Support NeoGAF

[ChainsawFilms]

I'd argue that Microsoft saved a ton of money on the X1, as they clearly didn't pay anyone to design it.

lol

 

[maomao]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

 

[Samyy]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

Uhoh, here comes the secret sauce!

 

[Gemüsepizza]

So the reason why the Xbox performance is so bad, is because they wanted to save $18 so that they can include the $75 Kinect? Great idea.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Uhoh, here comes the secret sauce!

LOL let's let him get his say in now!

Oh, and that post history >>

He's very serious about what he said.

 

[davepoobond]

They are more of a hardware company, it probably would have happened last gen if they hadn't bet the farm on the cell

i dont buy this "they are a hardware company" or "they are a software company" stuff.

if they aren't, then HIRE PEOPLE WHO DO THAT STUFF WELL.

Microsoft obviously didn't hire the right people to design this box as efficiently as Sony.

 

[mattp]

I'm shocked the APU costs more than the PS4's. ESRAM, I guess? Kinect actually costs less than I expected.

i think the hidden costs of the kinect are all in R&D
they had to have spent a fortune

 

[NoMoreTrolls]

So what I'm getting from some people in this thread (PG2G for example) is that Sony relied almost entirely on luck and had no impact on, hand in, or knowledge of the possibility of higher density GDDR5. They merely woke up in February with memory manufacturers dumping truckloads of RAM sticks on their front lawn because the manufacturers didn't know what to do with them. Burdened by a veritable mountain of high density RAM, Sony had no choice but to put them into PS4s to avoid censure from regional police for littering their city streets with stacks and stacks of RAM.

 

[BigDug13]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

Man, no wonder Microsoft goes for such technically confusing PR statements. People will latch on to anything.

 

[NoMoreTrolls]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

Keep dreaming little buddy.

 

[adamantypants]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

Dem transistors yo

 

[PG2G]

So what I'm getting from some people in this thread (PG2G for example) is that Sony relied almost entirely on luck and had no impact on, hand in, or knowledge of the possibility of higher density GDDR5. They merely woke up in February with memory manufacturers dumping truckloads of RAM sticks on their front lawn because the manufacturers didn't know what to do with them. Burdened by a veritable mountain of high density RAM, Sony had no choice but to put them into PS4s to avoid censure from regional police for littering their city streets with stacks and stacks of RAM.

No, that isn't what I'm saying at all. There are roadmaps for this stuff everyone has an idea of when they should be available. The issue is Sony was going to be okay if they didn't show up, Microsoft wasn't so they couldn't take the risk.

Designing hardware around cutting edge stuff is always a risk, things are late more often than not...

 

[ChainsawFilms]

Man, no wonder Microsoft goes for such technically confusing PR statements. People will latch on to anything.

What this last 6 or so months has shown me, without doubt, is people believe what they want to be believe. Fact doesn't come in to the equation.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

Misterxmedia, is that you?

 

[Steel]

Wait, without the kinect the xbox one is still more expensive and less powerful? The hell is wrong with this device?

 

[TakeItSlowDude]

Look at past history of Esram prices.

That should tell you everything.

What? The Esram cost is included in the cost of the APU. Its cost should scale down at the same rate that APU does.

 

[cchum]

I'd argue that Microsoft saved a ton of money on the X1, as they clearly didn't pay anyone to design it.

There's a rumor that Microsoft spent 3 billion on the chip (read it several times, but can't lock down a source).

Sony CTO mentioned something about the price of the chip/research being 1 billion.
Google his name and PS4.

Sony had a vision of what the goal and carried the plan out. Microsoft....

Hot dang at the chip and tear down differences. Yep, sony excels at hardware confirmed, while Microsoft doesn't

 

[maomao]

Keep dreaming little buddy.

just speculating man, why would they estimate the AMD chip to be $10 more expensive in the xbone?

 

[Nafai1123]

just speculating man, why would they estimate the AMD chip to be $10 more expensive in the xbone?

Because it's bigger. Bigger =\= better

 

[Steroyd]

So what I'm getting from some people in this thread (PG2G for example) is that Sony relied almost entirely on luck and had no impact on, hand in, or knowledge of the possibility of higher density GDDR5. They merely woke up in February with memory manufacturers dumping truckloads of RAM sticks on their front lawn because the manufacturers didn't know what to do with them. Burdened by a veritable mountain of high density RAM, Sony had no choice but to put them into PS4s to avoid censure from regional police for littering their city streets with stacks and stacks of RAM.

It just means Sony beta tested from the future better than Microsoft.

 

[googleplex]

Kinda of related...not really, but Chipworks has posted their analysis of Xbox One.

Dat eSram die space!.....god damn. I'm glad Sony used their silicon budget to beef up their GPU and compute.

