Support NeoGAF

[TTOOLL]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

 

[-Arcadia-]

I’m excited to see this new approach.

This will never be for me, but as a frequent buyer of budget stuff that delivers great quality for the price, like phones, I understand how valuable this can be to more casual gamers. Options for people to join on their own terms, are fantastic.

To Microsoft as well. I imagine there tends to be a very big pause in the influx of more casual buyers for years, until these new systems drop to a suitable price for them. With this, Microsoft may be able to get them from Day One.

Plus, I kind of take the Digital Foundry approach. It’s going to be really fascinating seeing how games perform on this thing, far more so than the typical top-of-the-line-system analyses.

 

[Aidah]

Top selling for a week then dropping off the face of the earth. No one is asking or wants this and 300? For that? Nah ppl won't bite. Mark my words.

Thy didn't learn from the "SAD"

Nah, top selling overall.
Also, "no one is asking for this" is always funny to me as it has no basis. Cheaper versions sell more if they're not butchered. $500 vs $300 for instance is a huge difference to a lot of people, possibly the difference between buying something and not.

 

[Fun Fanboy]

Great replies guys. Thanks for the chat.



So they will only sell the Lockhart for a single year? That thing will be dragged along kicking and screaming all generation.

What needs to be the reply? Same CPU just lower GPU... It'll be more powerful than an X1X. You don't have to buy one if you don't like it. Easy as that.

 

[cireza]

I actually would be interested in a 1080p@60fps machine that would have a smaller form factor and do less noise, like the Wii U for example.

I play on Xbox One X, the console is okay, but a bit noisy, and all games are rendered at 4k or more than 1080p which is pretty useless for me.

 

[SuperLupeRap]

So for the price of a Switch:
- 1080P box (most people here say it), like the Switch home
- is not both mobile and a home console
- bad controler
- does not play Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Smash, Mario Kart.


Good luck with that.

The original Xbox is like what, 900p? Still blows Switch graphics out of the water.

What do you mean by bad controller?

 

[Agnostic2020]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

Well the main focus will be lockhart not xsx. Just like now ps4 and x1 are main focus rather than pro and x1x

 

[sendit]

 

[Deleted member 775630]

So they will only sell the Lockhart for a single year? That thing will be dragged along kicking and screaming all generation.

No not Lockhart, that was a comment on you saying that you didn't like the cross-gen games idea. And even though Lockhart will be here for 3-4 years, it won't impact the XSX, and games on XSX will still look better than games on the PS5. So gamers buying the XSX for that premium experience, won't be let down.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

I call dibs on making the XsS Scalability Meme Thread

 

[geordiemp]

Well bloomberg says sony wants to drop the price on both ps4 and pro so I m assuming pri will stick around another couple of years

They have to get rid of stock I guess

 

[Allandor]

I really don't see the need for it.
Yes, the GPU could be reduced and therefore resolution/details can be reduced (the easy way) until it runs well (that is the easy part). But I really don't see how they would reduce costs so far that the price could make a real difference.
In best case, if we reduce the GPU, we might get a $30-$40 lower SOC price. CPU should be untouched, else it would make it harder for developers to adapt to that.
They can't strip out the SSD at best they could use a bit slower SSD (because smaller assets are used) but that wouldn't change the price much.

They can strip out the BR-drive and again make a digital only console, but that would be at best another $30 (digital only xb1 wasn't that much cheaper).

But on the other had, with a lower end GPU, they also can't really use the RT-hardware (because you need at least a decent enough chip to use it) so developers can't even rely on that.
Memory might be reduced to by one or two gigs. Maybe that is why the xbox one x has such a strange interface.

It only makes sense if they want a replacement for the xbox one x like a xbox one x "mini". They did something similar when the xbox one was released. They introduces an even smaler xbox 360 in xbox one design.

 

[Zannegan]

This is exactly where my mind went, too. Why else would they feel they need this at launch? And IF the XsX needs to cost 599, what will the PS5 need to cost? I had hoped for 449 but maybe it’s higher too.

I dunno. Again, I’m hoping the reveal is very specific about what the console is meant to do and who it is intended for

If you want my totally uneducated guess, $499.99 for the PS5, and not a penny lower. Struggling to hit $450 on the BOM alone (as the rumors suggest) would probably still make the PS5 a slight loss at $500. There's no way it comes in at more than $100 less than the XSX. The gap may well be less than that.

