Print 90 comment(s) - last by talonvor.. on Sep 10 at 4:24 AM

Microsoft's Yusuf Mehdi  (Source:
The Xbox 360 will also get another three years of support

A Microsoft executive said that each sale of the upcoming Xbox One console will break-even or be sold at profit from its launch date.

According to Microsoft's Yusuf Mehdi, the company plans to make money on selling games for the console and the Xbox Live subscription (which, he noted, has grown to 48 million members now). 

"The strategy will continue which is that we're looking to be break even or low margin at worst on [Xbox One]," said Mehdi. "And then make money selling additional games, the Xbox Live service and other capabilities on top. And as we can cost-reduce our box as we've done with 360, we'll do that to continue to price reduce and get even more competitive with our offering."

Mehdi, who spoke at the Citi Global Technology Conference this week, also said that Microsoft plans to support the Xbox 360 for another three years. The company plans to release over another 100 games for the console. 

"You've seen us over the years constantly be focused on profitability and improving year over year," said Mehdi. "There are different points in the cycle when you invest in new hardware. If you look at 360, that platform lasted for seven to eight years and it's going to go for another three years. It's incredibly profitable now in the tail. 

"Some of these things take some time in the launch year in which you invest, and then they they play out over time. We're going to continue to invest in Xbox 360, and the two devices can work in concert. So it's not like the day we ship Xbox One your 360 won't work. We'll continue to support it."

Microsoft recently announced that the Xbox One will officially launch November 22 in 13 markets, including Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, New Zealand, Spain, UK, and USA. It will make its way to other markets in 2014.

Source: Games Industry International

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By drumsticks on 9/6/2013 10:16:32 AM , Rating: 2
If the XBO is being sold at even, the PS4 is definitely taking a loss. Kinect doesn't cost $100 to create, and even if for example the XBO has a harder to manufacture chassis, it's still not $100 more. And since they're using similar internals at different clocks (the XBO parts are probably even cheaper since they're likely just lower binned versions of Sony's GPU), the PS4 is arguably more expensive. So they better make a lot of money off of games if they want to be happy.

At least gamers will be happy with them though.

By Heidfirst on 9/6/2013 10:29:17 AM , Rating: 2
a $100 difference at retail is nothing like that at cost.
& presumably Sony are making theirs whilst MS will be outsourcing?

By Flunk on 9/6/2013 11:20:36 AM , Rating: 2
They outsourced a lot of PS3 production to Pegatron and Foxconn so I can't see it being different this time around.

By Flunk on 9/6/2013 11:21:51 AM , Rating: 2
That's not necessarily bad news, Pegatron and Foxconn generally make things fairly well. Although Foxconn does have a history of human rights abuses (and there are some reports of Pegatron doing some of the same things).

By BRB29 on 9/6/2013 12:05:15 PM , Rating: 2
they both do. It's China where every chinese will admit that money is more important than people. We just see things differently but human rights are few and far in most places of the world.

By Flunk on 9/6/2013 3:37:29 PM , Rating: 4
I think it's a factor of how much you have. If you have all you want to eat, a safe place to live and free leisure time things like personal rights and freedoms seem more important that when you spend all day trying to make enough money to feed, house and clothe your family.

By talonvor on 9/10/2013 4:24:22 AM , Rating: 2
Really, because the PS3 was made in China and Japan. The same way the PS4 is being made in China and Japan. Then again why does it matter? Yes like many others I would love to see all the products sold in the US, made in the US. However that's never going to happen because of companies like Apple, who make all of their products in Asia.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 11:12:28 AM , Rating: 3
Don't forget R&D costs, which typically make up for the cost of most devices. People seem to forget this and assume that companies are selling their products at nothing more than manufacturing costs. If that were true a brand new ivy bridge-e would be like $5

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 2:25:49 PM , Rating: 5
There is WAY more R&D than just the CPU/GPU design. Choosing the components to begin with takes time. Test and development of the different configurations, OS and API development. The Kinect actually does have a custom designed processor in it made by Microsoft, and MSR put significant effort into the technology in Kinect 2, which despite whether or not you like the idea, you must admit is impressive.