 

[HORRORSHØW]

lol

 

[juno106]

I think someone should make a new thread about the chipworks tear down. That should accelerate the misterxmedia meltdown . Lol

 

[GavinGT]

The BoM for Kinect 1 was estimated at $56, but bkilian on the Beyond3D forum (former Xbox audio engineer) said this:

Yeah, about as accurate as iSuppli is, ie, not at all. Doesn't include per unit patent and licensing costs, vastly underestimates some items, and doesn't seem to count things like the tilt motor assembly.

and this:

You keep repeating this number. Do you often pull numbers out of you butt like this? I know for a fact the BOM for Kinect wasn't anywhere near $56. If your source is iSupply, that doesn't help much, since they're useless at estimating costs of custom devices.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Kinect 2 costs them way more than these guys are estimating.

 

[maomao]

Because it's bigger. Bigger =\= better

we're talking about computer chips from the same vendor at the same time period. the cost should be estimated based on powers (number of transistors). I really don't have any insight on how they estimate the cost, but I bet it's not based on size. The thing is not a fruit.

 

[evilalien]

we're talking about computer chips from the same vendor at the same time period. the cost should be estimated based on powers (number of transistors). I really don't have any insight on how they estimate the cost, but I bet it's not based on size. The thing is not a fruit.

Size gives you number of transistors if you know the process used which we do. So yes cost estimate is based on size. The XBone chip costs more because of all the transistors dedicated to SRAM.

 

[Chobel]

I'd argue that Microsoft saved a ton of money on the X1, as they clearly didn't pay anyone to design it.

LOL! Nice one.

 

[Nafai1123]

we're talking about computer chips from the same vendor at the same time period. the cost should be estimated based on powers (number of transistors). I really don't have any insight on how they estimate the cost, but I bet it's not based on size. The thing is not a fruit.

Yes, they are computer chips. Computer chips are made up of transistors. The more transistors you have on the chip, the bigger the chip is. It's simple physics.

The XB1 chip is made up of more transistors due to the ESRAM. That is why it is bigger. More transistors=bigger chip=higher cost.

I believe the yield would also relate to the cost. Bigger chip= harder to produce = lower yield = higher cost per working chip.

If you want to base power on the number of transistors, the XB1 is more powerful. If you actually know what power means in a gaming console, you'd realize this statement is bullshit.

 

[Minions]

So is Microsoft still making a profit on every console sold? I thought people said Sony was taking a loss? Numbers say they are both minimally profiting as far as I can tell.

 

[bigboss370]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

yup. these people also forgot to consider the price of the clouds built in to the xbox one. that makes it more expensive and more powerful as well.

 

[GoofsterStud]

What? The Esram cost is included in the cost of the APU. Its cost should scale down at the same rate that APU does.

True but the the APU cost will not go down as quick or steady. If you ever worked with Edram or Esram before you would understand. There is always a cost using these methods, it'll also make shrinking the die much more challenging and more costly.

 

[Copenap]

It's amazing how little it takes for some people to grasp for the secret sauce again.

 

[Sciz]

So the Xbox was hamstrung by a bad Nvidia contract, the 360 suffered the RRoD debacle, and the One managed to wring a more expensive, worse performing part out of the exact same company that designed their competitor's chip.

Microsoft, you're not good at hardware.

 

[enoki]

yup. these people also forgot to consider the price of the clouds built in to the xbox one. that makes it more expensive and more powerful as well.

Excuse you.

 

[Kabuki Quantum Lover]

Excuse you.

This Cloud to Butt extension is a constant & pleasant surprise.

 

[Arkanius]

I can't defend Microsoft anymore against such beating.
This all comes down to the stupid decision of using DDR3 against GDDR5 when they almost pionered the use of GDDR memory as system memory in X360.

Those ESRAM blocks are merely band ainds to try reduce the gap that is open between consoles in memory speed, and it's costing them in GPU power.

Who the fuck designed this console? I bet some engineers are getting an axe at Microsoft, and it feels from the outside that the morale inside the company isn't very good right now

 

[TakeItSlowDude]

True but the the APU cost will not go down as quick or steady. If you ever worked with Edram or Esram before you would understand. There is always a cost using these methods, it'll also make shrinking the die much more challenging and more costly.

How is that the case for Esram? I realize that Edram makes use of stack capacitors, but isn't Esram just transistor (6t in the case of the Xbone)? Also I thought that the regularity of Esram makes it easier to produce versus logic when it comes down to lithography.

 

[maomao]

Yes, they are computer chips. Computer chips are made up of transistors. The more transistors you have on the chip, the bigger the chip is. It's simple physics.

The XB1 chip is made up of more transistors due to the ESRAM. That is why it is bigger. More transistors=bigger chip=higher cost.

I believe the yield would also relate to the cost. Bigger chip= harder to produce = lower yield = higher cost per working chip.

If you want to base power on the number of transistors, the XB1 is more powerful. If you actually know what power means in a gaming console, you'd realize this statement is bullshit.

Look, the whole time I'm discussing about the AMD chip being $10 more on the xbone, it has nothing to do with the power as a whole for either console. There are many other factors for the whole console output.

