wouldn't they be able to increase sales if MS publicise it assuming it is already produced
"We have a 65nm CPU!"
98% of the world says "WTF?"
wouldn't they be able to increase sales if MS publicise it assuming it is already produced
Hmmm... well, maybe saying "we all know" was a bit strong. I've personally heard it from a couple of places; frankly it makes so much sense to me that I haven't personally really bothered with any follow-up to verify the veracity, but... well anyway it's the assumption I'm personally working under.
"We have a 65nm CPU!"
98% of the world says "WTF?"
Hah. Well, actually, they probably are thinking about their ability to do warrantee work in the future, which requires spare parts. . . but again, this would be yet another argument for going forward as fast as possible with 65nm into the channel and withholding (if anything is goign to be withheld) some portion of 90nm production for future warrantee work.
If they disclose which one is cooler and more reliable, they can't sell the older version at the same price as the new one.
That sounds tautological to me I wrote "If they disclose which one is cooler and more reliable".It's only a select, more educated hardcore gaming audience which follows such things (ie. us). They vast majority of the public would never know or care about the difference.
Let me gets this cleared out though: the "so called" cooler X360's are ONLY 65nm CPU-wise, which means the oven hot GPU is still at large, with only an additional HS as its savior
If thats the case, then how exactly will the ROD problems be solved?
Ah, so the new batch of HDMI equipped X360's coming out should have both CPU and GPU at 65nm correct?
The news just keep stating about the CPU, which is why im scratching my head
Because I believe they actually transitioned the gpu months ago so its not news.
I definitely do not think that is the case; in fact the GPU should be coming later than the CPU, not before. That's not to say that the Falcon board may not include both though, bt simply that 65nm CPUs were ready first.
Thats the basis for this?I definitely do not think that is the case; in fact the GPU should be coming later than the CPU, not before.
I definitely do not think that is the case; in fact the GPU should be coming later than the CPU, not before. That's not to say that the Falcon board may not include both though, bt simply that 65nm CPUs were ready first.
i thought we just read last week somewhere that both were going to 65 at the same time?
Thats the basis for this?