 

[sendit]

No not Lockhart, that was a comment on you saying that you didn't like the cross-gen games idea. And even though Lockhart will be here for 3-4 years, it won't impact the XSX, and games on XSX will still look better than games on the PS5. So gamers buying the XSX for that premium experience, won't be let down.

You’re making a lot of baseless assumptions here.

 

[Leonidas]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

Same as this gen with One S and One X.

 

[Shambala]

Remember the 10.28tf Ps5 is underpowered. Now watch the spin that a 4tf Lockhart is such a great deal and a great console because reasons. Lmao

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

I really don't see the need for it.
Yes, the GPU could be reduced and therefore resolution/details can be reduced (the easy way) until it runs well (that is the easy part). But I really don't see how they would reduce costs so far that the price could make a real difference.
In best case, if we reduce the GPU, we might get a $30-$40 lower SOC price. CPU should be untouched, else it would make it harder for developers to adapt to that.
They can't strip out the SSD at best they could use a bit slower SSD (because smaller assets are used) but that wouldn't change the price much.

They can strip out the BR-drive and again make a digital only console, but that would be at best another $30 (digital only xb1 wasn't that much cheaper).

But on the other had, with a lower end GPU, they also can't really use the RT-hardware (because you need at least a decent enough chip to use it) so developers can't even rely on that.
Memory might be reduced to by one or two gigs. Maybe that is why the xbox one x has such a strange interface.

It only makes sense if they want a replacement for the xbox one x like a xbox one x "mini". They did something similar when the xbox one was released. They introduces an even smaler xbox 360 in xbox one design.

I would think the two things that have to remain the same are SSD/storage bandwidth and CPU, but maybe I’m wrong

 

[Fun Fanboy]

Next month for some Xbox stuff. Maybe more console news. Hell, even price and release date. June for games. (xbox stuff... no idea of ps news)

Good to see Tom W on Reeeeeee, give the same type of outlook. Lockhart in May... let's see some games in June.

 

[Gamernyc78]

Nah, top selling overall.
Also, "no one is asking for this" is always funny to me as it has no basis. Cheaper versions sell more if they're not butchered. $500 vs $300 for instance is a huge difference to a lot of people, possibly the difference between buying something and not.

Thts not all true in history. Sad is dead tht was cheaper, pstv was 100 at some point tht died and let's, look at ps3 versus Xbox 360 PS3 was hundreds more, inferior online at the time and multiplats and it still sold better world wide upon its release world wide and for the duration of its life.

I laugh when ppl dismiss history. We have case study tht it can go either or. It's just my opinion anyway.

 

[geordiemp]

Don't expect Sony to kill PS4 Pro anytime soon. PS4 is still selling really well, Xbox One isn't

They could stop making the PS4 Slim and price drop the PS4 Pro

Sony always kill the old consoles very quickly into a new generation, and with Ps4 back compatability there is no point.

Also everyone buying a XSX and Ps5 can sell tehir old Ps4 / Xb1 so every second hand game shop will be full of them.

There is no need to have new Ps4 or Xb1 and make them at a loss.

 

[GHG]

What needs to be the reply? Same CPU just lower GPU... It'll be more powerful than an X1X. You don't have to buy one if you don't like it. Easy as that.

People throughout the thread have been discussing the merit of having a machine like this and its implications throughout the generation. It's not just about whether people will buy it or not, the poll speaks for itself. The reality is that I doubt you will be buying one either.

If you're incapable of having an adult discussion about it without throwing your toys out the pram then that's fine.

No not Lockhart, that was a comment on you saying that you didn't like the cross-gen games idea. And even though Lockhart will be here for 3-4 years, it won't impact the XSX, and games on XSX will still look better than games on the PS5. So gamers buying the XSX for that premium experience, won't be let down.

Oh I get that. The question for me is more around the game design side of things. A performance budget doesn't have to be thrown only at resolution. When there is a machine that is 200% weaker than the leading console that needs to be accounted for it's bound to have an impact in some way.

In an ideal world the PS5 is the weakest "next gen" console that needs to be accounted for and then it's just a 20% weaker console potentially holding the show up and not a 200% weaker one.

 

[-Arcadia-]

I think that if a 1.23 teraflop console (Xbox One S) can co-exist with, and play the same games as a 6 teraflop one (Xbox One X), we have to consider that the nature of game development has changed, re: scalability.

