Xbox 720 Is Super Powerful, Contains 16-Core CPU

I like my games but I can't pay $600 for a new game console. I wait until it hits $300 or less.

16 cores is a near-useless spec without knowing their clock speed, cache, etc. - as is AMD 7000 series - wtf? does that mean it's a 7430M or a 7970?

and I agree, they need to have a SSD to reduce the load times and blu-ray disks for the games - with the amount they charge for the HDD upgrades, they might as well put in a SSD for us

Quote from Waxed : People who cant afford the 720 will just buy the 360 if it is backwards compatible with the 720 because of the much larger library. It will more then likely be backwards compatiable because they Microsoft is still going with the IBM powerpc and AMD graphics. The only thing the Wii U has going for it is the controller but being that one controller will cost 100 dollars and limit the system to only 1 player, it's beginning to sound more like the system's downfall.

because the 360 is so backwards compatible with Xbox games AMIRITE?!

seriously 2 things
#1: these speculations are hilarious. I will bet the real system comes in at like 6 cores.
#2: M$ won't push Backwards Compatibility that hard with the new Xbox, there's no reason for them to as its more profitable for people to buy new gen games than previous gen games.

Quote from slapshot136 : 16 cores is a near-useless spec without knowing their clock speed, cache, etc. - as is AMD 7000 series - wtf? does that mean it's a 7430M or a 7970? and I agree, they need to have a SSD to reduce the load times and blu-ray disks for the games - with the amount they charge for the HDD upgrades, they might as well put in a SSD for us

if they put an SSD, the HDD upgrades would be prices at like $400 bucks for 120GB

Quote from IPT : because the 360 is so backwards compatible with Xbox games AMIRITE?! seriously 2 things #1: these speculations are hilarious. I will bet the real system comes in at like 6 cores. #2: M$ won't push Backwards Compatibility that hard with the new Xbox, there's no reason for them to as its more profitable for people to buy new gen games than previous gen games. if they put an SSD, the HDD upgrades would be prices at like $400 bucks for 120GB

Microsoft isn't changing cpu and graphics manufacturer with the next xbox, so I'm pretty confident that the next xbox will be fully compatible. The rumor of 16 cores does sound crazy but not really far fetched. Either way, it will definitely blow the Wii U out of the water.

Quote from IPT : if they put an SSD, the HDD upgrades would be prices at like $400 bucks for 120GB

120gb ssd costs about $100 (since they won't be putting in the high-end ones), they can charge $1/gb and get a profit - that or just let users upgrade their hard drive themselves, like on the PS3

Quote from Waxed : Microsoft isn't changing cpu and graphics manufacturer with the next xbox, so I'm pretty confident that the next xbox will be fully compatible. The rumor of 16 cores does sound crazy but not really far fetched. Either way, it will definitely blow the Wii U out of the water.

think of the power consumption, the amount of cooling needed to cool a 16 core CPU.

and again, backwards compatibility only matters for the mainstream crowd for the 1st year of a console launch, to supplement the launch titles.

M$ won't push hard for BC imo as its not profitable.
Just take the fact that Halo 2 is still not an Xbox Marketplace title.

Quote from slapshot136 : 120gb ssd costs about $100 (since they won't be putting in the high-end ones), they can charge $1/gb and get a profit - that or just let users upgrade their hard drive themselves, like on the PS3

I'd also like a unicorn.

Quote from slapshot136 : 120gb ssd costs about $100 (since they won't be putting in the high-end ones), they can charge $1/gb and get a profit - that or just let users upgrade their hard drive themselves, like on the PS3

why would they?
They charge MSRP right now of $130 for a 320gb drive.
That 320gb drive is sold as a laptop drive normally for what, $50 bucks?

Wouldn't surprise me if they sold an SSD of 120GB for that cost.
Also lets be honest, an SSD is a waste of $$ for a console. 120gb isn't really that much space. normal game installs now run what, 7 gbs or so?
If they're gonna push so much hardware/graphics, i don't see games being smaller than 15 gb if not more.
you'll want at least 250GB or so, and those SSDs are right now around $200 or so.
Also what in M$'s history makes you think they'll open up the HDD for users when M$ is so protective of its hardware?

Or does the fact that no wireless controllers can be made for the system besides Microsoft ones?
They won't even license out the bluetooth on the 360 for 3rd party manufactures, i can't see them being nice.

Quote from IPT : because the 360 is so backwards compatible with Xbox games AMIRITE?! seriously 2 things #1: these speculations are hilarious. I will bet the real system comes in at like 6 cores. #2: M$ won't push Backwards Compatibility that hard with the new Xbox, there's no reason for them to as its more profitable for people to buy new gen games than previous gen games.