What on Earth makes you so shortsighted into thinking the R&D for a console comes down to j7ust telling AMD that they want a processor?

By Alexvrb on 9/8/2013 3:26:13 PM , Rating: 2
Xbox 360 was designed much that same way. Xbox One has quite a few custom bits and bobs, more so than its predecessor (even if it isn't all the work of MS directly). Have you looked at the most recent breakdowns of their APU? It's quite interesting.

In the end, I think final performance will be roughly the same for both. Similar to how Xbox 360 and PS3 are today. Some games/engines will favor one or the other, of course.

By purerice on 9/7/2013 12:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
You are right although the question is, are they factoring in long term costs such as R&D+depreciation etc into the cost of each unit sold, or are they merely talking about the marginal cost of production/unit?

R&D is more than just researching hardware. Game manufacturers could consider most of their development costs to be R&D, for example. If you are facilitating developers' attempts to get titles ready for launch or just to optimize for your hardware, that could be R&D.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 11:21:51 AM , Rating: 4
Now all Microsoft has to do is get people to buy them.

Good luck!

By bah12 on 9/6/2013 12:00:05 PM , Rating: 4
Sorry but credit where credit is due. At least MS is trying. Taken in a vaccum I agree they aren't on my nice list, but when compared to Sony they still look like angels.

I get it, they made some bad choices. I get it that even though they backed off some items, those will probably creep back. $100 is more, but this is launch I'm sure there will be a no Kinect version that is in line with the PS3. Real world performance will be close enough.

My problem with comments like yours is that presumably you are choosing Sony instead. To that I say WTF this is Sony for pete's sake. Sony is the absolute king of screwing the customer over first, ask questions later. I haven't owned a Sony product in 7+ years, and won't again. I don't think we even got an apology for the cluster f the rootkit scandal was.

Frankly I find it refreshing that a company the size of MS has responded the way they did. Seriously name any other large corporation that made anywhere near the changes MS has this close to launch. I still don't like everything about the XONE, but at least the company behind it seems to be listening.

By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 12:31:16 PM , Rating: 5
" Sony is the absolute king of screwing the customer over first, ask questions later. I haven't owned a Sony product in 7+ years, and won't again. "

I hear you there... Sony has been absolutely horrendous in the past... But lately, they havent done anything crappy and they are clearly trying to be better. MS on the other hand was always pretty cool and lately is totally dropping the ball on customer sat and giving a crap about what their customers want period.

So to that point, when buying a product today would you rather buy from a company that sucked in the past and is doing better now, or buy from a company that was better in the past and sucks now? Sorry, Sony gets my cash on this round. I am totally open to MS turning around in the future, I bet they will, but this round is Sony's and sales will prove it.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 12:57:40 PM , Rating: 4
So to that point, when buying a product today would you rather buy from a company that sucked in the past and is doing better now, or buy from a company that was better in the past and sucks now?

How about one that that clearly listened to their customers' feedback and implemented changes to make them happy?

By HoosierEngineer5 on 9/6/2013 2:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
Think Microsoft would have made the change without the competition from Sony? At this point, it's clear the customer would be screwed if EITHER company didn't exist...

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 2:35:51 PM , Rating: 5
And that's exactly the point. People are giving Sony a free pass here and just slamming Microsoft hardcore. Yet, Sony has a history of screwing their customers and then not doing anything about it, and in one instance now they did OK, whereas Microsoft has a pretty good history of pumping out decent products that meet their customer needs, and when they mess up, they listen to the feedback and make changes accordingly, only be to unreasonably criticized for having had the thought to begin with.

Sure Sony didn't do anything wrong, but credit is deserved for listening and making adjustments to please their fans, and I think Microsoft really deserves a break on that one. At this point, to pick a console based on anything other than objective facts is simply fanboyism or bias. If you want the PS4 because the specs are better or you like the games better, go for it. But this blame on Microsoft for something that never even came to fruition is absolutely absurd.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 3:03:33 PM , Rating: 1
I actually have no plans on buying one, nor do I plan on buying a PS4. I'm just thinking about this as an unbiased third party, who clearly sees that Microsoft screwed up, and then fixed their mistake. And credit is due here for listening to the customers.