It remains to be seen, but I think it’s possible that a 4 TF Lockhart could get along just fine. Granted, you’d be playing those games at far less fidelity (resolution, framerate, and asset quality all on the table for cuts), as we see with the S.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Waiting to see how people spin this into a good thing.

If 10TF is "underpowered" and "anemic" then what's this?

I can't get my head around how anyone thought this would be a good idea.

Remember the 10.28tf Ps5 is underpowered. Now watch the spin that a 4tf Lockhart is such a great deal and a great console because reasons. Lmao

I don’t think anyone on GAF will be advocating for Lockhart over either PS5 or XsX. At best it seems like a price conscious alternative for those on strict budgets, that’s it

 

[Deleted member 775630]

You’re making a lot of baseless assumptions here.

3rd party games won't focus on anything special for SSD, since otherwise they would also exclude PC players. So it's purely about power. Who has the most power, bandwidth and better CPU? The XSX.

If your response is: "1st party studio games of PS5 might look better than anything on XSX". Sure could be, but that wouldn't matter because you would need to buy a PS5 to play them anyway, just like you would need to buy the XSX or Windows to play first party studio games from Microsoft. It's about the games available on both systems if we are talking about Lockhart holding back the whole generation.

 

[GHG]

I think that if a 1.23 teraflop console (Xbox One S) can co-exist with, and play the same games as a 6 teraflop one (Xbox One X), we have to consider that the nature of game development has changed, re: scalability.

It remains to be seen, but I think it’s possible that a 4 TF Lockhart could get along just fine. Granted, you’d be playing those games at far less fidelity (resolution, framerate, and asset quality all on the table for cuts), as we see with the S.

This is entirely the problem though, the longer the generation went on the more that machine got forgotten about and ended up with rough treatment as far as games go. In the last 6 months it's become clear that the console has very much become an afterthought as far as developers go. It was weak and underpowered at the start of the generation and that only got worse as time progressed.

 

[FStubbs]

What would be a point of a machine weaker than the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X?

 

[Agnostic2020]

Good to see Tom W on Reeeeeee, give the same type of outlook. Lockhart in May... let's see some games in June.

U quoted urself and praised urself and called urself tom Warren?

Never mind I just saw RE refrence lol

 

[Deleted member 740922]

What do you mean by bad controller

It doesn't have drift?

 

[splattered]

Remember the 10.28tf Ps5 is underpowered. Now watch the spin that a 4tf Lockhart is such a great deal and a great console because reasons. Lmao

For $200 less offering super stable 1080p - 1440p 60FPS performance yes this will be a great deal and a great console.

If they shock the world and fit this into a mobile hybrid format it will be unstoppable.

 

[prinz_valium]

Oh crap, so there will be like 3 xbox consoles to purchase (High End > SEX, Mid End > One X, Low End > Lockhart)

I think SEX games will run on One X at ~2K res.

No. One X is gone by the time Series X and Series S launch.
And even One S will phase out fast.

 

[ResilientBanana]

MS, just cancel Lockhart. It's redundant. There's no genuine purpose for it. XSX and Xcloud are enough. If people want to get in on next-gen cheaply, literally just let them use Xcloud streaming on their One X/XBO or Samsung phone.

Just focus on XSX and price it right, because the more I hear about Lockhart (especially in light of the already great Xcloud and Gamepass services), the more I dislike it. The whole thing is feeling like a stopgap and a constant road bump to a smooth next-gen with XSX, Xcloud and Gamepass.

Hearing it could have critical next-gen features cut back just makes it sound even worst. Put that Lockhart production budget towards XSX, more software development or securing 3rd-party deals (or even a VR/AR headset). All of those would be better use of that Lockhart money, IMHO.



But that's the thing; GPU isn't just for graphics. Asynchronous compute will be a massive thing for next gen, arguably more than the SSDs IMHO, and while non-graphical features of games are very scalable these days, there's a point to where you scale down so much it becomes a completely different gaming experience.

Just my opinion, but the whole thing with Lockhart feels very 32X-ish. A potential long-term anchor solution for a short-term problem (recession and casuals not able or willing to jump in @$450/$500). It just feels redundant now thanks to stuff like Xcloud streaming.

Maybe the ONLY way I could see Lockhart being justified is IF it's a streaming device, perhaps they could get it to $199. In that case, I can see it being of some value and not have any big impacts on XSX. But you don't need 4TF for a streaming device IMO....not even for 4K60 I would assume.

