Will MS have two different performance SKUs next-gen? *spawn

[Squilliam]

My honest appraisal is that I doubt the idea of a two APU SKU unless Microsoft goes crazy and designs two levels of consoles with a substantial price delta between the two. I believe that the Xbox engineers at Microsoft are passionate but the executive likely believes that a $299 price tag is key to getting good early adoption continued support. I do feel that they have sort of abandoned the core game market to a point but the passion of the engineers themselves have made up for it in their own way even though they have to stay within strict BOM constraints.

We shouldn't forget the 'good enough' part of the market even if we're all enthusiasts here. To really leverage the native talents of the people at Microsoft then software and services will be key. Software doesn't come with a 'per unit' cost like hardware features so to make the most of that factor they really need to come in with a console which can do justice to their talents, I.E. cheap and with plenty of software design overhead.

The design of Durango is 'good' and I really do not doubt this. If the rumours come true then I will tip my hat to the people at Microsoft for their excellent work as I truly believe they have put in 110% to make the console an excellent design in every way. I'm sorry that their change of direction has put off a few people both internally and externally but I feel intuitively that they have made the right decisions for the benefit of all stakeholders in the longer term. My only resting hope at this point is that they will upgrade their console every 2-3 years in order to keep pace with technological development.

P.S. I'm sorry that this post is sort of businessy. I just feel that a single post along these lines could be of benefit to this discussion. Feel free to move this post mods if you're not happy with what I've done here.

 

[ramr]

My honest appraisal is that I doubt the idea of a two APU SKU unless Microsoft goes crazy and designs two levels of consoles with a substantial price delta between the two. I believe that the Xbox engineers at Microsoft are passionate but the executive likely believes that a $299 price tag is key to getting good early adoption continued support. I do feel that they have sort of abandoned the core game market to a point but the passion of the engineers themselves have made up for it in their own way even though they have to stay within strict BOM constraints.

A $299 and $499 2 sku strategy would work fine for launch, especially with $200 off for a live contract. The dual sku rumors should not be dismissed because of price. I tend to favor the idea that either some variation of the dual sku is real or durango leaks are old/incomplete.

edit: now that we are in a seperate thread, I can speculate more without mods getting upset. I think that there is a reasonable business case for a 2 SKU strategy. There have also been a number of rumors (and not the mistercteam type) of "supercomputer", 2 computers taped together, et cetera, that support such a possibility along with the previous Yukon leaks and MS comments about scalability. From a strategy standpoint a $299/$499 strategy ($99/$299 with contract) really hems in Sony as they lose on both price and performance (assuming a $399 to $449 launch price) and puts up firewalls against Apple and Google. STB and 360 ss cover super low end, legacy business. $299 plays next gen games with $499 having much improved graphics and server capabilities,e.g. STB component streams / records video, server could play game with enhanced graphics OR play 1 next gen game on primary display while streaming another next gen game to a secondary display. I certainly hope that MS produces an all-in-1 server system that supports xbox surfaces and whole home streaming and network control. To me that meets all of the networking needs of my family. I don't think Sony can do that, and steam box probably will lack the intregration that I want. Additionally, the $499 SKU could have a different power envelope and form factor if it is designed as a server, i.e. a 300+W black cube would work fine for that use case.

 

[MfA]

Unless they use the double model for stereoscopy, no I don't see it working ... it won't get sufficient support.

 

[ramr]

Unless they use the double model for stereoscopy, no I don't see it working ... it won't get sufficient support.

not sure I follow your comment? what is there to support?

 

[dumbo11]

not sure I follow your comment? what is there to support?

The long-rumoured model of '2 xbox skus' is:
1) a set-top-box with kinect interface.
2) a games machine - called 'Durango' which also contains that set-top-box.

Windows (blue?)/flash developers would target both boxes.
Games developers would target the second box.

Seems perfectly sensible - everyone gets '100% market with 1 target'.
---

Some people feel that it's actually:
1) set-top-box with kinect interface and games machine - 'Durango'.
2) super-duper games machine - 'Durango2'.

Games developers would need to build 2 versions of all their games, and debug/test/certify both copies separately.

This is considered by many people 'highly unlikely'.