By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 3:06:39 PM , Rating: 4
"I'm just thinking about this as an unbiased third party, who clearly sees that Microsoft screwed up, and then fixed their mistake. And credit is due here for listening to the customers."

Even if you give MS a pass and they dont put back what they backed down on, as a gaming system its still not as fast, more limited, no Netflix without gold and its slower + costs more. There really isnt any more to it.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 3:14:46 PM , Rating: 1
I don't care if you believe me or not, I call it as I see it, and as I see it, people are giving Microsoft a hard time for no reason.

I'm also not arguing which console is better. Look through my posts and you will see that. I only argue against people who make false claims that cannot be backed up, as we have no real world data to prove anything until both consoles are released and we have reviews.

Attempting to claim the intentions of any company without being in the meetings where such decisions were made is complete nonsense, and has no supporting evidence.

I am a hardcore PC gamer, and the only thing about the xbox one i'm truly interested in is the controller, which I will use to replace my current 360 controller to improve my experience in controller friendly games, especially emulators. Otherwise I couldn't care less about who makes what console and what games are available in what quality.

By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 3:23:25 PM , Rating: 4
"people are giving Microsoft a hard time for no reason"

That is absolutely not true. I have personally witnessed dozens of people here at this site (myself included) spelling those reasons out to you in great detail time and time again. If you disagree and those reasons don't matter to you, that is fine, but don't say those reasons don't exist. They obliviously matter to most of us here.

I personally think its a good thing to voice it. We all voiced the hell out of it with Vista and they got the message and fixed it all in Win7. If they don't hear that stuff all over the place by masses of people, they might never fix the horrendous jokes that are Win8 and the XBO

By cditty on 9/6/2013 3:56:18 PM , Rating: 2
How many really use the Xbox for Netflix? I use my TV for that. I have a Gold membership, though... It is economical and the multiplayer works great in all my games. I trust the MS network to stay up and work. I have more faith in them than I do Sony for that... So, I preordered Xbox One. I love multiplayer gaming and my faith in MS networking was a driving force in my decision. Followed closely by the voice commands in Kinect 2.

By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 4:09:44 PM , Rating: 2
it doesn't even matter, that isn't the point. The point is that Microsoft disables your ability to use your Xbox you paid for and your Netflix that you pay for unless you pay the $5 a month. Its just crappy and restrictive.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 4:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
The Xbox is WAY faster than your TV's online suite, especially when outputting a 1080p 5.1 audio Netflix. Most smart TV's suck balls at streaming.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 5:05:47 PM , Rating: 2
And that's fine. Voice your opinion, they've already listened and fixed the issues people had with XBO. So how is it a joke? They literally listened and responded to every single issue (software related, it's obviously far too late to address hardware changes from feedback about the performance difference).

Windows 8 is honestly the only piece of software I know of that has received such massive criticism but hasn't really addressed feedback all that much.

By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 5:38:33 PM , Rating: 2
"So how is it a joke?"

Take all the items you have defended over the past few months for examples. It's not all in everyone else's collective imaginations.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 6:44:46 PM , Rating: 2
I guess we have very different opinions about what a joke is then. Because XBO was a joke when it was first announced, then they corrected the issues. So how is it a joke unless you're just purposely applying an unreachable expectation for the sole purpose of being able to find an excuse to call them bad?

I don't see any comments around about Sony and PSN being hacked. They made a mistake, then ignored the issue, then got hacked AGAIN. But the moment they release a console and targeted advertisements of being not what people didn't want XBO to be, they're suddenly saviors?

By 0ldman on 9/8/2013 11:46:14 PM , Rating: 2

You are young.

By sguy on 9/7/2013 9:34:37 PM , Rating: 2
Did you know that Sony had plans to have their own DRM on the PS4? They ended up not implementing it because they saw the backlash that Microsoft was getting for theirs. To act like Sony just has us gamers in mind is ludicrous. They didn't implement the DRM because they knew they could make more money that way. It's really as simple as that: it comes down to them wanting to make money. which is not a bad thing, its just people praise Sony as if they cared about the gamer when it was a business move not an act of heroism.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 2:43:39 PM , Rating: 3
How about one that that clearly listened to their customers' feedback and implemented changes to make them happy?