RT most likely accounts for very much of the GPU usage next-gen. By removing RT and lowering the resolution as well as texture quality by 2-4x you will need far less TFLOPs, Memory and CPU power. So asynchronicity compute could still be a thing. I'm not sure if anyone understands this, but even a 2080ti is humbled @ 1080p with Hardware RT. If a lot of people think that wont still be the case for Next-Gen consoles, you're all crazy as fuck.

4TF will be more than enough without the bells and whistles to handle next gen games. The things that will use the most power will indeed be toggles that can be flipped.

What would be a point of a machine weaker than the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X?

It's not weaker 4TF RDNA2 = 6TF GCN in performance. Not to mention the XOX was meant for current gen at 4K, the XSS is not.

 

[-Arcadia-]

This is entirely the problem though, the longer the generation went on the more that machine got forgotten about and ended up with rough treatment as far as games go. In the last 6 months it's become clear that the console has very much become an afterthought as far as developers go. It was weak and underpowered at the start of the generation and that only got worse as time progressed.

Rough treatment by our standards.

For casual gamers, they’re not going to care about how the Xbox One S, or Lockhart, weighs in compared to the others on a Digital Foundry analysis.

I concede that with S, I’ve heard that sub-30 FPS framerate sometimes is the cut, and that does impact casual gamers. Lockhart would have to avoid a pitfall like this.

 

[GeorgPrime]

Oh crap, so there will be like 3 xbox consoles to purchase (High End > SEX, Mid End > One X, Low End > Lockhart)

I think SEX games will run on One X at ~2K res.

So there is literally no point in buying "Lockhart" aside from the aspect that you may be able to play your Xbox One X Games on it?

For me: I dont buy Lockheart when i can just save up money for one more month to buy the better console.

They could do it like this:

Lockhart 399
One X 499
SEX 599

But if you buy Lockhart first and you buy SEX within two years you just pay 299 for the upgrade.

 

[Gamernyc78]

What would be a point of a machine weaker than the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X?

Ppl are going to say accessibility at a lower price point. Not everyone can afford a 500 console but my opinion is game enthusiasts wantvthe best and will pay for it. Casuals want to by the best from word of mouth unless the system is offering some gimmicky, new, fun way to play like the wii. I don't see lockhart having a place because of this.

 

[Neo_game]

No not Lockhart, that was a comment on you saying that you didn't like the cross-gen games idea. And even though Lockhart will be here for 3-4 years, it won't impact the XSX, and games on XSX will still look better than games on the PS5. So gamers buying the XSX for that premium experience, won't be let down.

The only difference is third party games is going to be resolution between the consoles. May be RT to some extent ? which will probably be disabled on the 300$ console.

 

[FStubbs]

Ppl are going to say accessibility at a lower price point. Not everyone can afford a 500 console but my opinion is game enthusiasts wantvthe best and will pay for it. Casuals want to by the best from word of mouth unless the system is offering some gimmicky, new, fun way to play like the wii. I don't see lockhart having a place because of this.

Then MS already has the Xbox One X which is stronger than this proposed box, which they could price drop on.

 

[Grinchy]

I think that if a 1.23 teraflop console (Xbox One S) can co-exist with, and play the same games as a 6 teraflop one (Xbox One X), we have to consider that the nature of game development has changed, re: scalability.

It remains to be seen, but I think it’s possible that a 4 TF Lockhart could get along just fine. Granted, you’d be playing those games at far less fidelity (resolution, framerate, and asset quality all on the table for cuts), as we see with the S.

The games aren't being made for the 6TF X and then scaled down for S, though. The 6TF X is just boosting some aspects of the game that was targetting the shitty hardware levels.

If only the X existed for this whole generation, Xbox games would have taken a giant shit on PS games from the Empire State building.

 

[SonGoku]

Not even just a technical thing, I personally question the logistics behind Lockhart financially as a 4 TF local-hardware gaming device, even at $299, because what can MS realistically cut while still keeping things at a baseline that won't hurt XSX. 4 TF is a smaller GPU, cool. But then what? They'd still need the same SSD as XSX, and they'd probably need 12 GB RAM... that's not too much less than the 16 GB in XSX or PS5.

Oh I agree, from a business standpoint it could get messy. It'll create confusion and potentially hurt sales
Locker should be introduced in 2-3 years when things are established

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

GENIOUS move by Phil an the team. Can't wait for the reveal.

 

[Gamernyc78]

Then MS already has the Xbox One X which is stronger than this proposed box, which they could price drop on.

