Support NeoGAF

[TheExodu5]

I might as well post what I posted in the other thread regarding power consumption and comparisons to the 360/PS3:

Looking at some old GPU articles...I think people really need to tone down their expectations.

The PS3's RSX is supposed to be slower than the 7900GT released that year. How much power did the 7900GT take under load? 50 watts.

Now, let's take a look at a high-end GPU from today: the GTX 580. How much power does it take under load? 300W.

The PS3 was a power hungry beast and it has a 225W PSU, which means its total draw is below that. Next generation consoles are likely going to take less power than that. Even mid-range GPUs like the 6850 or GTX 460 take 100-150W of power, so I wouldn't even expect that kind of GPU performance in a modern console anytime soon.

Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/power-noise_4.html#sect1

Source: http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-2.htm

That's the total consumption.

A high end GPU alone requires over 200W of consumption during gameplay, and can peak as high as 300W. Total system consumption is well over 400W.

Computers may have gotten faster, but they're also far more power hungry than they were in the past. Video cards now come with big 2 and even 3 slot coolers with 2 90mm fans, when they used to come with small single slot coolers with a single 50mm fan.

This is a 7900GT, a high-end card which is more powerful than the PS3's RSX, and released a few months prior to the PS3:

This is a GTX 570, a high-end card which released a year ago:

Note: the PS3 power supply is actually 380W, although the system only took around 200W under load.

Also, to the poster on the last page who posted <400W load in Metro 2033, it's important to realize that a lof of PC games don't fully tax the hardware. Metro 2033 actually barely taxes the CPU, so the fact that it's overclocked doesn't have that much bearing on the power consumption.

 

[bgassassin]

How willing they are to do this depends on how close 22nm is from the consoles launch. If the console hits in 2012 and 22nm is schedualed for 2013 or the console hits in 2013 and 22nm is schedualed for 2013 then i see no reason why ms wouldn't take advantage even if initial chips are on 28nm

Considering how recently the guy from Sony was commenting on the stability of 28nm manufacturing, I think we should have an idea of what they are targeting.

 

[specialguy]

I dont think 7900 GT's looked like that when they were released.

Just worry about power consumption, HD 7970 seems very nice indeed there. I bet down clocking it to say, 800, even more 700, would do wonders more while maintaining most of it's performance.

And dont forget a 7970 also includes a lot of the things a full console would in it's TDP. Such as a circuit board, video outputs, cooling system, and a hefty 3GB RAM. It's not too much of a stretch to say it's almost a mini console itself. So it's not fair to look at it as only the GPU TDP and pigeonhole it into a 100 watt number or something.

 

[TheExodu5]

I dont think 7900 GT's looked like that when they were released.

They did:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/geforce7900gt_2.html

You might be thinking of the top end 7900GTX.

 

[PatrickLyons]

hrm. at what point do we start thinking about splitting graphics rendering up over multiple smaller GPUs with independent cooling systems to manage all this heat?

also, I am probably alone in this, but I can't figure out why anyone cares how big game consoles are. I'd be perfectly happy if they were the size of a stereo receiver if that meant they were cooler and quieter and less prone to failure. most cable boxes and dvd players are that standard width anyway, so videogames just look weird being these little oddly shaped boxes.

 

[TheExodu5]

hrm. at what point do we start thinking about splitting graphics rendering up over multiple smaller GPUs with independent cooling systems to manage all this heat?

also, I am probably alone in this, but I can't figure out why anyone cares how big game consoles are. I'd be perfectly happy if they were the size of a stereo receiver if that meant they were cooler and quieter and less prone to failure. most cable boxes and dvd players are that standard width anyway, so videogames just look weird being these little oddly shaped boxes.

A lot of people care. That's one of the big reasons for Apple's success. Form factor means a lot.

 

[LowEndTorque]

Some people think GPU customization and 'optimization' of the hardware is some holy grail in this thread.

You don't optimize hardware, you optimize software/games to run efficiently on the given hardware.

And as already mentioned (but apparently ignored), console GPU's should be compared to mobile/notebook GPU's not desktop GPU's.

The GTX 580M and 6990M are equivalent to the 560Ti and 6870. My guess is that the 7xxxM and GTX 6xxM will probably be equivalent to the 580 and 6970.

 

[Pimpbaa]

A lot of people care. That's one of the big reasons for Apple's success. Form factor means a lot.

Gamers don't care, otherwise the 360 and PS3 would have bombed (also the original Xbox). A lot of them wouldn't want anything to do with Apple either.

