It’s that time of decade again. Time for a new Xbox. It took four years for Microsoft to go from the original Xbox to the Xbox 360. The transition from Xbox 360 to the newly announced Xbox One will take right around 8 years, and the 360 won’t be going away anytime soon either. The console business demands long upgrade cycles in order to make early investments in hardware (often sold at a loss) worthwhile. This last round was much longer that it ever should have been, so the Xbox One arrives to a very welcoming crowd.

Yesterday Microsoft finally took the covers off the new Xbox, what it hopes will last for many years to come. At a high level here’s what we’re dealing with:

- 8-core AMD Jaguar CPU
- 12 CU/768 SP AMD GCN GPU
- 8GB DDR3 system memory
- 500GB HDD
- Blu-ray drive
- 2.4/5.0GHz 802.11 a/b/g/n, multiple radios with WiFi Direct support
- 4K HDMI in/out (for cable TV passthrough)
- USB 3.0
- Available later this year

While Microsoft was light on technical details, I believe we have enough to put together some decent analysis. Let’s get to it.

Chassis

The Xbox 360 was crafted during a time that seems so long ago. Consumer electronics styled in white were all the rage, we would be a few years away from the aluminum revolution that engulfs us today. Looking at the Xbox One tells us a lot about how things have changed.

Microsoft isn’t so obsessed with size here, at least initially. Wired reports that the Xbox One is larger than the outgoing 360, although it’s not clear whether we’re talking about the new slim or the original design. Either way, given what’s under the hood - skimping on cooling and ventilation isn’t a good thing.

The squared off design and glossy black chassis scream entertainment center. Microsoft isn’t playing for a position in your games cabinet, the Xbox One is just as much about consuming media as it is about playing games.

In its presentation Microsoft kept referencing how the world has changed. Smartphones, tablets, even internet connectivity are very different today than they were when the Xbox 360 launched in 2005. It’s what Microsoft didn’t mention that really seems to have played a role in its decision making behind the One: many critics didn’t see hope for another generation of high-end game consoles.

With so much of today focused on mobile, free to play and casual gaming on smartphones and tablets - would anyone even buy a next-generation console? For much of the past couple of years I’ve been going around meetings saying that before consolidation comes great expansion. I’ve been saying this about a number of markets, but I believe the phrase is very applicable to gaming. Casual gaming, the advent of free to play and even the current mobile revolution won’t do anything to the demand for high-end consoles today or in the near term - they simply expand the market for gamers. Eventually those types of games and gaming platforms will grow to the point where they start competing with one another and then the big console players might have an issue to worry about, but I suspect that’s still some time away. The depth offered by big gaming titles remains unmatched elsewhere. You can argue that many games are priced too high, but the Halo, BioShock, Mass Effect, CoD experience still drives a considerable portion of the market.

The fact that this debate is happening however has to have impacted Microsoft. Simply building a better Xbox 360 wasn’t going to guarantee success, and I suspect there were not insignificant numbers within the company who felt that even making the Xbox One as much of a gaming machine as it is would be a mistake. What resulted was a subtle pivot in strategy.

The Battle for the TV

Last year you couldn’t throw a stone without hitting a rumor of Apple getting into the TV business. As of yet those rumors haven’t gone anywhere other than to point to continued investment in the Apple TV. Go back even further and Google had its own TV aspirations, although met with far less success. More recently, Intel threw its hat into the ring. I don’t know for sure how things have changed with the new CEO, but as far as I can tell he’s a rational man and things should proceed with Intel Media’s plans for an IPTV service. All of this is a round about way of saying that TV is clearly important and viewed by many as one of the next ecosystem battles in tech.

Combine the fact that TV is important, with the fact that the Xbox 360 has evolved into a Netflix box for many, add a dash of uncertainty for the future of high end gaming consoles and you end up with the formula behind the Xbox One. If the future doesn’t look bright for high-end gaming consoles, turning the Xbox into something much more than that will hopefully guarantee its presence in the living room. At least that’s what I suspect Microsoft’s thinking was going into the Xbox One. With that in mind, everything about the One makes a lot of sense.

CPU & GPU Hardware Analyzed
Comments Locked

245 Comments

View All Comments

  • bplewis24 - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    "the Xbox One is MORE about consuming media THAN it is about playing games."

    FTFY
  • twotwotwo - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    I hope it's just weak marketing, but what worries me is that the non-gaming extras don't sound all that new or interesting. A compelling, if unlikely, possibility would be to sell an upgrade that sticks Pro-compatible Windows 8 on the non-XBox side. MS is already selling a portable computer; why not sell a desktop/HTPC, too?
  • SymphonyX7 - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    If this was Top Gear, Jeremy Clarkson would be busy saying unpleasant things about the Xbox One right now.

    "MORE SPEED and POWER!!!"

    Oddly enough, I dreamt the night before the Xbox One launch that the new Xbox had 16 GB of DDR4 RAM and shader count equivalent to Tahiti @ 1 Ghz. I hoped that Microsoft with their virtually bottomless pockets could someone improve on the leaked Durango and Orbis specs which didn't bode too well for Durango. I mean, Sony doubled the RAM from 4 to 8 GB. And it's GDDR5 to boot!

    Sigh. One can only dream -- no pun intended.
  • nafhan - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    Don't think anyone has mentioned this yet, BUT another reason why MS can have slightly lower specs than the PS4: XBO and PS4 are close enough that cross platform games are likely going to target the weaker platform. Sony will be spending money on more powerful hardware that will only be utilized in first party/exclusive games. Side by side comparisons will (in most cases) show minimal - if any - differences.
  • inherendo - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    Can someone explain to me what bluray dsp is. Curious as to what Anand meant but googling shows no info.
  • Kiste - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    That alway-on Kinect thing is really creeping the hell out of me.

    This THING is always watching. Always. Unblinking. And it can see you in the dark. It can hear you. It can even measure your heart rate just by looking at you! It has a huge HAL9000 eye staring at you.

    It even LOOKS evil.

    I really don't want this thing... looking at me.
  • tipoo - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    It's silicon. It's anonymized. I don't get what everyone has a problem with. It's not like this is letting the evil gub'ment spy on you.
  • scottwilkins - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    One thing I think that the article failed to point out was that even though there is a 33% difference in hardware on GPU, there is NOT a 33% different in performance. As the GPU grows in parts, the gains go up logarithmically, not linear like this article suggests. I'd say there is likely less than a 10% performance gain on the PS4 part. Yet it will use almost twice the power, be much more hotter requiring more loud cooling. Yuck! Add to that the performance of the Windows kernel for processing, something Sony could never be able to match, I'd bet that they are probably almost equal in the end.
  • scottwilkins - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    I believe I should have said "reverse logarithmically" meaning more parts equal less gain. I'm sure you guys get the point. Sony is betting on tech specs and market power rather than real processing power.
  • tipoo - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link

    In the absense of another bottleneck like memory bandwidth, within GPUs adding shader cores is actually a pretty good indicator of performance. And it's not just 12 vs 18 CUs, the PS4 also has double the ROPs and 172GB/s for its entire pool of memory.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now