Ohhh, c'mon...I can see it now....with a GOLD subscription you can have access to all Xbox 360 games. [because that is something you can do for free currently]

Seriously...just keeping you in the eco system no matter what is 10x more important (read: profitable) to them than getting you to buy a new system and the few games that come with it. People that are going to play the 3 year old COD are going to play the same cheap COD no matter what, and those aren't the people they are trying to keep.

Quote from Curtieson : Ohhh, c'mon...I can see it now....with a GOLD subscription you can have access to all Xbox 360 games. [because that is something you can do for free currently] Seriously...just keeping you in the eco system no matter what is 10x more important (read: profitable) to them than getting you to buy a new system and the few games that come with it. People that are going to play the 3 year old COD are going to play the same cheap COD no matter what, and those aren't the people they are trying to keep.

so how many Xbox games do you play these days?

whats the point of keeping the user in the eco system if they don't buy new games?

Why would users upgrade if they were gonna keep playing the 3 year old CODs?

Quote from IPT : so how many Xbox games do you play these days? whats the point of keeping the user in the eco system if they don't buy new games? Why would users upgrade if they were gonna keep playing the 3 year old CODs?

I don't play any because I didn't have many to begin with. But with this newer one...I probably own 100 or so 360 games now (including XBLA titles)...I would want BC to be able to play those for at LEAST the next console generation.

And the point of keeping them in the eco system even if they aren't buying new games is that they are buying LIVE! PRINTING MONEY! MS gets more profit out of 1 year of LIVE than they get out of someone buying 1 new game a year. (I wonder what MS's cut of a $60 game is? Anyone know?)

Quote from IPT : why would they? i can't see them being nice.

to stay competitive hopefully, if nothing else - why else would you spend $600 on something that is pretty much a brick compared to a $600 computer?

Quote from Frogstar : I'd also like a unicorn.

im only asking for what already exists

Quote from Curtieson : I don't play any because I didn't have many to begin with. But with this newer one...I probably own 100 or so 360 games now (including XBLA titles)...I would want BC to be able to play those for at LEAST the next console generation. And the point of keeping them in the eco system even if they aren't buying new games is that they are buying LIVE! PRINTING MONEY! MS gets more profit out of 1 year of LIVE than they get out of someone buying 1 new game a year. (I wonder what MS's cut of a $60 game is? Anyone know?)

Curtie, how often do you go back to your old games
lets be honest, of the 100 games you own right now, how many have you gone back and played that you bought 2 years ago?
3 years ago?
do you still go back to the 1st 360 game you bought?

Look, BC is a nice idea, but it was really blown out of proportions by the fanboys defending/attacking consoles that didn't offer it *cough PS3*

For Indie Devs, they pay M$ $99 a year for the Developer Kit.

This is an old article, but i can't imagine it being much different:
http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/...artner=rss

Quote : Console Owner Fee: 11.5% (about $7) This is why Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are laboring so mightily to make their machines to success: Each gamemaker that wants to roll out a new title has to fork over a fee for each unit sold. This may vary per console maker--some publishers say creating games for the PlayStation 3 is more expensive because of fees Sony charges to use its Blu-Ray DVD standard. "But that number can get smaller depending on the publisher's status," says Peer Schneider, vice president of content publishing at IGN, News Corp.'s gaming portal. "The fee can be waived for exclusivity to a platform--that will buy you a kickback."

Quote from slapshot136 : to stay competitive hopefully, if nothing else - why else would you spend $600 on something that is pretty much a brick compared to a $600 computer? im only asking for what already exists

same reason people bought 3-4 xbox 360s after their consoles RROD.

Don't forget, the old "Fat" 360 had HDD upgrades costing $150 and up.
Even the new slim originally lauched the 250GB HDD for 149.99
Also the slim 360 HDD is exactly the same as the "fat" 360 HDD, just a different case
Why didn't M$ offer their customers the case for $20 and let those who "upgrade" to the new system carry over their old HDD?
Clearly to stay competitive to the PS3 which allows people to use any HDD.

Quote from IPT : Curtie, how often do you go back to your old games lets be honest, of the 100 games you own right now, how many have you gone back and played that you bought 2 years ago? 3 years ago? do you still go back to the 1st 360 game you bought? Look, BC is a nice idea, but it was really blown out of proportions by the fanboys defending/attacking consoles that didn't offer it *cough PS3*

Nice find on the $7 info. But that means they would have to get you to buy the console (maybe unicorn best case of $100 profit, one time) and get you to buy 5 games a year for 4 years to match some other joe schoe that stays with the current 360 and current COD and pays for LIVE for 4 years.

Dude one has dropped $600 console + 20 games = $1800 Total [$240 to MS]
Dude two has dropped $240 total [$240 to MS] (all prices MSRP)


And I am not a good example for you for BC...the 1st two games I remember buying were COD2 and THroject 8. I have played BOTH of them within the last year, and have owned them both for 4 years. If I could bring up my achievements at work I could even get you dates...