Except they didn't do that. Read my post below if you care about why those changes were really made.

They only made those changes because Sony made it literally impossible for Microsoft to get away with their original schemes. End of story.

By half_duplex on 9/6/2013 4:59:35 PM , Rating: 2
And don't think for a second that they've given up on their original plans, they've just put them on hold.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 2:30:26 PM , Rating: 1
The rootkit was a million years ago. I mean really, it's hard to say which company has done more dirty anti-consumer things over the years between these two giants. So I kinda think it's a wash in that aspect.

Not to make light of the rootkit. I know that sucked for lots of people and was a pretty shady thing to do. But we're talking game consoles here. Sony has never used the Playstation platform to bash their customers over the head the way Microsoft wanted to. The biggest grievance people can come up with was them removing Linux support from the PS3, wow, big freaking deal. I'm sure those 10 people who wanted to play with Linux were pissed, but yeah, not really an issue.

About half the people who bought an Xbox 360 had it fail. Then about half of that half had the replacement fail! Hell I've read people on Daily Tech who were on their third or fourth Xbox.

Frankly I find it refreshing that a company the size of MS has responded the way they did. Seriously name any other large corporation that made anywhere near the changes MS has this close to launch. I still don't like everything about the XONE, but at least the company behind it seems to be listening.

This is where a lot of people misunderstand Microsoft realizing they had a loser on their hands with Microsoft giving a sh&t about what they think.

Microsoft, of course, knew before they announced their plans the backlash would be huge. How could they not? BUT they were counting on Sony to follow a similar path with the Playstation 4.

Instead in a brilliant bit of strategy, Sony lets Microsoft rush to announce their plans first. Then after seeing the massive consumer backlash, moves to position the Playstation 4 as the opposite-to-the Xbox product. They even ran adds about how you could share games with the PS4 no problem, clearly meaning to expose Microsoft's greed.

Don't be the fool and think Microsoft is being some benevolent giant, bending down to lend it's ear. Sony forced their hand. Microsoft doesn't care about what you think, only their bottom line.

My problem with comments like yours is that presumably you are choosing Sony instead.

Nah, PC gamer for life here.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 2:38:28 PM , Rating: 1
Don't be the fool and think Microsoft is being some benevolent giant, bending down to lend it's ear. Sony forced their hand. Microsoft doesn't care about what you think, only their bottom line.

Don't also be a fool and believe that Sony didn't play that card hard. I have no doubt in my mind that Sony had similar ideas lined up and took them back due to the Xbox One reveal's feedback from customers, then used this to their advantage to do exactly what you said. Play the opposite card.

Sony is just laughing the whole way to the bank that users simply had no idea that the PS4 would've been little or no different. Their timing was simply better.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 2:46:03 PM , Rating: 2
I have no doubt in my mind that Sony had similar ideas lined up and took them back due to the Xbox One reveal's feedback from customers

It would be impossible today to keep that a secret. We would have some leaked email, some memo, something to prove your speculation.

Do you have any? You're going on a theory as if it's already fact.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 2:56:25 PM , Rating: 2

Okay I guess you rather just troll than make rational points.

You know how much Microsoft cared about what Internet whiners thought? I believe it was a senior director who got on Twitter and told everyone to, and I quote, "deal with it!", if they didn't like the direction the Xbox One was heading in.

Yeah that's some awesome customer relations there!

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 3:05:15 PM , Rating: 1
If I recall the same person was fired a day or two later.

Also my point is not rational because I was trying to point out you did the very same thing. You accuse me of having no evidence to back up my claim, yet you have none yourself, yet you are somehow arguing that your point holds more water than mine.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 3:15:02 PM , Rating: 3
If I recall the same person was fired a day or two later.

LOL gee I wonder why!?