 

[KageMaru]

Edit: just saw this...

Not a chance really. It has been announced that Windows 8, which ships in roughly the same timeframe as the Xbox Next, will come with DirectX 11.1 only (which itself is only a very very minor update to DX11). DirectX and OpenGL will seemingly be stale for a couple of years, there seems just not that much to improve anymore about these graphics pipelines.

Unless you work at MS or AMD, I'm not sure how anyone can make this claim so boldly. Windows 8 launches this year, the next xbox will be launching late next year, plenty can develop in that time.

hrm. at what point do we start thinking about splitting graphics rendering up over multiple smaller GPUs with independent cooling systems to manage all this heat?

I could be wrong, but it would probably be more beneficial and efficient to just make one bigger GPU in a console than two (or more) smaller GPUs. For one, it would raise the complexity of the mother board which would be harder to cost reduce.

also, I am probably alone in this, but I can't figure out why anyone cares how big game consoles are. I'd be perfectly happy if they were the size of a stereo receiver if that meant they were cooler and quieter and less prone to failure. most cable boxes and dvd players are that standard width anyway, so videogames just look weird being these little oddly shaped boxes.

Yeah same here, make the thing the size of a mini-fridge for all I care. =p

 

[jim-jam bongs]

You don't optimize hardware, you optimize software/games to run efficiently on the given hardware.

No, you can do both. The area of optimisation changes; in the case of hardware you optimise power consumption, which is what he was referring to.

And as already mentioned (but apparently ignored), console GPU's should be compared to mobile/notebook GPU's not desktop GPU's.

The GTX 560M and 6990M are equivalent to the 560Ti and 6870. My guess is that the 7xxxM and GTX 6xxM will probably be equivalent to the 580 and 6970.

It wasn't ignored, but it's also irrelevant to his point considering that even the mobile variants of those chipsets draw over 100W under load.

 

[TheExodu5]

Gamers don't care, otherwise the 360 and PS3 would have bombed (also the original Xbox). A lot of them wouldn't want anything to do with Apple either.

Some gamers don't care, but many do. The original DS is seen as an ugly hulking monstrosity by most gamers here. You can't deny that a better, sleeker looking console doesn't have any impact on perception.

 

[Felix Lighter]

560M is not equivalent to a 560 Ti, its more like a GTS 450.

 

[LowEndTorque]

No, you can do both. The area of optimisation changes; in the case of hardware you optimise power consumption, which is what he was referring to.

Whatever, you know exactly what I meant. And I'm pretty sure that's not what he was referring to:

In his post he said "people in this thread think optimization is a holy grail." The "people in this thread" that he was referencing were talking about software optimization, not hardware.

It wasn't ignored, but it's also irrelevant to his point considering that even the mobile variants of those chipsets draw over 100W under load.

If mobile GPU's are irrelevant to the discussion, then desktop GPU's are even more irrelevant.

560M is not equivalent to a 560 Ti, its more like a GTS 450.

oops, I meant the 580M. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[NIGHT-]

Some gamers don't care, but many do. The original DS is seen as an ugly hulking monstrosity by most gamers here. You can't deny that a better, sleeker looking console doesn't have any impact on perception.

Bad example? At least considering how well DS sold

 

[Dennis]

I agree with Pimpaa that form factor is a minor issue for the "hardcore" at least and perhaps the majority of more average gamers.

Apple products are not bought primarily for their ability to play games. Their main purpose is signaling. Gaming is secondary.

 

[TheExodu5]

Bad example? At least considering how well DS sold

You mean how well the DS Lite sold. Sales went up massively after the redesign to a thinner, sleeker system.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Whatever, you know exactly what I meant. And I'm pretty sure that's not what he was referring to:

In his post he said "people in this thread think optimization is a holy grail." The "people in this thread" that he was referencing were talking about software optimization, not hardware.

I didn't know exactly what you meant, it looked to me like an attempt to argue with someone while not being in possession of the facts. And to be perfectly honest I'm almost 100% certain that's not what he was saying anyway, he was directly responding to the idea that you can optimise the power/performance ratio of a chip to suddenly drop wattage by half.

If mobile GPU's are irrelevant to the discussion, then desktop GPU's are even more irrelevant.

It depends heavily on what point you're trying to illustrate. If your point is that high-end PC GPUs, both mobile and desktop, are inappropriate for home consoles because of their heat and power requirements, then it's perfectly relevant.