 

[eastmen]

As I said in another thread , this comes from Paul Thurrot who is an actual insider.


Perhaps the xbox tv would replace the 360. A single APU set up with BC for the 360. The current Durango specs could put the price cheap enough to do this. ESP if a live sub is required for the tv functions

Second console could be high end. Either a dual apu set up or an apu + dedicated graphics chip or simply a bigger APU . Price it at $400 -$500

If the APU's are the same then the lower end box would simply run all games at 720p while the more expensive console would run at 1080p with more filtering/ aa and other featuers turned on. Kind of like how current pc games are set up . The difference being that devs can tweak for two boxes instead of hundreds of combinations.


So xbox tv = next gen games + bc + tv for $150 with live sub required for tv functions

Xbox next = next gen games + bc +tv for $400-$500 with next gen games kicked up a few notches.


This could also fit in with MS wanting to refresh the hardware faster.

2013

xbox tv + xbox next

2016

Either xbox tv phased out and xbox next takes over or since its x86 and an amd cpu you simply replace the apu with new ones based on a newer gpu from amd and cpu. Go with the multi sku phase again.

That way those who owned the original xbox tv can now play their original games at the higher settings from the xbox next and the new games at 720p . Those who buy the new high end would be able to play all the new games at the highest possible settings.

Cost to consumer would be what they want to spend. I know lots of people who bought a 360 at $400 multiple times , myself included. 360 20 gig launch $400 . 120 gig elite $400 and then $300 for the xbox slim.

So I wouldn't mind buying a new xbox every 3 years at $400 with a set up like this (nor a playstation for that matter)

Some people feel that it's actually:
1) set-top-box with kinect interface and games machine - 'Durango'.
2) super-duper games machine - 'Durango2'.

Games developers would need to build 2 versions of all their games, and debug/test/certify both copies separately.

This is considered by many people 'highly unlikely'.

How are pc games made today ? As long as the 2 consoles use the same tech it should be very easy esp with everyone claiming MS only lets them develop in high level languages like DX .

Devs wouldn't really need to do much to get the game to run at higher res with better filtering and some more features turned up

 

[MfA]

not sure I follow your comment? what is there to support?

Two systems with different performance metrics, the more performant system will only get perfunctory support and will show very little for it's higher performance ... unless it's specifically targeted for stereoscopic use, then I can see it working. That's not a huge deal to support for the developer while making perfect use of the increased power.

 

[eastmen]

Two systems with different performance metrics, the more performant system will only get perfunctory support and will show very little for it's higher performance ... unless it's specifically targeted for stereoscopic use, then I can see it working. That's not a huge deal to support for the developer while making perfect use of the increased power.

we are talking about 2 different hardware sets . Its not like the pc which has thousands of different configurations . It shouldn't be hard for a developer to target two different performance metrics Esp if they are only allowed to code for higher level api's like dx .

They could simply build the engine / game for the lower performance metric and then like on the pc scale up assets / eye candy till the desired performance and quality improvements are met for the higher sku.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I don't think Microsoft are stupid enough to release two different consoles and expect devs to actually adapt to treat them like two seperate entities along with PS4, PC and Wii U(and i guess you would count PS3 and 360 for the time being)

a completely nonsensical splitting of the marketplace for no reason.

 

[Davros]

maybe 2 apu's is just ms marketing speak for dual core ?

 

[eastmen]

I don't think Microsoft are stupid enough to release two different consoles and expect devs to actually adapt to treat them like two seperate entities along with PS4, PC and Wii U(and i guess you would count PS3 and 360 for the time being)

a completely nonsensical splitting of the marketplace for no reason.

What would be the cost to take a finished game and run it in a higher resolution and enable better textures / effects / aa / anistropic filtering ?

If the costs are so crazy high then why are pc games made like this ?

 

[Exophase]

Phones and tablets have embraced the multi-SKU model and are now driving a big chunk of the games market. For better or worse MS may try to embrace this too. I don't think it's that outrageous to expect developers to deliver a workable product that's useful on two products as much as 2x apart in capability when they're supporting a much bigger divide for PC configurations.