You're applying stupid circular logic to confuse the obvious. Unless Microsoft is staffed with the dumbest people on Earth, they ALREADY KNEW the shi$storm their announcements would cause before hand. They just didn't care! Until Sony made them care.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 4:42:06 PM , Rating: 1
What? Every company on the planet is going to hire dumb people. You cannot possibly know what they will do. Nobody walks into an interview telling the employer they plan on doing something like this.

You are just using pure speculation to backup unfounded argument. There's no truth in what you're saying unless you have evidence. Do you have a leaked memo? Something that actually spells out their intentions every step of the way? No, you don't. One person's comments do not represent a companies beliefs.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 4:51:49 PM , Rating: 2
Okay whatever, have it your way. I really don't care THIS much about the Xbox to put up with your childish games any longer.

You are just using pure speculation to backup unfounded argument.

I could find you about 20 professional tech writers who all know it's true too. But that would be a further waste of time.

Enjoy blissful ignorance, and your new Xbox.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 6:06:36 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, for the last time, I don't give a sh*t about getting an xbox one, I don't want one. I'm not some biased fanboy who thinks their console is better and trying to justify it with logicless arguments. I'm a bystander who can see it for what it is, unlike you apparently.

Make a mistake - get criticized. Fix your mistake, get criticized. You people are something else... really.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 7:58:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah a bystander. Go make another 50 posts about the Xbox or how poor Microsoft is being treated unfairly.

Without Sony, Microsoft would have - intentionally - caused irreparable harm to the gaming community. And you keep trying to hand them a medal because they were forced into retreat. Spin that however you want.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 9:15:18 PM , Rating: 2
Lol, if you want my truly honest opinion, I'm "defending" Microsoft's decisions because they reacted accordingly to customer feedback. The reality is I think they never should have. Their original idea had far more potential, and I think people who complained were incredibly short sighted, or didn't have a stable internet connection. And yes, it sucks to not be able to use it for that reason, but there are a lot of products that can't. Nobody is forcing someone in the middle of nowhere to buy a cell phone, and nobody is forcing someone with no internet to buy an XBO. The device is a luxury, not a right.

So if you want to keep talking about how I'm defending Microsoft, then you can at least be aware that I DON'T like the decision they actually made. I'm defending them because they listened to customers and gave everyone what they wanted, and that is a +1 in my book even though it's not exactly what *I* wanted.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/7/2013 8:50:04 AM , Rating: 2
So wait a second, after all that we're just NOW getting the truth from you? That you don't feel Microsoft was trying to do anything wrong in the first place? That certainly explains a lot.

By inighthawki on 9/7/2013 3:29:38 PM , Rating: 2
This was never about whether or not I thought Microsoft made the better decision or not. As I've told you a hundred times, it's because I think Microsoft deserves credit for listening to customers, and that should be noted.

I obviously don't feel like Microsoft's original plans were 100% optimal, but they were a step in the right direction. I'm not going to have the argument about that anymore, though, as it's no longer relevant.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 3:19:57 PM , Rating: 1
No see his logic is that Microsoft didn't know what they were doing. They were just trying their hardest to make people happy! Only when they got the feedback, did they say, "ooops, you're right, that's a bad idea! Sorry we'll change it ASAP!"

It had nothing to do with Sony, nope. Nothing at all. It was all due to Microsoft's excellent listening skills and customer respect.

By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 4:46:46 PM , Rating: 3
That's not what's being said at all. Everyone knows, including hardcore MS fanboys, that Microsoft fully intended to do what they set out to do. The difference of opinion here is that I believe it was peoples' feedback that drove them to turn around polices. And yes, Sony's policies definitely swayed their opinion, but that's exactly the point.

Microsoft is a business, and like every business, they care about maximizing profit. They see that people are enraged about their policies, but then love Sony's policies. Sony puts hard pressure on Microsoft, and so the decision is made that they were wrong, and in response to customer feedback stating that the policies suck and that they are going to buy PS4s instead, Microsoft changed their policies. Changing policies in response to the positive feedback about Sony's policies surrounding the PS4 is the very definition of listening to the customer feedback. Competition at its best.

