From the other thread:
The rumours don't tally though. We're told LH is the same as XBSX but less GPU and less RAM. Okay, so that means it can't be a lot cheaper. But then we're told it's notably cheaper. Okay, if it's a lot cheaper, it must be reduced in quite a lot of areas. No no no, it's basically an XBSX just with 1/3 rd the GPU running 1080p, but also half the price.
This promise is just unrealistic. It can't be everything. It's either close to XBSX at which point it has a highish BOM and only a low price if MS subsidise it, or it's a fair bit different from XBSX with some extensive price reduction. How are you accounting for it being the same as XBSX and yet as cheap as $200??
Which part? Rdna2?
I'm going with a 5 x 15 X 30 case. Ultra thin XSX! That's a 3rd of the XSX volume. That should give enough space for a single mb design.
Okay, if it's a lot cheaper, it must be reduced in quite a lot of areas. No no no, it's basically an XBSX just with 1/3 rd the GPU running 1080p, but also half the price.
If XBSX is only $400, despite the largest silicon budget ever in a console, an elaborate construction and cooling, and a sizeable and fairly speedy SSD. Are we thinking LH is $200 and XBSX is $400?The CPU doesn't take much space in the SOC, maybe 50 of the 380 SOC for Series X? So cut the remaining 330 in half for 165 GPU, add the 50 CPU and you're at 215. Fairly close to the rumored 200 for LockHart.
If XBSX is only $400, despite the largest silicon budget ever in a console, an elaborate construction and cooling, and a sizeable and fairly speedy SSD. Are we thinking LH is $200 and XBSX is $400?
I can't think of another instance where both a premium product and the loss leader were sold at a big loss.If XBSX is only $400, despite the largest silicon budget ever in a console, an elaborate construction and cooling, and a sizeable and fairly speedy SSD. Are we thinking LH is $200 and XBSX is $400?
If XBSX is only $400, despite the largest silicon budget ever in a console, an elaborate construction and cooling, and a sizeable and fairly speedy SSD. Are we thinking LH is $200 and XBSX is $400?
Xbox360 and xbox360 arcade.I can't think of another instance where both a premium product and the loss leader were sold at a big loss.
This is assuming that $460-$520 BOM estimate is accurate, of course.
249 / 499 vs. 399 / 449
fight!
Well, I was speaking in terms of performance-related hardware. In addition to a much smaller SoC and less RAM, you have cheaper cooling, power supply, case, half the SSD storage and no BluRay drive. Plus, the idea of subsidizing a digital-only console is a lot more attractive. Consumers can’t buy used games or borrow them from a friend, and you pretty much always end up using Microsoft’s retail giving them a much bigger cut. The current rumor for PS5 pricing is $100 less for the digital edition which points to the same kind of situation.
I personally think Lockhart is a brilliant move for Microsoft if they can execute and message it well (prove it’s next-gen all the way, only 1080p). The benefits are numerous:
This list doesn’t even include more speculative things like using the smaller SoC in other form factors like mobile devices, or giving it away with 2 year GamePass subscriptions. I think this will end up being really disruptive in a positive way. I just hope in practice it doesn’t hold any Series X games back, and that the mob doesn’t turn on MS for this, which can influence casual gamers.
- It gives them a the lowest price next-gen console by default, while still giving them the prestige of (sort of) the most powerful console.
- It lets them sell next-gen to the casual gamer a year or two early, meaning they could potentially sell at lot more next-gen consoles than Sony in the first two years. In some ways this is similar to releasing their console a year ahead of the competition in terms of potential momentum building. All those One S sales they would have had in the next 2 years get added straight to their count of the next-gen base early in its life.
- By skipping over the last-gen console sell-a-thon that usually happens over the next year or two (selling tons of your old console at $199 or $149) they can focus all their marketing energy toward next-gen.
- This expansion of their next-gen user base makes their platform more attractive to developers to target in the first year or two.
- It’s a real leg-up for GamePass because they will have a low cost entry point that doesn’t have any limitations in terms of what games it can play (no next-gen only games on the One S).
- If it costs $200-250, it becomes a near impulse buy for Sony or Nintendo fans that want a cheap second console to dabble in GamePass and Halo.
- The price can only go down from here, meaning buying into the XBox platform could get ridiculously cheap in 4-5 years.
Ugh. Much prefer the little cube idea.
With xcloud and the like it doesn't make sense for MS to keep the same hardware sitting there for a long time. Xcloud will keep getting refreshed because the more ML and the more instances each blade can run the more people they can serve , the more money they can make.
I can't think of another instance where both a premium product and the loss leader were sold at a big loss.
This is assuming that $460-$520 BOM estimate is accurate, of course.
There are no new generations for MS. Its best to think of these three consoles as phones. You have the affordable phone and the high end flagship phone . Then you will get a new high end phone and the old high end phone drops down in postion and the affordable phone because low end / end of lie and then a new high end comes out.
it will be the same for MS in the console world imo , it will just be a 3 year cycle for ms, You have LH , XSX both of those consoles drop in price most likely with a new micron process of 5nm which paves the way for a 5nm navi 3/4 with zen 4/5 to come in and sit at that high end. When the next one comes out LH will most likely EOL out of the market and XSX will now be the lowest end console at age 6.
With xcloud and the like it doesn't make sense for MS to keep the same hardware sitting there for a long time. Xcloud will keep getting refreshed because the more ML and the more instances each blade can run the more people they can serve , the more money they can make.
Anyone have any insight into how often do cloud server installations typically get refreshed?
Anyone have any insight into how often cloud server installations typically get refreshed?