Get the Wifi board onto the MB

Even the Xbox 360 S & E don't even do this since it needs to reside outside the metal cage for good radio reception.

The IR hardware is inside the Kinect, so that offers no gain on Kinect-less models.

He's talking about the IR Blaster connector. It's used for devices that are tucked away in a cabinet where Kinect can't blast.

Tommy McClain

 

[Shortbread]

The size of the XB1 wouldn't really bother me that much tbh, but that's not the point. The point is that they need to cut the costs, and one way of doing that is by shrinking the box. The PS4 may be slightly louder in general (dunno if that's definitive or not), but there are very few complaints about noise or heat. Considering the PS4 naturally draws more power while operating, is physically smaller, and has an internal PSU... MS should be able to considerably shrink the XB1 if they wanted to. They may need to sacrifice the noise level slightly, but if it helps cut the costs, then it's worth it considering the position they're in IMO.

With the current node size, is it even possible for MS to design a smaller unit, without affecting the current up-clocked GPU/CPU?

Meaning; no costly redesign to the cooling setup. Even at the current size, the XB1 can get fairly hot.

I vaguely remember MS engineers or PR mouths mentioning that the additional space afforded by the XB1 design gave them the needed headroom for the upclocks, and possible future ones as well.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

I still cant believe that they went with this dumbed down internal design, just plastic box with mobo and few elements placed over it [BD drive, HDD and cooler]. Zero attempt to control the internal airflow.

You do realize that the fan is exhausting air and the SOC is basically the only component requiring major cooling? Any further attempt to control the airflow would be totally pointless.

 

[eastmen]

This has come up repeatedly in discussion with advocates such as eastmen doubting the expense of Kinect. Yet it's removal has facilitated a $100 difference. It's one of the most sophisticated ToF sensors ever devised, outperforming multiple far more expensive sensors, and that has to come at some cost. Die costs aren't just a matter of lithography * area.

Taking iSuppli at face value, MS spent $28 just on building the box. A little of that will be things like HDMI in, but all round they seem to be spending more to achieve the same thing. As such, they should be able to match Sony's design and get the same costs (eg. same mechanical/electromechanical choices). I don't know if Sony make some savings for being a HW company or not.

But when all's said and done, the savings aren't really there to materially achieve a cost advantage while avoiding a loss leader. The best they could have done was remove Kinect, which they did.

We've had price drops before that come out of thin air . For example every price drop the Original xbox ever had.

The Kinect is not that expensive from my very limited sources MS was actually profiting on each unit sold at $500 and that includes the bult in buffer for the retail chain selling it.


MS would see great gains from dropping the bluray drive as its just dead space but not enough people on the console side have figured out Digital downloads yet and will get upset if they buy a console and can't put a disc from game stop in it. Doesn't matter how many warnings you put on the box. You'd drop at least $20 from the drive alone , you'd then get about a third to half the console back and you should be able to shrink the box accordingly while still fitting everything else and keeping the same cooling set up

 

[Shifty Geezer]

We've had price drops before that come out of thin air . For example every price drop the Original xbox ever had.

XB was a huge loss leader. MS just dropped the price and endured the expense to establish the brand.

The Kinect is not that expensive from my very limited sources MS was actually profiting on each unit sold at $500 and that includes the bult in buffer for the retail chain selling it.

So your saying MS made a console with a $50 profit margin and then instead of dropping that price margin to be competitive, removed a $20 Kinect camera to hit the new price point?

We've plenty of sources and evidence Kinect is costly. $50 has to be a sane minimum.

...not enough people on the console side have figured out Digital downloads yet.

I think they've figured out download just fine. It costs more and you can't share your content or sell it on. Especially next to mobile where download is dirt cheap, the inflated prices of download for the consoles is always going to be a significant barrier. A cheaper download only console could work, but it's going to cost the user more in the long run. Quick price check between XB Live store's most popular games and Shop To:

COD:Ghosts. £55 download, £31 disc
FIFA 14 : £55 download, £37 disc
BF4 : £55, £35
Titanfall : £55, £30
Sniper 3 : £50, £42
Transformer : £55, £35

Factor in the added functionality of the cheaper version and it's pretty clear why downloads aren't the primary distribution choice by gamers. Therefore, removing the option to play discs would create a pretty niche product. Could MS really save as much as $100 by removing the $30 drive, and will gamers want to save $100 buying the console only to spend that much extra a year on the more expensive games?

 

[Rangers]

Kinect 2 is supposed to retail for as Phil Spencer tweeted "not exactly $100". So this basically means $129 or $149. Old Kinect retails for $109.

So yes, it has some significant, $50-$75+ BOM.

Also about iSuppli, I dont trust their figures. A internal PSU is by (almost) all measures superior to an external. I still remember Kutaragi being asked if Ps3 has internal or a brick before PS3 was released. He asked the reporter "which is better?" The reporter said internal. And Kutaragi said so that will be what PS3 has. So why on earth would MS make an external brick, and cost themselves (supposedly) $5 per console in order to make an inferior product? That makes less than no sense.

 

[imaxx]

Could MS really save as much as $100 by removing the $30 drive, and will gamers want to save $100 buying the console only to spend that much extra a year on the more expensive games?

Bandwidth costs. Spage storage (or re-download time if you hgave many games) costs.

Time: a disk that you need to push in the BD player for fresh install and, 2 minutes later, start to play (PS alike) is way better, than re-downloading a game. segment, especially if you dont feat a 100mb line.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

So why on earth would MS make an external brick, and cost themselves (supposedly) $5 per console in order to make an inferior product? That makes less than no sense.

Presumably because it removes a fair amount of heat from the chassis and Microsoft's design is patently a product of risk averse thinking. How else do you explain the oversized chassis and enormous fan.

However the IHS estimates are the costs to each manufacturer. Sony's PSU is better than Microsoft's (it's a universal 50/60hz 110v to 240v unit) but the cost of building a PSU for Sony is going to be less than Microsoft because Sony source a lot of PSUs across a lot of products. Economies of scale will naturally favour the hardware company. I doubt there's any part of of the Xbox One that Sony couldn't have done cheaper.

The controller is the stand out but then the DualShock 4 has touch controls and a battery so it's not apples and oranges.