The ability to get the same popular games at reduced image quality and perhaps features, but at a much lower price, could be attractive. And like with PC components the higher end products could help float the lower end prices. In a couple years the lower end product will be phased out, the higher end product will be brought down to lower end prices, and a new higher end product will be released. Rinse and repeat. It sounds like a nightmare for console games but if it can work for iPads I don't see why it's that foreign. Developers complained about storage uncertainties but that could actually be a bigger problem than a lack of GPU (as odd as that sounds). So they should start with a healthy baseline for storage this time around.

If MS moves to a staggered multi-SKU release schedule with a 2-3 year cadence and Sony sticks with a 6+ year long term plan it's going to put some serious pressure on them. What this costs in game efficiency I don't really know.

Supporting both 8 and 16 cores is a little crazy though, that's going to be difficult to scale with.

 

[eastmen]

Exophase - Perhaps it wouldn't be if a developer really only had to worry about two configurations at once. When the new higher end console comes out they stop support (or within a year or so) of the lowest end console. All the games purchased for said console would play on both of the newer consoles with the enhanced detail of the original high end console. But now the high end console is at the lower price. The newest high end would play all the older games as well as the old high end console but all the new games at a higher setting.

Rinse and repeat. Instead of people buying a new model that is just remodeled smaller with more capacity they would buy a new system that plays the game better.

Then depending on how big into games you are you can pick. Do you upgrade ever x years to the $400 or stay with the $150 sku. or whatever price they end up being.


Scaling on the cpu side doesn't matter. The extra cpu cores would just come with the apu. The bobcat cores are tiny so keeping 4 or 8 of them shouldn't matter and I would wager it be cheaper to produce twice as many of the same apu then having to produce two different apu's for a savings of what 30mm2 or so from the cpu.

The next generation 3 years later can keep the higher core count with better performing cores and perhaps clock them slightly higher .

 

[Jubei]

I havent heard Thurrotts comment but im guessing he simply said "there will be multiple Xbox versions" and the dual apu or supercharged GPU is your personal interpretation of his comment?

 

[MfA]

supporting a much bigger divide for PC configurations.

And don't expect it to be any better than high end PC support, so as I said perfunctory.

 

[eastmen]

I havent heard Thurrotts comment but im guessing he simply said "there will be multiple Xbox versions" and the dual apu or supercharged GPU is your personal interpretation of his comment?

He said there will be multiple Xbox's I believe. It was a few weeks ago so I don't remember exactly.


As I said in another post I don't think you could do xbox 360 / xbox tv / high end xbox as the pricing will be out of wack.

Not only that but think about it . The 360 is PPC . MS has windows of course which is x86 and RT which is ARM and then Windows phone which is arm. Even the xbox is moving to x86. So why keep the 360 around at that point ? A low end Durango replacing the 360 would let them sell everything on the windows market place on the Durango at a sub $200 price point.

With windows blue MS also wants to improve write once run anywhere compiling. So reducing from 3 platforms down to 2 is better. PPC is the least used by MS so just ditch it

That's the only reason I can believe the multiple APU scenario.


If we flip the world upside down and believe that Durango isn't the high end xbox but instead xbox tv it could make sense.

The rumor's that have come out previously that can support this are simple

Durango has XBOX 360 BC

Durango has some type of tv capability (tuner has been mentioned along with some time of hdmi in)

Yukon leak

--------------
IF Durango has BC and is cheap enough in a single apu configuration it could replace the current xbox 360.

For instance if Durango costs MS around $200 to produce then why bother with a $100-$150 xbox 360 ? It wouldn't make sense for a consumer to buy the 360 at that point nor for ms to continue making it.


So following this line of thinking we have a Durango with an apu and ddr 3 ram. This even with added equipment shouldn't cost a lot of money.

So how does MS create a higher end console to slot in around $400-$500 ? Well they can have a whole new design of course. Maybe a bigger APU with more CUs and gddr5 instead of ddr 3 or maybe more edram.

Or they simply use a second APU .

With a second APU they would just use crossfire or perhaps an enhanced form of it. The second APU can come in different forms


The first type brought up by some is simple the exact same APU so a 8 core jaguar + 12 cu chip.

Then you can have a mixed APU perhaps a 4 core or 2 core Jaguar + 12 cu chip or 8 cu chip or what have you.