By 91TTZ on 9/9/2013 9:51:41 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is that trying a shady move and then backing off when you get caught doesn't work. You end up losing support from your customers. They no longer trust you and will shy away from buying their products.

By BZDTemp on 9/9/2013 11:44:23 AM , Rating: 2
If you prefer Microsoft over Sony then you're either trying to talk up the MS stocks or being very ill informed about Microsoft.

Microsoft has been pulling tons of crap over the years and keeping at it. By comparison Sony perhaps not perfect but they are certainly nowhere near that level of dickishness.

Just one simple example - look how Sony is using industry standards in their consoles and how Microsoft is instead going with tweaked versions of the industry standards to ensure buying accessories for their console brings them extra money. Take the headset, with Sony I can use pretty much any Bluetooth headset out there while with Microsoft it is not so. Same thing with steering wheels, hard drives...

By troysavary on 9/6/2013 1:09:31 PM , Rating: 4
Given that pre-orders are sold out a many places, I'll take that as a sign that most people are not waiting for the reclaimer77 seal of approval before they make purchasing decisions.

By Piiman on 9/7/2013 2:44:24 PM , Rating: 2
Well you've certainly over estimated your brillence.

By AlphaVirus on 9/6/2013 11:26:14 AM , Rating: 3
Sony has the benefit of being released a few weeks earlier plus the droves of gamers who have abandoned MS because of its original DRM plans. That will definitely surge across the industry and hurt future MS sales.

Sony lost money on each PS3 sold at launch and I don't think it has a problem doing it again if it means it can capture a larger percentage of the market. As of today PS3 sold 79M and 360 sold 78M, that's including the 360's one year lead and multi-device purchase by people who had RROD.

By troysavary on 9/6/2013 1:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
Sony can't afford to sell at a loss this time. They have been bleeding cash for quite a while.

By melgross on 9/6/2013 11:26:49 AM , Rating: 2
You're just saying things here. You don't know their cost structure. Besides this is just marketing speak. We don't even know if it's true.

For example, he's saying that the Xbox is incredibly profitable now, but reality denies that. According to their last financial statement, the Entertainment and Small devices Division lost $250 million. That division includes the old Entertainment Division which had been steadily losing a couple of hundred million a quarter, on average, since the first Xbox came out, and includes income from movies, Tv shows, music and Xbox Live. Then they merged that with the highly profitable Small devices Division, which had been making over $200 million a quarter in profits for years (keyboards, mice, trackpads, cables, etc.).

But the combined division has made losses almost every quarter since the merger, which should tell us something about how the Xbox and content areas are really doing—really badly.

So when he comes on and says that it's doing incredibly well in profitability, we need to be skeptics about it. And if we are about that, then we also need to be skeptics about the Xbox One being profitable out the gate as well.

Remember that Microsoft is portraying this more as an entertainment center than a gaming device right now, and despite after all the years of doing that they are still in the single digits in every one of those content areas.

By Mint on 9/6/2013 12:38:57 PM , Rating: 2
Assuming that MS's small device division is making the same profits as it did many years ago despite the vast competition of low price accessories nowadays is silly.

They've added short term money losers like Surface and Windows Phone. They've been paying for XBox One R&D.

It's complete nonsense to ascribe E&S losses to XBox 360.

By SenilePlatypus on 9/6/2013 12:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
While I generally agree with your cost assessment, I highly doubt the APU in the XBox One is a die harvested PS4 APU. First off, they have a completely different integrated memory controllers. Second: that'd be a lot of silicon going to waste in the XBox One APU...

Well DUH
By quiksilvr on 9/6/2013 10:36:59 AM , Rating: 2
They're selling a mid-range PC for $500. Of course they're going to make a profit off of it.

RE: Well DUH
By hpglow on 9/6/2013 11:15:16 AM , Rating: 2
Mid range? Try budget PC. Depending on what kennect costs MS could be pocketing some serious cash per console after they get production cost down.