 

[NIGHT-]

You mean how well the DS Lite sold. Sales went up massively after the redesign to a thinner, sleeker system.

Didn't DSlite come with a price drop as well?

 

[TheExodu5]

Didn't DSlite come with a price drop as well?

edit: woops, $20 price drop. Actually, only a $20 price drop in the US. Price in Europe was the same, and Japan saw a price increase.

 

[Ocellatus]

Not happening.

Ease answer: The Wii (not Wii U but Wii) set an example as how to sell hardware, make a huge profit and use old tech while narrowing costs down. Now, I believe consoles will be upgraded but they won't be almost "top of the line" primarily because of the costs.

Sony (if they have learned anything) wouldn't launch any new console at those elite prices as they did with the PS3 EVER AGAIN! Neither will Microsoft and even less Nintendo. They just need to have better performance right now and people won't bother about the specs. Game Art is what will always compensate for hindrances on consoles.

I really wish something like the 6970 would be a standard, but to maintain a ~$400 or less console price, that card is out of the question! (The 6970 costs around $350 alone!)

This may have been addressed already, but i think just the opposite. I think the 360 and PS3 have proved that if you build your machine with an eye for longevity, you most certainly can do a 10 year product cycle. The 360 was cutting edge when it was revealed, minus the DVD drive. I think MS will do something similar this time around precisely because selling an overpowered system for 7-10 years is cheaper than replacing an underpowered system in 4-5 years.

 

[TheExodu5]

This may have been addressed already, but i think just the opposite. I think the 360 and PS3 have proved that if you build your machine with an eye for longevity, you most certainly can do a 10 year product cycle. The 360 was cutting edge when it was revealed, minus the DVD drive. It think MS will do something similar this time around precisely because selling an overpowered system for 7-10 years is cheaper than replacing an underpowered system in 4-5 years.

Is it? Nintendo has been a lot more profitable seeling an underpowered system than MS has taking a loss on every sale for the first few years.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

This may have been addressed already, but i think just the opposite. I think the 360 and PS3 have proved that if you build your machine with an eye for longevity, you most certainly can do a 10 year product cycle. The 360 was cutting edge when it was revealed, minus the DVD drive. It think MS will do something similar this time around precisely because selling an overpowered system for 7-10 years is cheaper than replacing an underpowered system in 4-5 years.

It's cheaper but it's also less profitable. There's a reason that Microsoft are moving to yearly Windows revisions, the current trend in tech is disposable, iterative technology. It would be extremely surprising to see the next consoles bucking that trend, particularly not after the experience Sony had this generation.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Is it? Nintendo has been a lot more profitable seeling an underpowered system than MS has taking a loss on every sale for the first few years.

Yeah that had to be one of the strangest arguments I've seen yet. They made billions on the Wii at time when MS lost billions on the 360.

Oh, and I'd say we know the power area of the Loop. MS has to have the final specs stamped down, since it's likely to launch either this year (my guess) or spring of next year. I can see them giving Nintendo a year alone on the market at the absolute latest.

But I don't see MS even entertaining the thought of leaving their largest market open for a year. Not when a Wii can come out of nowhere and own the market for four years.

 

[Necronomikon]

This may have been addressed already, but i think just the opposite. I think the 360 and PS3 have proved that if you build your machine with an eye for longevity, you most certainly can do a 10 year product cycle. The 360 was cutting edge when it was revealed, minus the DVD drive. I think MS will do something similar this time around precisely because selling an overpowered system for 7-10 years is cheaper than replacing an underpowered system in 4-5 years.

But the PS2 before the Wii demonstrated a 10 long year longevity which has been profitable for Sony, and with an outdated hardware. But for now, the 10 year longevity of both the PS3 and 360 hasn't been proved, even less with rumors about them showing their next console this year.

Is it? Nintendo has been a lot more profitable seeling an underpowered system than MS has taking a loss on every sale for the first few years.

And not only that, because MS took the heavy burden of changing every RROD X360 they received, so even less profit for them. And IIRC MS and Sony have just started (just started as in 2 years ago) making profit, but in the long term having 3 rough years vs 2 'ok' years is not even comparable to having 5 years of 'it printz moneyz'.

That's why I don't think top of the line HW will be included on this new consoles. And even less taking into account that mobile gaming has expanded so much (which is another selling point why top of the line HW isn't a requirement) that grabbing that market won't be easier by releasing a ~$500 console with ~$60 games.

 

[McHuj]

I could be wrong, but it would probably be more beneficial and efficient to just make one bigger GPU in a console than two (or more) smaller GPUs. For one, it would raise the complexity of the mother board which would be harder to cost reduce.