Yeah and thts the issue some ppl have, it's like the X is being dismissed and it just released. Again I don't see a place for lockhart.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Lets do some paper math. Assuming Series X BoM is ~$500, I don't see how Lockhart can shave $150-200 off it.

APU - Series X has 360mm2 size, lets assume they keep the same CPU, how much die space they are saving on a smaller GPU? If Lockhart has 22CUs @1.4GHz. Savings would be the tune of ~70-75mm2? How much would the savings be here? ~$40-50.

RAM - We don't know the setup except that total size is 12GB. Let's assume they are buying 4 less modules than Series X. Savings would be another ~$40.

SSD - Apparently same, so same price.

PSU - Don't need to be as big or powerful, $10 savings.

Cooling - No vapor chamber required, $20-25 savings.

Other peripherals - I assume no separate PCBs in Lockhart, with overall skeleton of box being cheaper to build too, $10-20.

After adding all of this, I'm still struggling to go anywhere near $350 BoM. That's without accounting for manufacturing, distribution, and other miscellaneous costs such as retailers cut etc. $249 price-tag sounds too extreme to me, even a $299 one would be mean them eating $100 loss per box. Then you take into account, Series X will be sold at a loss as well. I mean how much money are Xbox planning to lose on hardware alone?

Well, I can already tell you its not a streaming device. I listened up the Phil Spencer interview on IGN a fortnight ago, and he was pretty adamant when it came to gaming experience, they are best when running on a local hardware. xCloud is a long-term goal for them which I don't expect to come to fruition in short-term. Lockhart is basically a cheaper entry spec machine into the next-gen.

Good work on the cost scalings, as that seems about right. If it's what we think it is, they can't get it to a BOM below $350 so they either sell it at a loss (why? They are probably already going to sell XSX at a loss), or sell it at $399 which at that point makes it a poor value proposition.

The last part is the thing that worries me most. There's no need for Lockhart if that is it's purpose. People might think I'm crazy to bring up the SEGA 32X but it would end up being a similar "dead end" if it is not something aimed specifically at high-quality game streaming on the cheap. The 32X did a lot of the same things Lockhart is rumored to be doing: using same CPU setup as its bigger brother (Saturn in 32X's case), coming in very cheap ($160 in 32X's case), aimed at cost-conscious gamers not ready to plop down big bucks for true next-gen systems (Saturn, PS1 and N64 in 32X's case), and designed as a reaction to short-term market threats (Atari Jaguar in 32X's case, current recession and cost-prohibitive pricing of next-gen systems in Lockhart's case).

Those are extremely strong parallels IMO and we know how 32X ended up. I don't want the same for Lockhart, because that could hurt the XSX which MS so far have been very on-point with. And at least the 32X came a year before Saturn and had some exclusive games to try justifying a purchase even if it was super-niche of a device. Lockhart might benefit from no need for developers to explicitly write games for its specific architecture, but what's the appeal of a potentially $350 device that only does 1080p natively to the hardcore/core gamers who usually make up the VAST majority of early adopters, when they can spend at least $100 more for actual 4K60-capable next-gen experiences, and aren't price-conscious enough to avoid doing so?

Oh I agree, from a business standpoint it could get messy. It'll create confusion and potentially hurt sales
Locker should be introduced in 2-3 years when things are established

Yeah if it's a 4 TF machine meant for running next-gen games locally I don't see how they sell it at $299 and don't lose money. Then there's the risk factor of if they get the allocation numbers between Lockhart and XSX wrong; maybe they over-produce Lockhart and under-produce XSX when the market really just wants XSX. What then? Buy back the unsold Lockharts? Use them in server blades, maybe?

2-3 years sounds like a good time for something like Lockhart, as you say.

 

[Hendrick's]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

It would be the same as it's been for the past 10 years. The same as it will be regardless of what console sells more.

 

[Major_Key]

The only difference is going to be resolution between the consoles, may be RT to some extent ? which will probably be absent on the 300$ console.

Yes Res and RT and maybe some other things like a lot more shaders optimization on SX. But the lead platform will be SX. not Series S.

The devkit is one dev console for XSX and XSS with switching option dev told me. So the devkit we have see in DF video is also the devkit of Lockhart

And don't forget xCloud is integrated into the hardware.

So you can play your games instantly in XBOX, without waiting for the download or anything (if you use xCloud ofc). That also next gen features.

