How does media make them more money?
I assume they can negotiate advertising deals if people are using their box to funnel content or something.
How does media make them more money?
How does media make them more money?
How does media make them more money?
Because it's locked behind the paywall. If they can get everyone in the US living room to want an XBO controlling their entertainment, they will all pay MS $60 a year just for the privilege.
You don't think smartphones and tablets will be doing that shit already?
It really is sad but Sony with Cerny leading the way is far more reminiscent of J Allard's Xbox than modern MS could ever hope for
Obviously I love Sony's current hardware/software approach but wish MS had a similar approach, at least prioritize the game machine first
So even a Kinectless SKU would be around $400? Lulz, what a fuck up.
Truly crazy that by these figures MS basically took a 33% hit on GPU performance to only save a net $18 on RAM.
Microsoft is going for the what makes them the most money. Disguise your media box as a games console and bam. Products like the Chromecast, Roku, and Apple TV belong to a niche market. Microsoft initially went with games for the Xbox and 360 was the smoothest way to penetrate the market and steal thunder from Sony.
Amazing how we thought the inclusion of 8GB of GDDR5 was so profligate at the time, only for it to it turn out to be a mere $28 difference in the final accounting.
Would have been interesting if Xbone had more or less the exact same specs (18 functional CUs, 32 ROPs and GDDR5). It would have been a battle between services and exclusives rather than horsepower.
To be fair outside of the core most consumers will only care about exclusives, price and maybe services
I'm still curious what the mainstream think of these consoles
The massive irony is if MS had just used 8GB of GDDR5, the cost of the BOM would likely be the same. ESRAM made the APU expensive, and took away silicon budget they could have been used for performance.
A controller is $15 to make but costs what, $60 to buy?
better comparison is to bundle the price of the memory, esram is there to offset for cheaper memory. xb1 is $18 less but i dont think its really worth the savings.
xbox1
$110 APU + $60 RAM = $170
ps4
$100 APU + $88 RAM = $188
Sounds like a hostage situation.Because it's locked behind the paywall. If they can get everyone in the US living room to want an XBO controlling their entertainment, they will all pay MS $60 a year just for the privilege.
Microsoft is going for the what makes them the most money. Disguise your media box as a games console and bam. Products like the Chromecast, Roku, and Apple TV belong to a niche market. Microsoft initially went with games for the Xbox and 360 was the smoothest way to penetrate the market and steal thunder from Sony.
Baby don't Pwn me, don't Pwn me no more.What is GAF love ?
Its really no surprise why Tretton mentioned "phenomenal yields" for PS4 APU.
To be fair outside of the core most consumers will only care about exclusives, price and maybe services
I'm still curious what the mainstream think of these consoles
Not if it becomes water cooler talk that versions of games running on console x is better than console y. Which it -did- become for the 360 vs ps3 era. There were random dudes at gamestops telling people that "I heard that 360 games run better"
Wether they notice it or not, but nobody wants an inferior product.
Who to believe?
I'll take EE Times BOM over IHS.
People are going to shell out $500 for a media box with a paywall vs $99 Apple/Chromecast/Roku with no paywall?
It looks like while they were planning to steal everyone's thunder, they let theres get away.
CE companies are gonna wind up stealing that "media box market" thunder from Microsoft very soon, especially for people that don't care about games at all.
People are going to shell out $500 for a media box with a paywall vs $99 Apple/Chromecast/Roku with no paywall?
It looks like while they were planning to steal everyone's thunder, they let theres get away.
Truly crazy that by these figures MS basically took a 33% hit on GPU performance to only save a net $18 on RAM.
Plainly, Microsoft dun goofed. It's a weak games console, while not as a versatile as a true media consumption device. The price is also out of reach for many, with PS4 being the better buy.
If J Allard had stayed at Microsoft and they instead built a true Xbox 360 successor, then the war against Sony would have been better fought.
People are going to shell out $500 for a media box with a paywall vs $99 Apple/Chromecast/Roku with no paywall?
It looks like while they were planning to steal everyone's thunder, they let theres get away.
Same way it's making them money now....by adding a pay wall.
Not as versatile? How so?
It sounds more reasonable to me, that's all.
60$ for that DDR3?! That's insane, how are they paying more than what I pay at retail for that memory
Isn't it extra fast DDR3 to try to compensate for them not going with GDDR5? It's probably not the same DDR3 as you bought for your desktop.
I thought the eSRAM was in there to compensate for slow DDR3 speeds?
I thought the eSRAM was in there to compensate for slow DDR3 speeds?
Isn't it extra fast DDR3 to try to compensate for them not going with GDDR5? It's probably not the same DDR3 as you bought for your desktop.
Truly crazy that by these figures MS basically took a 33% hit on GPU performance to only save a net $18 on RAM.
I don't think so, just standard 2133MHz DDR3. 8GB of that is $60 in retail.
I wouldn't call that luck, more like better planning. I really don't get where the lucky narrative comes from because it doesn't seem that firmly based on reality. Sony's well connected in the semiconductor world, it wouldn't be all that shocking to know that they had a projection of GDDR5 prices and planned their console accordingly.
Check voltage. MS may need lower voltage RAM and what you looked at was probably 1.65V. Nearly all RAM can run at 2133Mhz with high enough voltage.I don't think so, just standard 2133MHz DDR3. 8GB of that is $60 in retail.
I realize this is an old post now, but we know the 8GB GDDR5 was quite a late decision as tons of developers were surprised when it was announced in February and the first demos of Killzone SF that were designed for just 4GB.
Still, a 4GB PS4 would have been much better than the 8GB One in games. The difference would most likely have been worse multitasking and possibly no game DVR.
I don't think so, just standard 2133MHz DDR3. 8GB of that is $60 in retail.