The yields can drastically get worse as chip size increases. You can probably produce many functional chips than you can of a single big chip.

You're right in the current manufacturing scheme, it doesn't make sense to use multiple chips. However, there's some companies out there that are doing stuff with silicon interposers to put small multiple chips on a single die. They claim this reduces cost, can reduce power, and provide the performance of a larger single chip.

Perhaps this is something that will be employed in a future console. AMD is rumored to be prototyping with interposers.

 

[Proelite]

I think we should look at how much the TDP can be lowered when customizing desktop GPUS for the laptop market.

The 6990M has a factory TDP of 75W and a real world TDP of 100W, and can output 1.6 teraflops.

The most comparable desktop GPU are the 6850 at 1.5 teraflops and the 5830 at 1.8 teraflops.
The TDP for the 6850 and 5830 are 127W and 175W respectively, and around 140W in real world for both.

GPU manufacturers have managed to cut TDP by around 30% for laptops without sacrificing performance. They might or might not be able to cut some more for consoles.

A 28nm 6990m would probably cut its TDP by half, or achieve 2x the performance with the same TDP, meaning a something in the lines of

3.2 teraflops with a TDP of 100W.

Which is what I think is the least that will go into the next generation of consoles.

 

[LowEndTorque]

Sony's approach with the Vita indicates that they don't plan on imitating Nintendo's business model any time soon.

Microsoft... who knows what they'll do.

They've had huge financial success with kinect, so that's gotta be something influencing their business strategy.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Sony's approach with the Vita indicates that they don't plan on imitating Nintendo's business model any time soon.

Microsoft... who knows what they'll do.

They've had huge financial success with kinect, so that's gotta be something influencing their business strategy.

I'd argue Vita is Sony's most conservative hardware yet.

Off the shelf parts, really cheap slow RAM. There's nothing about it that screams Sony. No Emotion Engine, no Cell or BR, no UMD. The only thing particularly new in its design is its screen.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Kinect (when it was still called Project Natal) originally contained hardware acceleration for the body-mapping tech which was removed to bring the manufacturing cost down, so that should give you an idea of where Microsoft is heading.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Is it? Nintendo has been a lot more profitable seeling an underpowered system than MS has taking a loss on every sale for the first few years.

And how are you suppose to replicate that?

Im not sure even nintendo can.

 

[LowEndTorque]

I think we should look at how much the TDP can be lowered when customizing desktop GPUS for the laptop market.

The 6990M has a factory TDP of 75W and a real world TDP of 100W, and can output 1.6 teraflops.

The most comparable desktop GPU are the 6850 at 1.5 teraflops and the 5830 at 1.8 teraflops.
The TDP for the 6850 and 5830 are 127W and 175W respectively, and around 140W in real world for both.

GPU manufacturers have managed to cut TDP by around 30% for laptops without sacrificing performance. They might or might not be able to cut some more for consoles.

A 28nm 6990m would probably cut its TDP by half, or achieve 2x the performance with the same TDP, meaning a something in the lines of

3.2 teraflops with a TDP of 100W.

Which is what I think is the least that will go into the next generation of consoles.

Good info/post. I would expect the same if the consoles are to be released in late 2013 (much less obviously if they're planned for 2012 release but that's not likely) And there will still be the possibility of cutting consumption even further down the line.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...in_2012_Start_20nm_Manufacturing_in_2013.html
But let's not discuss such irrelevant things, since that's not what some people here want to hear/talk about.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

And how are you suppose to replicate that?

Im not sure even nintendo can.

The same way it's done any time in this industry.

Have the games people want. They wanted Wii Sports last time. The time before they wanted GTA. Before that? Final Fantasy, Tetris, Mario.

The only thing we can say for certain is the market tends to have very diverse tastes. What wins one generation is an afterthought the next. Until proven otherwise I always fall back to games.

You could release an N64 level system in 2004 and still see huge success if the games are there.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

The same way it's done any time in this industry.

Have the games people want. They wanted Wii Sports last time. The time before they wanted GTA. Before that? Final Fantasy, Tetris, Mario.

The only thing we can say for certain is the market tends to have very diverse tastes. What wins one generation is an afterthought the next. Until proven otherwise I always fall back to games.

You could release an N64 level system in 2004 and still see huge success if the games are there.

I dont think they are the same people at all.

I think they are completely different models. The people who bought the ps360 early on wouldnt necessary buy the wii or vice versa.