And also Project acoustic in both hardware (tempest engine like)

 

[SonGoku]

This is exactly where my mind went, too. Why else would they feel they need this at launch? And IF the XsX needs to cost 599, what will the PS5 need to cost? I had hoped for 449 but maybe it’s higher too.

Im betting on $449 or lower for PS5, definitely not more than $499.
Lockhart would be in an awkward position if it only costs $50 less than PS5

 

[-Arcadia-]

The games aren't being made for the 6TF X and then scaled down for S, though. The 6TF X is just boosting some aspects of the game that was targetting the shitty hardware levels.

If only the X existed for this whole generation, Xbox games would have taken a giant shit on PS games from the Empire State building.

Not entirely true. We see stuff like Forza Horizon 4, where X was the lead platform, and there’s very different visual settings and features between the platforms.

Likewise, we can expand this analogy to the PC, which such scalability is a fact of life... and just about every modern game comes to that platform, and deals with it just fine.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

The only difference is third party games is going to be resolution between the consoles. May be RT to some extent ? which will probably be disabled on the 300$ console.

It won't be $300, though. Or if it is, they'd be selling it at around a $50-$60 loss, at the least. And why lose money per system sold on both Lockhart and XSX, unless they intend to sell XSX at-profit?

Which would also be a mistake IMHO; they honestly don't need a Lockhart, unless again, it's a streaming-focused device. And 4 TF seems a bit overkill for that. Just focus on XSX and if you gotta take a loss at $450 to make it competitive with PS5, take the loss. It'd pay off a lot more in the long-run.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

What we have now with mid-gen refreshes.

 

[SonGoku]

Imagine this being a success because of price and selling more than the xsex...what would happen to game development?

Devs would spend more time optimizing (to the metal) for lockart and just increase resolution on XSX and add a few extra features here and there. Kinda like XB1->XB1X

 

[Aidah]

Thts not all true in history. Sad is dead tht was cheaper, pstv was 100 at some point tht died and let's, look at ps3 versus Xbox 360 PS3 was hundreds more, inferior online at the time and multiplats and it still sold better world wide upon its release world wide and for the duration of its life.

I laugh when ppl dismiss history. We have case study tht it can go either or. It's just my opinion anyway.

I don't think these are examples of the same thing.

Examples of the same thing would be:
PS4 vs PS4 Pro
Xbox1 vs One X
Cheapest new iPhone Vs most expensive.
Budget Samsung phones vs high end.

i.e. same product line, same overall functionality, different tier.

Also, I said it always works out that way if the cheaper version isn't butchered.

Like if Lockhart isn't butchered (doesnt take away essential features), I expect it to overall outsell Series X, but still not sell as much as PS5.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Actually, I didn't even think of that. Rumors seem to suggest a 192-bit bus so who knows what the actual setup is.



This is my biggest fear, CPU on Series X is capable of sustaining a 3.8GHz performance with no SMT. That's bonkers, the quality of silicon which is needed to become a SoC in a Series X machine is very high. I don't think it'll be anywhere as high for a lower-spec machine as it'll raise the cost. On SSD, I long assumed that it would have the same speed as Series X, just with smaller storage. But the rumors suggest its a 1TB SSD, in that case, the SSD may not be as fast.



Lets do some paper math. Assuming Series X BoM is ~$500, I don't see how Lockhart can shave $150-200 off it.

APU - Series X has 360mm2 size, lets assume they keep the same CPU, how much die space they are saving on a smaller GPU? If Lockhart has 22CUs @1.4GHz. Savings would be the tune of ~70-75mm2? How much would the savings be here? ~$40-50.

RAM - We don't know the setup except that total size is 12GB. Let's assume they are buying 4 less modules than Series X. Savings would be another ~$40.

SSD - Apparently same, so same price.

PSU - Don't need to be as big or powerful, $10 savings.

Cooling - No vapor chamber required, $20-25 savings.

Other peripherals - I assume no separate PCBs in Lockhart, with overall skeleton of box being cheaper to build too, $10-20.

After adding all of this, I'm still struggling to go anywhere near $350 BoM. That's without accounting for manufacturing, distribution, and other miscellaneous costs such as retailers cut etc. $249 price-tag sounds too extreme to me, even a $299 one would be mean them eating $100 loss per box. Then you take into account, Series X will be sold at a loss as well. I mean how much money are Xbox planning to lose on hardware alone?

Some possible math issues with the calculation. I think the APU would be a little smaller than you are figuring. You could half module density on the SSD to save $$$ without changing overall performance. You could drop the BR drive.