"this one is a combination of a CPU and a graphics-processing unit (GPU) that handles gaming graphics"

that's all there is to it, not comparing ram, cloud or whatever sauce.

I'm just asking what basis they have for estimating costs. My guess is it's based on # of transistors and complexity. So the chip of the xbone has more "hardware" than that of the ps4. Unless you tell me that they know confidential business info regarding contract prices and yields. I'm not making any judgment regarding "power" of the chip nor the console.

 

[Biker19]

I don't think we'll ever see a Kinect-less SKU. The press on the Xbox One release focused mainly on the Kinect functionality. Without Kinect, it's just a slower PS4. I think at this point Microsoft would rather take a huge hit in dropping the price outright than removing Kinect. It's the only differentiator they have at this point.

Well, we can pretty much say goodbye to the idea of a cheap Kinectless SKU. Even without Kinect, the XB1 would sell for $399-$449, which still doesn't make it appealing compared to the PS4, while STILL generating a loss. MS is better off (from a business perspective) just keeping the Kinect in the box. Yeesh.

These. If they remove Kinect, then you might as well buy a PS4 at that point. More powerful, & you'll have good 1st/2nd party support in the long run.

Microsoft's clearly in a "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't" scenario.

 

[onQ123]

"At an estimated cost of $110 — about $10 more than the AMD chip found in the PS4 — it’s the single most expensive component in the system."

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

Reason being that all these costs are estimates. They must seen something in the chip of xbone to estimate that it's $10 more expensive than the one in the ps4.

You're joking right?


the APU is estimated to cost $10 more because it has 32MB of eSRAM , custom Audio processors & custom DMA blocks.


none of this will make up for the 6 CU's that's missing & the connection to 8GB of GDDR5 that the PS4 has.

 

[Binabik15]

That's a lot of RAM. Wait, no, it just uses a crazy amount of die space.

 

[andromeduck]

we're talking about computer chips from the same vendor at the same time period. the cost should be estimated based on powers (number of transistors). I really don't have any insight on how they estimate the cost, but I bet it's not based on size. The thing is not a fruit.

uhh actually a pretty large portion of the cost is tied to size/node because tsmc charges by area/node and area is directly linked to yields as well

 

[skc]

This should debunk those that say that MS is making a profit off of Xbox One from the start.

To be fair, we're talking about an analyst who's projection was a whole 1 billion dollars off.

Bottom line, wait for the financials to be reported at the end of the quarter. Stop believing everything on the internet.

 

[Vilam]

Huh, I assumed I'd buy an Xbone when they dropped the Kinect from the box, subsequently lowering the price to $349. It looks like they won't hit that price anytime soon... and I'm sure not paying the PS4 equivalent price for a weaker console. I may end up passing on an Xbone for the majority of this gen if that's the case.

What a turnaround.

 

[mattp]

So the Xbox was hamstrung by a bad Nvidia contract, the 360 suffered the RRoD debacle, and the One managed to wring a more expensive, worse performing part out of the exact same company that designed their competitor's chip.

Microsoft, you're not good at hardware.

to be fair, both the ps1 and ps2 were kind of pieces of garbage that were guaranteed to fail
see: upside down ps1s, ps2 disc read errors

 

[andromeduck]

This should debunk those that say that MS is making a profit off of Xbox One from the start.



If they remove Kinect, then you might as well buy a PS4 at that point. More powerful, & you'll have good 1st/2nd party support in the long run.

Microsoft's clearly in a "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't" scenario.

XBLG + Accessories + Games

They'll likely be making money same with Sony just not directly from the device itself.

 

[BotoxAgent]

just speculating man, why would they estimate the AMD chip to be $10 more expensive in the xbone?

horrible negotiators?

 

[Nafai1123]

Look, the whole time I'm discussing about the AMD chip being $10 more on the xbone, it has nothing to do with the power as a whole for either console. There are many other factors for the whole console output.

"this one is a combination of a CPU and a graphics-processing unit (GPU) that handles gaming graphics"

that's all there is to it, not comparing ram, cloud or whatever sauce.

I'm just asking what basis they have for estimating costs. My guess is it's based on # of transistors and complexity. So the chip of the xbone has more "hardware" than that of the ps4. Unless you tell me that they know confidential business info regarding contract prices and yields. I'm not making any judgment regarding "power" of the chip nor the console.

Then you shouldn't have said this

doesn't this alone proves that the single most expensive component in the system of xbone is more powerful than that of the ps4.

We've been through months of FUD so forgive me for being short. Of course these are estimates, and yes I suspect they are based on complexity. The XB1 APU is more complex due to the addition of ESRAM.

 

[Teletraan1]

to be fair, both the ps1 and ps2 were kind of pieces of garbage that were guaranteed to fail
see: upside down ps1s, ps2 disc read errors

Welcome to optical media. Every single device I have ever owned that used optical media has broken or was unable to read a disc after years. They are a ticking time bomb.

 

[maomao]

horrible negotiators?

Then they shouldn't say estimate because they know exactly how much AMD is charging.