Wii was a fad/phenomenon family/kids oriented console. Where as ps360 was a gamer/young adult male console.

 

[LowEndTorque]

I'd argue Vita is Sony's most conservative hardware yet.

Off the shelf parts, really cheap slow RAM. There's nothing about it that screams Sony. No Emotion Engine, no Cell or BR, no UMD. The only thing particularly new in its design is its screen.

So in other words, no silly risks or novelty features that cost an obscene amount of money while offering very little in terms of actual gain/results. Just solid, functional hardware. I'd say that's a good thing.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

So in other words, no silly risks or novelty features that cost an obscene amount of money while offering very little in terms of actual gain/results. Just solid, functional hardware. I'd say that's a good thing.

I never said any different.

I just argued that it wasn't along the same trend Sony had taken in the past.

 

[Ocellatus]

It's cheaper but it's also less profitable. There's a reason that Microsoft are moving to yearly Windows revisions, the current trend in tech is disposable, iterative technology. It would be extremely surprising to see the next consoles bucking that trend, particularly not after the experience Sony had this generation.

MS keeps pumping out windows because it's like printing money. There is nothing to manufacture other than CDs.

 

[Proelite]

Good info/post. I would expect the same if the consoles are to be released in late 2013 (much less obviously if they're planned for 2012 release but that's not likely) And there will still be the possibility of cutting consumption even further down the line.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...in_2012_Start_20nm_Manufacturing_in_2013.html
But let's not discuss such irrelevant things, since that's not what some people here want to hear/talk about.

I don't see 22/20nm barring a late 2014 launch.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

But let's not discuss such irrelevant things, since that's not what some people here want to hear/talk about.

:lol

MS keeps pumping out windows because it's like printing money. There is nothing to manufacture other than CDs.

Hey not even, the DD for Windows 7 was extremely comprehensive. However, ignoring Microsoft for a second, it's been proven by companies like Apple that you can iterate on an existing device in relatively minor ways with a very high rate of conversion to the new device. There is an expectation of yearly revisions in this day and age, I simply don't see why Microsoft would choose to ignore that completely in favour of a future-proofed design, particularly when you consider that they've seen their greatest success this generation after relaunching a 6 year old console with a new gimmick.

 

[Ocellatus]

Is it? Nintendo has been a lot more profitable seeling an underpowered system than MS has taking a loss on every sale for the first few years.

Nintendo has increasingly marginalized itself with that strategy and the only reason it works at all is because of their first party software. Wii Sales took a nose dive when people realized third party support was not there and Wii U may suffer for it.

The Wii is like a fad that ran it's course, and now, no one wants to be seen with it. They will need a serious gimmick to repeat the success of the Wii.

 

[TheExodu5]

Nintendo has increasingly marginalized itself with that strategy and the only reason it works at all is because of their first party software. Wii Sales took a nose dive when people realized third party support was not there and Wii U may suffer for it.

The Wii is like a fad that ran it's course, and now, no one wants to be seen with it. They will need a serious gimmick to repeat the success of the Wii.

Fine. Look at the GameCube for a less outlandish example. It didn't sell nearly as well as the PS2, but was more profitable for Nintendo in the end than the PS2 was for Sony. It was also far less risky.

 

[Ocellatus]

:lol



Hey not even, the DD for Windows 7 was extremely comprehensive. However, ignoring Microsoft for a second, it's been proven by companies like Apple that you can iterate on an existing device in relatively minor ways with a very high rate of conversion to the new device. There is an expectation of yearly revisions in this day and age, I simply don't see why Microsoft would choose to ignore that completely in favour of a future-proofed design, particularly when you consider that they've seen their greatest success this generation after relaunching a 6 year old console with a new gimmick.

Apple is successful because it's products are portable products that are cool to be seen with while your are out and about. Their desktops and other stationary products don't enjoy the same kind of success.

If MS decides to turn the 360 into some kind of portable device, it makes perfect sense to do the apple thing.

 

[LowEndTorque]

I don't see 22/20nm barring a late 2014 launch.

I would agree that 28nm is most likely for a 2013 launch.

22/20 would probably be the plan for the "slim" models to follow a few years later with a price cut and heavily reduced power consumption.

By the way, no mobile GPU's have been manufactured on 28nm yet right?

The gamecube didn't sell nearly as well as the PS2, but was more profitable for Nintendo in the end than the PS2 was for Sony.

Seriously? Can I have the source/link please.