Then of course it could just be a 12 cu gpu. It would have no jaguar at all .


I would wager it would simply be two of the same apu. Mabye the second would have some disabled parts (less cores / cus or something) to be able to keep yields higher.


Following that line of thought it makes sense . But that would increase the consoles cost quite a bit depending how much the APU actually costs. IF the APU is only $50 or so then it wouldn't make the console that expensive. Even having to have 2 sets of ram one per APU wouldn't increase costs that much .


So if the original system could clock in at say $200. The second APU system wouldn't cost double since only some things need to be doubled. So perhaps it would raise costs another $100 or so.

Or if say the original system costs $250 and ms sells it at $200 and the high end costs $350 to make and MS sells it at $450 or something they could use the other to negate costs.

Esp if the tv functions require a live subscription.



I doubt the dual APU thing is true but its fun to think about and would be an interesting take on consoles.



There is a lot of talk in this thread also http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?p=1716574#post1716574

So I dunno if the devs want us to talk about it in just one thread or what.

 

[Exophase]

And don't expect it to be any better than high end PC support, so as I said perfunctory.

Chould be about as good as support for getting extra oomph out of the latest iPads, which is not ideal but probably better than high end PC support. Of course, even the difference between console games and their PC ports (resolution, frame rate, and to a smaller extent image quality) may be enough to sell people on the better console versions. Or at least it'll be an easier sell than high end PCs, since it trims a lot of the PC fat and doesn't come with the higher end CPUs that gamers tend to think they need.

If this thread took off from a comment that there'll be multiple version then that doesn't really mean anything.. didn't last gen qualify as having several versions too? It's pretty much a given that at least that level of differentiation would continue. Even Nintendo is doing it now..

 

[Jubei]

Thurrott isnt a hardware guy though. Multiple Xbox versions is fairly vague and could even just mean different SKUs.

The problem with all these theories is that the existing evidence doesnt support it, is MS planning on releasing a more powerful Xbox without letting devs know it exists? bkillian said the dual apu theory is bs atleast up until 2 months ago when he left, did MS scramble this together at the last moment? I dont think their engineers are dumb, if they cared about the specs, they would have designed a console that would crush anything Sony could bring from the beginning, not half ass it

These theories suffer from confirmation bias.

 

[dobwal]

I don't think Microsoft are stupid enough to release two different consoles and expect devs to actually adapt to treat them like two seperate entities along with PS4, PC and Wii U(and i guess you would count PS3 and 360 for the time being)

a completely nonsensical splitting of the marketplace for no reason.

Yeah, I believe MS looks at the PC market and is in utter amazement that that publishers like EA and Ubisoft cater to not only two different gpu manufacturers but two different cpu manufacturers. All three of which releases dozens upon dozens of hardware flavors combined into thousands upon thousands different configurations.

Yet when MS and Sony crams x86 cpus and PC based gpus into their consoles, that ability is lost because for some odd reason because publishers refuse to do it for the larger more profitable market.

The vast majority of full fledged retail PC gaming is marketed with hardware (high end dual crossfire/SLI setups) that probably less than 10% of pc gamers own. You honest think publishers are going to develop strictly for the most prevalent sku of the xbox ecosystem even if its the least powerful? And let other pubs use the more powerful sku as their marketing platforms showing off visuals that the former can't match?

 

[Exophase]

Thurrott isnt a hardware guy though. Multiple Xbox versions is fairly vague and could even just mean different SKUs.

The problem with all these theories is that the existing evidence doesnt support it, is MS planning on releasing a more powerful Xbox without letting devs know it exists? bkillian said the dual apu theory is bs atleast up until 2 months ago when he left, did MS scramble this together at the last moment? I dont think their engineers are dumb, if they cared about the specs, they would have designed a console that would crush anything Sony could bring from the beginning, not half ass it

These theories suffer from confirmation bias.

I don't believe the theory in the slightest but it's fun to talk about the technical implications and how plausible things are. I personally could hardly care who has the best or worst console and for that matter only have a very mild interest in how powerful they are in general. It's just interesting technical discussion.

I don't know why people get so bent out of shape over this.