Report: Xbox 720 Will Be Smaller, Cheaper Than Xbox 360

MS Nerd: One amazingly wrong story about Windows Phone has picked up a lot of steam lately. I’m afraid with my Rhythm post, I may have contributed to the problem. (Oddly, the Ecosystems post has gone relatively unnoticed, what with the recent Lenovo leak). I am referring to the widespread misconception the Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 will be a single OS, based on the current Windows 8. Not only is this utterly wrong, but the assumption some folks are making, based on my posts, that this will happen with Windows 9 is also wrong.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
sjaakiejj1812d ago

An ARM processor in a home console? Doesn't sound plausible.

Serg1812d ago (Edited 1812d ago )

The ARM architecture is now being used in servers, which is crazy, so using it in a console isn't that big of a stretch to be honest. The games on the mobile phones look better and better, and without tight constraints on power consumption an ARM processor could provide very high performance for games.

sjaakiejj1812d ago

ARM processors are great, but they're not great for games. They offer performance that is high relative to their power consumption, but in a one-to-one with desktop processors by Intel and AMD, they don't stand a chance.

The choice of ARM for a home console would be poor, as its instruction set is simply too limited for the ultra-high-performance machine it needs to be to compete with Sony's Playstation 4.

fatstarr1812d ago (Edited 1812d ago )

servers can be run with celerons and still have room to process more. thats why virtualization is the new big thing.

Serg1812d ago

Well, ARM CPU's were around for decades, being implemented almost exclusivly in embedded hardware. Routers and mostly PDAs, Phones and Smartphones. Now the leap to servers is pretty huge if you ask me. Also it's being used in the new PS Vita and the graphics are off the charts. Yes it's a handheld device but still, if they throw the power consumption concerns out the window they may produce a CPU that can handle contemporary processing needs for games. I'm not saying they should go the ARM route, I'm saying it would have been a ridiculous suggestion 1, maybe 2 years ago, but not anymore.

And as I hinted at in my lenghy post below, I don't think they will be going after Sony next generation. Microsoft has always been, and I mean from the '80s on, a company that invades other markets, they almost never try to do their own thing. They saw Sony beating the hell out of Nintendo and Sega with the PS1. Gaming was becoming the next thing in entertainment, they've seen Sony making a ton of money on PS1 and then PS2, and decided to "Jump in". With the 360 they have seen that the hardcore market is more demanding in exchange for their loyalty. Better hardware (in terms of performance, obviously), better looking games, more features etc. Then Nintendo showed up to the party, made money off of every single console they sold from day one while it took Microsoft and Sony years to break even, their games weren't nearly as good looking, at least from a technical perspective, and still they sold like crazy. You could already see Microsoft trying to get a piece of the casual pie with the introduction of Avatars, followed by Kinect (still can't believe people actually thought hardcore games would be possible with that thing, small elements, yes, whole games, no way).

This is also a supporting point for ARM being the CPU of choice, if they go after Nintendo, they simply don't need that crazy performance. This is a big if, but still, if they go that route, they are likely to produce slightly more powerful hardware than the 360, for noticably better looking games, but still profitable from the get go, and cheaper for that matter. One of the reasons the Wii took off like a rocket was the pricepoint, parents felt more comfortable with their kids playing with 250 buck "toys" rather than 5-600.

sjaakiejj1812d ago (Edited 1812d ago )

Serg, ARM being used in servers doesn't really mean much more then the simple fact that in FLOP per dollar it turned out cheaper. It doesn't really mean anything in regards to performance.

Now ARM has come a long way since its original introduction by Professor Stephen Furber and his associates, but the core functionality, and its main reason for existence hasn't changed. ARM is competing as a mobile processor, but has never, and will never, target high-performance desktop processors such as the Core i7 and AMDs equivalents. It is however perfect for mobile devices such as the PSvita, and mobile phones, due to its very low power consumption.

Even if Microsoft were to compete with Nintendo instead of Sony in the next generation, it remains doubtful that they would use an ARM processor in their machine, as it will probably be cheaper and have higher performance if you use an Intel, AMD or IBM processor.

So in regards to this statement:
"if they throw the power consumption concerns out the window "
They won't, because ARM processors are made specifically for power consumption concerns.

Kurylo3d1811d ago (Edited 1811d ago )

respectfully i disagree... arm is a very likely choice since nvidia and its tegra processors also replace the gpu. Tegra 4 which is slated for end of 2012 supposedly will be as fast as the ps3 and even support direct x 11 . The first tablet with tegra 3 comes out in less then a month. The very next one after tegra4 comes in 2013 and is supposed to be twice is as fast... What that means is that it will be about 100x as todays tegra 2 processor which is only a year old itself in tablets and some smart phones... And the tegra 2 is impressive in terms of what it can pump out in 3d. Its already more powerful then the ps2 and original xbox. And the 100x number i said is not an exaggeration. Its what the company itself nvidia stated.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1811d ago
fragnificent1812d ago

it might be cheaper cause the xbox360 was like 500 euro new when it first came out and like 100,000,000,000,000 dong

Serg1812d ago (Edited 1812d ago )

Despite the popularity of the 360 I think after the disaster that was the 360's hardware in it's first years, people will be hesitant to buy the "720" day one. That article I've read the other day, stating that people defend their purchases rather than brands, supports that.

I don't know if the assumptions the writer made regarding the CPU powering the "720" are based on any real information, but I think it would be funny if this turned out to be real. 5 years ago gamers and developers were laughing about and calling Sony names for using the Cell technology in it's PS3, which is exactly the type of processor the article describes (Multiple smaller assistant cores for different tasks). Supporters of the 360 in particular were very vocal about Sony's decision, now speculating that the next iteration of their platform of choice going the same route, one generation later.

Until I know for sure that I never have to use that ugly HD version of a 2 decade old 16 colour graphical user interface that Microsoft calls Metro, Windows 8 is a huge turnoff for me. So is Windows Phone 7. It is kind of hard to imagine Microsoft can deliver anything appealing at this point. Still I try to keep an open mind. There is no way in hell I would purchase a "720" without at least waiting a few months skimming through reviews and hardware tests.

PS: They announced 3 new Halo games this year, 3... taking that, Kinect and the events of the past 2 years into account, it's pretty much a solid bet they will go casual as a primary target audience while trying to keep the hardcore happy by milking the established franchises.