RE: Well DUH
By Flunk on 9/6/2013 11:23:20 AM , Rating: 2
Mid-range gaming GPU, 8GB Ram and budget processor. Of course that's based on today's market.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 12:25:58 PM , Rating: 3
"Mid-range gaming GPU"

The GPU is mid, but the combined RAM (VRAM and system RAM) is DDR3, RAM that would be used in a PC... It is low end for a video card, so yes, its a low end. PS4 has a much better solution using high speed GDDR5 for all ram, system and video.

RE: Well DUH
By Mint on 9/6/2013 1:01:08 PM , Rating: 1
32MB SRAM isn't free or pointless. It will have a big impact on bandwidth because it can offload all framebuffer bandwidth, which has always been the biggest consumer of bandwidth. That's how 360 outperformed PS3 for so many major titles.

The only reason we don't see embedded memory on PC GPUs is that gamers play at high resolution and AMD/NVidia don't want to risk having a bad result in a top game not optimized for a very unique architecture. MS is in a very different position with 99% of its market having no more than 1080p, having tools to work with eDRAM for 360, and having devs optimize for its platform. Note that Sony's most successful consoles used eDRAM also.

The biggest impact will be with GPGPU on workloads that need high BW on large datasets. That's been a complete non factor so far, so only time will tell if that'll mean anything.

Otherwise, XBox One has WAY more effective bandwidth than a similar GPU on the PC, so your assertion is dead wrong.

RE: Well DUH
By OnyxNite on 9/6/2013 1:31:55 PM , Rating: 2
The thing with eDRAM in the past is that it was much faster than other types of RAM. In this case while it is almost twice as fast as the XBone's system RAM it is still slower than the PS4's RAM.

XBone's DDR3 RAM: 68.3 GB/sec
XBone's eSRAM: 102 GB/sec
PS4's GDDR5 RAM: 176 GB/sec

The Xbone's DDR3 and eSRAM bandwidth ADDED TOGETHER doesn't even equal the PS4's.

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 2:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
But it's really close, and the DDR3 and ESRAM will have much lower latency, which means that you could theoretically end up with better memory performance from far less stalling on the processors.

My favorite part is how everyone is comparing numbers like it means sh*t until someone actually reviews the console to see the real difference.

RE: Well DUH
By Mint on 9/9/2013 10:32:36 AM , Rating: 2
Those are old numbers. When doing doing reading and writing together - e.g. alpha blending, which is the most BW heavy operation a GPU does - it's much faster than 102 GB/s:

RE: Well DUH
By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 2:35:51 PM , Rating: 3
Anandtech says you're full of it, so I'll take their word and analysis over whatever you're making up. No offense.

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 2:41:31 PM , Rating: 2
Which article are you referring to, just out of curiosity?

RE: Well DUH
RE: Well DUH
By Mint on 9/9/2013 10:34:21 AM , Rating: 2
That was published a month before the most recent info on the ESRAM came out.

RE: Well DUH
By Mint on 9/9/2013 11:15:22 AM , Rating: 2

204 GB/s peak ESRAM BW, from a MS presentation in Aug 2013. Anand's info is from a VGLeaks report in May.

RE: Well DUH
By troysavary on 9/6/2013 1:15:50 PM , Rating: 2
Have you read anything on the co-processors on the chip? MS did a lot of their own R&D on this chip. It isn't a case of buying a midrange AMD APU, slapping it in a case and calling it a day.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 3:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I know. In the end the memory bandwidth is still the bottleneck. eSram will help, but not enough for huge high res textures (which is the major weakpoint of PS3 and XB360 today) , so in the end we well see games made with lower res textures than they should have been had MS chosen a decent speed for their memory. Benchmarking wont even tell us because the higher res textures wont be there to turn on and off, they will just not exist. Make sense?

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 3:06:58 PM , Rating: 2
In which case benchmarking will tell us precisiely the data we want, because if it is true that the RAM in the xbox one is a huge bottleneck, we will see the same framerate at lower quality, hence worse.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 3:08:30 PM , Rating: 2
No we wont, the texture of X size wont be used because it wasn't fast enough, so they use textures < X. USing system RAM for VRAM IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. stop arguing for MS bad choices.