That is just insane if true, given the PS2's crazy success. The Gamecube was also more powerful than the PS2 wasn't it?

 

[Beer Monkey]

next gen will not have 1080P xbox already has dedicated hardware for scaling and it's super fast.

It tears in certain circumstances. That's why my 360 is usually set to output 720p, so that I get less tearing.

Hopefully we have tear-free scaling in every console next gen, because anybody who thinks that every game is going to render in 1080p is smoking rock.

 

[TheExodu5]

Seriously? Can I have the source/link please.

That is just insane if true, given the PS2's crazy success. The Gamecube was also more powerful than the PS2 wasn't it?

Hopefully I'm not made a fool of, but I can't find a source. I recall Sony only starting to turn a profit very late in the PS2's life cycle, as they were taking heavy losses early on. Nintendo remained profitable throughout the GameCube's life.

As for power, yes GameCube was more powerful, but it used mostly off the shelf components (PowerPC + ATI graphics) rather than expensive custom built components (EE + GS). It also came out a year later.

Now, I assume the PS2 made more money in the end, but that is probably impossible to track since a big chunk of its sales are mixed in with major losses due to the PS3 launch.

 

[RedSwirl]

Seriously? Can I have the source/link please.

That is just insane if true, given the PS2's crazy success. The Gamecube was also more powerful than the PS2 wasn't it?

It did indeed, and was more powerful than the PS2.

I can't find the links, but there were stories from back then stating that Nintendo made more money than either Sony's or Microsoft's gaming divisions last gen.

Basically the point is, when it comes to Nintendo, hardware, and cost, the Wii was actually the exception. They've typically been able to build up-to-par and even impressive machines with good economics behind them.

 

[TheExodu5]

It did indeed, and was more powerful than the PS2.

I can't find the links, but there were stories from back then stating that Nintendo made more money than either Sony's or Microsoft's gaming divisions last gen.

I'm glad I'm not remembering things wrong.

 

[iamshadowlark]

So in other words, no silly risks or novelty features that cost an obscene amount of money while offering very little in terms of actual gain/results. Just solid, functional hardware. I'd say that's a good thing.

You so funny.

 

[Chittagong]

Hopefully I'm not made a fool of, but I can't find a source. I recall Sony only starting to turn a profit very late in the PS2's life cycle, as they were taking heavy losses early on. Nintendo remained profitable throughout the GameCube's life.

As for power, yes GameCube was more powerful, but it used mostly off the shelf components (PowerPC + ATI graphics) rather than expensive custom built components (EE + GS). It also came out a year later.

Now, I assume the PS2 made more money in the end, but that is probably impossible to track since a big chunk of its sales are mixed in with major losses due to the PS3 launch.

I never, ever understood how Nintendo managed to turn profit with GameCube regardless of how low they slashed the price. The chips were way more advanced compared to PS2, and feature per feature there is no single cost driver in PS2 over GameCube. In fact, GCN had more controller ports and a smaller (= lower tolerances -> lower yields -> more expensive) components.

It's a real engineering and business marvel, unlike any other console ever before or since in efficiency.

 

[To Far Away Times]

I never, ever understood how Nintendo managed to turn profit with GameCube regardless of how low they slashed the price. The chips were way more advanced compared to PS2, and feature per feature there is no single cost driver in PS2 over GameCube. In fact, GCN had more controller ports and a smaller (= lower tolerances -> lower yields -> more expensive) components.

It's a real engineering and business marvel, unlike any other console ever before or since in efficiency.

I opened up my Gamecube and that thing is a marvel of engineering. The whole system is pretty much a motherboard on the bottom, a big ass heat sink in the middle and a disc drive on top; all stacked up on top of each other. As far as I know, that one big ass heat sink cools just about everything (well, that a couple of very small fans to get the air circulated). It's such a simple but efficient layout. Built like a tank too.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Apple is successful because it's products are portable products that are cool to be seen with while your are out and about. Their desktops and other stationary products don't enjoy the same kind of success.

If MS decides to turn the 360 into some kind of portable device, it makes perfect sense to do the apple thing.

If it were just Apple you might be on to something.

I opened up my Gamecube and that thing is a marvel of engineering. The whole system is pretty much a motherboard on the bottom, a big ass heat sink in the middle and a disc drive on top; all stacked up on top of each other. As far as I know, that one big ass heat sink cools just about everything (well, that a couple of very small fans to get the air circulated). It's such a simple but efficient layout. Built like a tank too.

For anyone doubting this, check out: http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2006/10/5703.ars