RE: Well DUH
By Reclaimer77 on 9/6/2013 3:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
Golly you mean there's a reason why every video card on Earth uses super-fast specialized RAM????

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 4:10:35 PM , Rating: 2
yeah I think all the video card manufacturers just might be on to something.

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 4:51:19 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are misreading my post. It is not defending Microsoft's decision for slower ram at all. I'm just super confused why you think this wouldn't show in benchmarks. You do not need both consoles to use the same size textures to benchmark. You compare performance relative to the texture quality used. If the PS4 and Xbox one both achieve 60fps but the Xbox one uses half resolution textures, then the benchmark shows that the PS4 has better performance. It's that simple.

Stop letting the bias cloud your reading ability and actually read what I wrote, not what you think I was going to say.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 5:42:48 PM , Rating: 2
What I meant there, is that the reduced texture size that will be in use in games is what will be used to benchmark... Yes, that reduced size may score a bit better on the PS4 and that would show us the PS4 is faster, but the issue isnt that the PS4 got 55 fps and the XBO got 52... The issue is that we wont know how it would look and run with the higher textures if they used faster VRAM because developers will dumb down the textures to match the hardware, and PS4 will get the same dumbed down textures. So we all lose.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 5:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
Meant to add... The choice by MS to use standard system DDR3 ram for VRAM instead of faster GDDR (something that mid range cards have been using for a decade at least) was purely a cost cutting choice. That $500 console probably saved some miniscule amount per unit like a few dollars and it will hold back image quality or the nest 7+ years.

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 6:09:40 PM , Rating: 2
It's ridiculously easy to keep high res versions of all the textures and scale them down for a particular release. That's why there are plenty of cross platform (console->PC) games where the PC offers high res textures. If the PS4 can support higher res textures, nothing is holding them back. Game developers don't apply a "least common denominator" strategy for something as simple as texture resolution.

RE: Well DUH
By retrospooty on 9/6/2013 6:44:16 PM , Rating: 2
Sadly, yes they do. You're right they don't have to but that does seem to be the way to do it. Its been mentioned several times by several developers they will just go to the spec of the LCD. no matter how you slice it in 2013 using system RAM for video RAM sucks.

RE: Well DUH
By inighthawki on 9/6/2013 9:22:17 PM , Rating: 2
no matter how you slice it in 2013 using system RAM for video RAM sucks

I agree it does suck that they didn't go for GDDR5, but in the fairness of the situation, I'll wait for reviews to determine if it makes a real impact. The ESRAM and lower latency might be enough to make the difference negligible.

But it's not always the case about high res textures. It depends on the studio and the game. A lot of studios create and then store super high res versions of their textures, then it's just a matter of building the release of the game with the LOD they want. If all is done right, the entire process should be 100% automated.

RE: Well DUH
By Mint on 9/9/2013 11:10:07 AM , Rating: 2
In the end the memory bandwidth is still the bottleneck. eSram will help, but not enough for huge high res textures (which is the major weakpoint of PS3 and XB360 today)
No it isn't. Who told you that? This is the second time you repeated this falsehood.

PS3 and XB360 are not limited by memory bandwidth for textures. It's limited by memory SIZE. 512MB is not enough to keep a lot of high res textures in RAM and available for rendering.

Texture pop-in is caused by optical disk or HDD bandwidth.

Texture bandwidth is quite small per clock cycle. Only uncompressed textures (or dynamical drawn reflection maps) will need high bandwidth.

By EnzoFX on 9/6/2013 1:50:38 PM , Rating: 3
Doesn't this news make you feel like you're getting less for your money if you went with an Xbox One over a PS4? lol. I want them to take the biggest loss possible on a console =p, means I get a relatively better machine for the money lol.

its the numbers
By XZerg on 9/6/2013 11:46:29 AM , Rating: 2
i am betting that there is some number fiddling happening here instead of the true value by real numbers. definitely the R&D cost is written off as something else or will be accounted elsewhere.

fyi - those who are claiming that this is a mid-range pc for $500 and so it should break/make money, you really need to take into consideration the R&D cost that was put into such a hardware and software. It isn't simply off-the-shelf parts.

"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki