Xbox 720 Specs Leaked – “Due 2013 for $299 with Kinect 2”



A leaked document purporting to show Microsoft’s plans for the Xbox 720 has been circulating widely, with plenty of attention being attracted by its low price and even lower specs.

According to the leaked document, apparently an internal company presentation circulated in 2010, the Xbox 720 would:

Have a Blu-ray drive

Have various hardware options including SSD, HDD, Wifi, Wimax, etc.

Be 6 to 8 times more powerful than the 360

Have 360 compatibility

Incorporate “Kinect 2”

Have full native 3D support

Be accompanied by the 2014 release of “Kinect Glasses”

Be priced at $299, for release in 2013

Sell 100 million units


The document’s provenance and authenticity is of course unknown, but the fact that the original 56-page PDF file it came as was taken down only hours after it went up at the request of a legal firm with ties to Microsoft may be telling.

However, as the document dates from 2010, even should it be authentic it is possible significant changes could have been made to their plans in the interim.

Microsoft itself has not so far publicly released any meaningful information about its plans for an Xbox successor console.

Leave a Comment


  • Anonymous says:

    So what? Let it be 6-8 times more powerful, what does that even mean? That doesn’t make the games any more enjoyable at all. If there is one thing that is for certain, then it’s the decline of quality for games over the last years.

    Sure they look all nice, they have great graphics and all that shit (apparently, it’s still not good enough though) but what about the game? The big titles, that used to be console sellers are now shallow husks of their former selfs with crisp graphics.

    There’s a very “virus” going around the gaming industry to make games into a “cinematic, epic experience”. It’s basically turning games into limited interactive slideshows. Quick time events, choices inbetween cutscenes or cutscenes that are literally paused for short gaming parts.

    No amount of computing power will ever save a game that isn’t a game by every sense of the word.

    The problem with THIS generation of consoles is really not a problem of “power”. It’s a problem a stagnant or recessive dedication.

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually, yeah, games definitely can improve from better graphics.

      You can’t have La Noire on an N64, for instance.

      Better technology = more opportunities = better games in the long run.

      • Anonymous says:

        Then tell me why gaming quality is in decline!

        With guys like you it’s always more, more more. What is this “more” contributing to the experience? FF13/FF13-2, the Mass Effects, TES games to name such a few. All of those are constantly improved on on a graphical level but they BLEED out on the gaming part. With each new iteration they get dumbed down, with each new title they lose more of their soul.

        Sorry but no. I have old DOS games that are a million times more of a gaming experience than those “opportunities”.

  • Anonymous says:

    Microsoft maybe greedy, but they aren’t stupid.

    After sinking hundreds of millions into recent updates such as more Kinect support (the peripheral hasn’t even gotten off the ground yet, since no developer seems to know how to implement it) and Smart Glass and apps being introduced, it seems like M$ is still supporting the 360 and why logically would they be throwing away money to these upgrades if they didn’t expect the 360 to last at least 3 more years?

    They just became the best selling console of 2011, so why would they flip off all those new customers?

  • Anonymous says:

    Oh well.

    I stopped caring about the specs when i realized that the majority this generations’ games is pure and utter shit.

    As long as they don’t get a clue and start making GAMES again, instead of half-finished/half-assed DLC patchwork crap, i will wait this next generation out. As i should have done with this generation.

    Fuck you, gaming industry.

  • Anonymous says:

    I hope it’s not true. I wont buy it either way (pretty sure, anyway) but I just feel bad for xbox users if it is. Kinect built into the console??
    That wont be inconvenient for anyone…

  • Anonymous says:

    im guessing this was microsofts buisness forecast from 2 years ago i doubt what specs it says for the next gen xbox are realisic anymore. i strongly doubt the next xbox whether its called 720 or 480 will look like a flat rectangle box especially when the currant xbox 360 slim looks better. $299 seems a fare but unrealistic price considering thats how much an xbox 360 costs now.

  • Anonymous says:

    with that kind of spec on 299$??? with freedom of storage support, 6 times more powerful than 360, backward compatible, i am not seeing ms will be that generous! I say that’s bullshit

    I dare to said bull shit it just feel like somemon is high

  • Ugg…

    If they mean 300 with the inflation/monopolized markets it means the “We are taking a hit on the console but holding on for dear life for the licensee/control racket” trip is going through the roof…

    Perhaps they have that idea from the Japanese guy to make not just non-tradable/resell able games but to also make them rent only… And of course high prices and no lower value later…

    But the design is also not creative… That I’m really po’d, X-box had good creativity in it’s design earlier… I was hoping for some kind of rocket shaped pod with multiple drives and a ventilation cooling system, perhaps a joint use of X-Box Tan and RROD-Tan lighted icons…

    I’m hoping this is some fucker’s fake.
    But I could fake better.

    My fake would have stuff like a better Kinect that could scan the room and take pictures of people, also tap through wifi and (secret) window’s backdoor computers for illegal files, an attack program for illegal files and competitor software and a secret chip that is (government involvement only) out to send any/all data to “Big Brother”…

    And it would look cool, not a 5th rate 5CD changer for a home stereo stack…

  • Anonymous says:

    Terrible. So many storage options and not a mandatory one will only hurt such a closed platform. Every unit needs to come with a HDD. Especially if they use a low speed BD drive.

    And 8X the 360 power will probably not be good enough if they really want a 10 year life span for this next generation.

    They need something revolutionarily effecient.

    Even the top of the line GTX680M(mobile) card is only between 5-10X the 360 (80 Gtex/s …….. 10x Xbox360
    1935 Gflops/s ….. 8x Xbox360
    115 GB/s ………. 5x Xbox360) from >

    And my Desktop GTX 460 V1 (which is 2 numerical generations behind) performs better than the 680M in some situations and even then that’s not enough to run every single current game Maxed out at 1080p with 30FPS or greater.

    With only 8X the power of the 360, the generational leap will not be that significant. It’ll only become closer to the mid-range of what’s capable on PCs.

    It also needs to be able to run agressive uber AA. Something that has gone by the way side in recent years.

    AA Makes IQ skyrocket and is a MUST for a next gen console. Whether it be FSSGSSAA, OGSSAA(Downsampling),TrSSAA, Or some crazy combination of PP AA like MLAA,FXAA,TXAA, and MSAA or FSAA.

    Binary Domain downsampled w/FXAA from 2732×1536 to 1600×900

    Compared to the console versions

  • Anonymous says:

    Fake. It won’t even cost $299 by the time it’s released. All of those features for only $299? From Microsoft? Plus the time of the 52% RRoDs, I’m still not getting an Xbox.

    • Anonymous says:

      I like how sancom figures that this probably is real because a law firm tied to microsoft had this shit pulled down, as if microsoft couldn’t have any reason to have this pulled except its real. Maybe sancom doesn’t realize that fake shit is damaging to reputations when the real stuff comes out.

  • Anonymous says:

    Did anyone else notice that what’s in the diagram doesn’t make sense?

    “6-8x ARM/X86 @ 2GHz”:

    * They’re not sure how many cores the app proc pool will have
    * They’re not sure whether they will be ARM,or x86

    “Device Specific IO HSPDA, WiMAX, W-HDMI, ATSC, DisplayPort, LVDS”

    * HSPDA is for cellular packet data. Who the hell is going to want to use expensive CPD bandwidth for their gaming connectivity?! It’ll be laggy, and the 720 is *not* battery-powered, portable gaming system.

    • Anonymous says:

      Back in 2010, those were hot emerging wireless technologies, so I could see how those would have been on the bullet point list at that time. Obviously now WiMax has shown it’s pretty terrible most places, and AT&T rolled out HSPDA+ as an interim solution before LTE could roll out. Here’s a possible idea… XBox Live Gold adds in wireless data support for when you’re not at your house (where there will no doubt be 802.11n support). Imagine the next XBox being like the 3G Kindles where if you go on a trip to a place without WiFi available, you can still play online.

      As for the CPUs, they don’t seem that surprising. If I recall correctly Microsoft has been using AMD parts for a while, and AMD has a desktop line of 6 and 8 core CPUs that have been available for more than a year now. I could easily see them getting information ahead of launch that those processors would be available by the launch of their new system.

      • Anonymous says:

        The power of cost scaling. If you’re using a current desktop, or even a generation older desktop chipset and order 100 million units, chances are good you can make a system much cheaper than people would expect. Also, they usually lose a bit on the hardware and make back the loss on software licensing. I would have to guess based on that list that they would be using the old 360 chip, which has likely been optimized to hell and back in terms of manufacturing costs by now, an AMD 6 or 8 core desktop variant for the application CPU, and a dual-core ARM processor to keep the system running in ultra low power mode all the time. 4GBs of RAM is nothing right now, so the only potentially expensive components are the new application CPU and GPU. A $300 price point at launch would be a major selling point, so I bet they would, and probably could hit it.

        • Anonymous says:

          I can see the SSD model being a premium version above the $300 price point, or maybe them doing a hybrid HD/SSD setup like many of the laptops are doing right now. Say a 500GB hard drive with a 4-8GB SSD for system files to cache on. Super fast power on and system use, but with plenty of space to install games on.

    • I like lolis and i have played a lot of loli games on 360(Im@s 1,2 & L4U,3 Dream Club,2 Onechanbara,Ore No Yome,Gal-Gun,2 Senko No Ronde,N3,2 Otomedius,Strike Witches,Stein’s Gate,Agarest War etc)and apart one,Gal-Gun(with an OPTIONAL Title Update)they’re not censored at all!So quit fanboism and go play these awesome games!!!

    • If they really do sell it at that price, they’ll have no choice but to heavily subsidize it. This will of course require them to squeeze more money out of their Xbox live subscriptions. Xbox live will get even more expensive, because most of their extensive 3rd party applications are also subscription-based, not to mention paid DLC. If you’re planning on getting the full Xbox experience, you’ll really need to open up your wallet.

    • Anonymous says:

      I wouldn’t be surprised actually if the PS4 ended up being close in “power” to the PS3, but just significantly easier to program for than the current version is. The PS3 is basically a super computer in a box, and in fact many companies bought them to do high level processing back when there was the option to run alternate operating systems on them.

      For that game’s side, that’s not a particularly good thing, as the type of programming for the PS3 doesn’t line up particularly well with porting to XBox 360 in a timely fashion. So despite the PS3 being ridiculously powerful, most of the titles this gen have been developed for 360 as the lead platform and then poorly ported over to the PS3. Note that games that were developed first on PS3 like Final Fantasy XIII tend to look significantly worse on the 360. Quality compromises had to be made all over the game to get it running on the 360 at a decent frame rate and both the textures and FMVs in the game were subpar, either due to space restrictions on the DVD or the amount of shared memory available to process them (likely disc space for the FMVs, memory for the textures). So an easier to program for while being equally powerful (with all the recent port and network upgrades, like 802.11n and USB 3) system might be a win for Sony after having such a tough sell this generation.

      • Anonymous says:

        Dude you forgot to mention a few things.

        No.1 why the PS3 failed the price, $800 AUS in those days and now $299 AUS?

        That’s pretty much fail adapting the same techniques as before was Ok when the Ps2 was released but in this generation both were well released before

        Mo.2 So hard to program on. This is proven by many factors but the evidence lays in FFXIII and FXIII-2 both were released way after their predicted rate.

        And to response “Quality compromises had to be made all over the game to get it running on the 360 at a decent frame rate and both the textures and FMVs in the game were subpar, either due to space” It was evident that Xbox 360 and PS3 were on the same power level.

        No.3 Blu-ray. It’s only recently that games needed more Disc space but this is DUE TO FMV.

        before FFXIII it was unnecessary at the time and by the time people got the so called blu-ray players they are now less than a Ps3 combined. Your blu-ray argument IS VALID NOW NOT WHEN THE PS3 WAS RELEASED.

        Now before you get your tits in a tangle no one has used the whole blu-ray even now its still unnecessary, only FMV takes up the space not the Actual GAME. Recent example Dragon’s Dogma.

        No 4. Super computers WHAT A BLOODY JOKE everyone got screwed on that one. Only had to waited a year before you had a proper one yourself :).

        The PS3 worth getting now hell yes!! Since it’s the price point it should of been +$100 more. I hope Sony learns from it’s mistakes and make a console that’s affordable to have one early in the game as well as xbox.

        • Anonymous says:

          I never said the GPU was good. I said the CELL architecture was hard to program games for, but it was incredibly appealing to doing data work with.

          Let’s be honest here, the new systems aren’t going to support 4k resolution graphics. They’ll just both end up finally supporting true 1080p, likely with decent filtering. Both of them struggled with their own issues this generation, Microsoft on pushing enough power through their system’s bottlenecks and Sony getting developers to learn to program for their system well enough to make decent looking games. I suspect the next system from both are going to more attempt to solve those problems than to make any insane power leaps. Bet on 2010 or 2011 technology under the hood when these things finally launch in 2013/2014, just like the Wii U’s GPU appears to be a chipset from 2006.

  • Anonymous says:

    Seeing that “leak” has become a trolling and marketing tactic like any other , the fact that it was promptly taken down actually add nothing to the viability of the said document .

    As long as it make people talk about you , it doesn’t need to be true .

      • Anonymous says:

        If a PS3 has
        SSD, Wimax, etc.

        6 to 8 times more powerful than the 360

        360 compatibility

        “Kinect 2″

        accompanied by the 2014 release of “Kinect Glasses”

        priced at $299, for release in 2013

        Then yes.

        Mine doesn’t…

        • Anonymous says:

          no, no, no

          HaHa wanna see the PS3 that has 6 to 8 times more power then the 360.

          no – though maybe that would (finally) justify buying a PS3




          still no

          No reason to buy a PS3 then?

    • Lol, no, it’s impossible. the PS3/Xbox360 Gen is still going strong, and there are still more people being introduced to it, also, making something better than PS3/Xbox360 in such a short time is impossible, no matter how developed and strong the technology is, it’s impossible.

      • Anonymous says:

        Making something better than the ps3/360 in such a short time is impossible? You are SO fucking blissfully unaware of how quickly technology advances right now…

        Moore’s Law anyone? It’s been 7 years and the systems were garbage compared to high end computers when they released, much less now.

      • Anonymous says:

        we call that PCm way better and stronger very long time ago and with short time u mean 7 years? thats plenty of time to make something a lot better.

        i remember when i bought my P3 of 933mhz, it was so awesome and it was 12 years ago 🙁 now with a i5 2500k at 4.5ghz

      • Anonymous says:

        NO LOL

        GTFO. PS3 and 360 are underpowered and are long past their expiration date.

        They were not designed for the long run in mind. Or Sony wouldn’t have Gimped the PS3 with so little RAM and a weak ass GPU.

        Microsoft wouldn’t have given the 360 such little eDRAM and system RAM, and a weak CPU.

        Consider the following:
        The original Xbox was only out 4 years before the 360 came out. The 360 has been out for 7 years almost. It’s time to die.
        Hopefully it’s successor won’t be the unreliable POS Pyramid scheme the 360 was.

        Maybe they’ll use Bluetooth this time too for controllers. Because the 360’s Wireless sucks. Constant disconnects.

        • Anonymous says:

          Screen in the controller, where did I see that again? Dreamcast? Hurr durr Dreamcast riped off Wii U.
          Sony uses Gyroscope in ther controller, they have a patent on this since 1999, hurr durr they rip off Nintendo.
          SOny has a camera controlling hurr durr they rip of Kinect, not like they already had eye toy for the PS2 and motion capturing in the movie business (in which Sony also participates).
          Nintendo is the Apple of consoles.
          Just accept there is more than one console and enjoy each and every of them.

        • Anonymous says:

          Sony originally said they wanted the PS3 to last longer than the PS2’s lifespan, close to 2016. I would say it wouldn’t be until 2014 until they release a new system, especially to see how the Wii U does this year and to rip off their innovation.

      • Anonymous says:

        You’re not really familiar with what’s actually inside the XBox 360, are you? It’s actually a pretty gimped machine that was behind desktop technology at its launch and devs have had to do all kinds of tricks to even get it playing at the level it appears to be. It’s doing a lot of line doubling to even hit HD resolutions on a lot of high profile titles, and many games are also running at 540p just to hit decent frame rates.

        As for the leaked specs, nothing looks particularly unreasonable. If they use an AMD CPU this time around, there are already off the shelf 8 core desktop processors. I would assume it would end up being a custom model of a current chipset with the memory baked in since they wouldn’t have to fit a standard socket, but hey, this is Microsoft, it could be a literal PC inside a plastic shell instead of a custom layout. After all, that’s what they sent around as dev kits for the 360.

        • Anonymous says:

          Nice example from the PS3, the system not running its flagship FPS titles in 540p so the frame rate doesn’t crash and burn. Yes, the two systems had a VERY brief period where they were more powerful than a PC. No, it didn’t last for more than a year or two (see Crysis, it wasn’t released on consoles for 4 years, and when it was the engine was gimped to run on them). And no, I don’t consider frame doubling a clever programming trick. I call it having to program on a machine that can’t handle what you’re putting on it and faking a framerate. Add enough blur and the idiots playing it won’t know the difference. It’s HD! No it’s not, and the fact that anyone thinks the 360 had been a powerhouse for more than a year or two after it was released is delusional.

        • Anonymous says:

          Yeah no!
          Not the one you are replying to, but you don’t seem to know nothing.
          CPU wise both PS3 and X360 were further advanced than any desktop CPU at the time, reason for that was the multicore for desktops was just in the beginning phase (dual cores max), at that time it was said IBM who made for both the CPU was at least for years more advanced than Intel. Differently said everyone else was atleast four years behind.
          Concerning the GPU, both consoles used either an ATI or nVidia high end chip of the time, that were tweaked to suit the demands of Sony and MS for the consoles.
          You called it tricks others call it on metal programming or running the software without an API like DX or OpenGL, AMD give an interesting interview about the capabilities of a GPU working without one, they said the performance increase is somewhere between 5 and 10 times. The problem with is that programming like that is for most companies too much (EA, Activision Blizzard and so).
          That is why you will only see good looking games from developers with some serious skill and knowledge about the machine, for example look at Uncharted (the first), the characters in it have a polygon count coming close to what chars in Crysis had at max settings.
          Obviously it is not Crysis level, but most of that is related to the textures as those really got limited thanks to Sony cheaping out on memory.

  • Anonymous says:

    Sounds more like what they would want for their next system, not necessarily what will be available. Screw speculation, just wait for an official announcement. Then people can hype/troll it all they want.

  • Here is my suspicion. The processor is irrelevant because of cloud computing. At launch it will equal PS4 but they can literally upgrade every year without everyone buying new console. HOWEVER you WOULD need an xbox live gold subscription.

      • Anonymous says:

        He means paying for Live would enable you to play games with better graphics than the system is capable to producing because you would actually be using the console as a remote terminal and all the raw processing power would be done of their servers. Basically Live would eventually support a service very similar to OnLive, but optimized for their platform and using their compression algorithms.

  • Anonymous says:

    “with plenty of attention being attracted by its low price and even lower specs”

    I dunno, the specs look pretty high to me, should be about equivalent to a high-end PC during the first half of 2013.

    Oh the things I would do to with those 10 ARM cores… (10 bucks a means of abusing the three 3Ghz PowerPC cores as an additional co-processing unit will be found too).

    Also, the fact that it will have “only” 112 (from the diagram most likely unified/general-purpose) shading units in terms of GPU doesn’t tell us much until we know what kind of architecture will be used for them.

    I’d say if anything the specs are more likely to have been scaled down since the time of writing of the leaked document.

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually that was probably more due to the complexity of programming for the CELL processor sending devs to code first on 360 and then doing shoddy ports over to the PS3. If you look at the handful of games that did it the other way around, the PS3 version smoked the 360 port in quality. Often textures were downgraded, details in the environments removed, and resolution decreased in order to get the 360 version up to an acceptable framerate. Note that most of the 360’s hot titles are actually running at 540p frame doubled to look HD, but they are not actually running natively HD or they wouldn’t be able to run smoothly.

        • Anonymous says:

          Quit trying to sound smart, CELL was a processor designed to do mathematical calculations and not for gaming. It’s cache is far too small and the unusual singlecore+many coprocessors design was it’s greatest downfall.

        • Anonymous says:

          Your douchebag remarks don’t change the fact that every game that lead on PS3 looked significantly better than its 360 equivalent, whereas the 360 to PS3 ports have looked nearly identical since the programming tools have reached maturity. I’m not saying both consoles don’t have their individual problems, I’m saying the PS3 is the more powerful of the two, and was significantly held back by the difficulties of programming for the CELL architecture they chose.

      • Anonymous says:

        Are you some kind of insider, or did you pull that out of your ass? If the actual specs are already public knowledge, what is the point of this article? Is SanCon just being slow again?

        (as you might have guessed, I am in no way informed about current developments in the console wars. I have no interest in consoles whatsoever and therefore wouldn’t know about what has already been announced. As a computer scientist I simply looked at the system presented to me in these charts and deemed it useful.)

  • Anonymous says:

    wow, this one seems legit… i mean, you have to have a really fucked up mind if you did a whole 60-paged document with business analysis for nothing… and they removed the document from the original source…

  • Anonymous says:

    Ok,If anyone buys this shit he has to hang himself for helping Kikrosoft to sell the 100 million units…
    Just buy a Wii U or PS4 because the Kikesbox 700dreckzig will not have any good titles that will be published only on the Kikesbox.
    And I bet,the 7-8 times more power will break it like 10 times faster/more often because the case/body definetly looks like it is packed with too much stuff and might have not enough ventilation… I wait for the announcements here where Kikesboxes melted away and burned the house xD

    Seriously,if you want power,just buy a new PC in 2014, Kinect and shitty games aren’t even an argument to think about buying that thing…
    If you like Japan and anime, do it like the Japanese and JUST… DON’T… BUY IT!!! (like how only 1-2% of the market share in Japan of the console market are won over by Kikecrosoft).

    If you still buy it,you’re officially considered a traitor against the Japanese culture and should leave Sankaku Complex for good. Go watch American Cartoons, listen to American Music and play American Games on American Consoles,we don’t need America-fanatics here because it’s Asia that connects our world!!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Sony doesn’t own Blu-ray. They’re a part of the Association that does. Even if they do not want to sell BD drives to the competitor, if their Association deems it profitable, then their say in the matter will be negligible.

      Its very possible the next Xbox could support Blu-ray. Assuming that voids the document is an idiotic sentiment.

      • Anonymous says:

        Sony isn’t just a “part of association” for developing BD you know that…
        It’s more like Sony created Blu-ray and made the Blu-ray Assosiation afterwards since they have done most of the technical work.

        • Anonymous says:

          It doesn’t change the fact that if it makes them a boatload of money they’d happily license 100 million bluray keys to Microsoft. That’s both free money, and makes it so developers are on even footing for porting to and from their platform, something which was a major problem this generation.

  • Anonymous says:

    >Blu-ray Drive
    It’s fake because adding a blu-ray drive means M$ will be paying Sony for the right to use blu-ray
    M$ is going to make a unique optical disc if anything rather then pay a competitor rights for a media format

    • Anonymous says:

      MS owns VC1, which most blurays are encoded with. That does not stop Sony Pictures from using VC1 on their bluray releases. Nor will rivalries stop MS from paying BDA royalties for movie playback.

    • Anonymous says:

      > >Blu-ray Drive
      > It’s fake because adding a blu-ray drive means M$
      > will be paying Sony for the right to use blu-ray

      Not necessarily. When cost is an issue, it makes more sense to use the currently-accepted standard than spend time and effort developing a new competing format. And Sony doesn’t own BR – they’re just part of the group that does.

      • Anonymous says:

        I have to remind you that M$ spend time and money to develop the failure known as HD-DVDs in order to fight blu-ray and M$ is still going a long way to restrict blu-ray on even Windows 8 by forcing users to pay for basic codecs like mpeg-2 which is required to play DVDs and blu-rays
        (Although the pay to get codec is less against blu-rays but just M$ just trying to kill the OS department of microsoft)

        • Anonymous says:

          “Failure”? BD won over HD-DVD because it was designed to support “have you by the balls” DRM from the get go. HD-DVD was fairly open which did not sell well with the publisher crowds.

        • Anonymous says:

          MPEG2 is a dead codec. Nintendo does not pay to license it, nor should MS. Last I recall, you faggots wanted to do away with Windows Media Player. Guess what, no WMP; no MPEG2 license.

        • Anonymous says:

          Microsoft supported HD-DVD as long as they did as a stall tactic to allow digital video to take off, and sure enough, it was long enough that online video stores got their foot in the door of the public conscious. Also, HD-DVD was just a modification on the original DVD format, and was producible on the same factory lines as DVD equipment. Bluray on the other hand was a completely different and much more expensive to create technology. I don’t think Microsoft ever intended to win that particular “war”, but they certainly succeeded in preventing Sony’s new format from being a monopolistic success.

    • Anonymous says:

      It can happen, it HAS BEEN PROVED to happen TWICE, PS1 and PS2 both had 10 years life cicles, (and both werent all that powerful to begin whit) power is NOT a factor on consoles sales an popularity, MSX was far more powerful than NES and lost, N64 lost against PS1, GC/Xbox lost against PS2, and 360/PS3 BOTH lost against the vastly underpowered Wii, and computer has always been more powerful than everybody but hasnt once sold more games in a year (so as a gaming device it effectively loss against consoles)

    • Anonymous says:

      >>10 Year lifecycle.
      >Good luck with that… Not going to happen but you gotta keep believing in your dreams M$

      By the time the next xbox debuts 360 will be 8 years old, no console has ever lasted as long without being superseded by a newer platform. Furthermore manufacturing PS1s & PS2s for 10 years is not the same as supporting them with new software releases.

    • Anonymous says:

      With enough cpu cores, a powerful enough gpu and game devs that actually know how to use the hardware presented to them (and still use a few tricks when the games eventually demand “more” out of the hardware than is physically available), then a 10 year for ANY console isn’t that farfetched.

      One can get 6-8 with any current pc and that’s with varying degrees of hardware. So why can’t a closed system get more than that?

      • Anonymous says:

        because PC lifespans are not an analog to consoles.

        PC lifespans get inflated because PC game developers are forced to make sure their games are scalable. no PC developer makes their games only playable for a specific limited generational breadth of hardware.
        hell there are MMO devs who are only just now officially ending any support for any version of Windows older than XP (arenanet for example). that goes well past 10 years.
        their games work for a range of specs from the latest hardware to usually at least hardware thats 5-6 years old (which in the past would be an entire console generation).

        you don’t get that kind of scalability with a closed system, because there are hard limitations are defined by the static tech level of the console.

        where a PC developer can make a game for newer technology, and then just make it scalable to tech 5-6 years old; a console dev 5 years in is strictly limited to working within the limitations of 5 year old technology. and once they switch, they generally switch completely.

        an analogy to your PC concept applied to consoles would be if the XBox 720 came out, but every game made for it was made to be playable on an XBox 360 as well.
        and then you claimed the 360 had a 15 year life span (or whatever age).

        but thats not how the console industry works. thats essentially how the PC game industry does, but not consoles.

      • I heard it could have as many as 16 PPC cores running at 3.2 GHz which would make the general purpose processor part of it insanely fast it should make a Core i7-3770 look like a Celeron.
        Of course this is only half the equation more important is the GPU’s specs.

        • Anonymous says:

          [quote]Ever wondered why supercomputers today mostly employ consumer-level CPUs?[/quote]
          “Professional” CPUs are overpriced for their capabilities. They are better CPUs, but the price difference does not help.
          Scientific number crunching usually boils down to “run this algorithm over and over again on this large pile of data”, which makes massive parallelization effective.

          [quote]The number of cores is the only thing that really matters to the well-educated, modern game programmer.[/quote]
          You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
          Computer games only benefit from more logical CPUs up to a certain point. Since you can’t know the entire of the engine state too far ahead of time, computer games rely on a lot more synchronization and communication than a typical scientific program. At a certain point, adding more cores simply bottlenecks the entire process since you will be wasting more time talking to other CPUs and waiting for IO operations than actually doing anything useful.

          CPU speed is not an issue for modern games at all. Memory bus capacity and especially memory access times is what’s killing it.

        • Anonymous says:

          @ anon 13:19:
          The tasks that are “inherently serial in nature” in game programming are not performance-bottlenecks. Do you even know what superlinear means? It means that if you double the number of cores, you actually get a speedup greater than 2x. Yes, many algorithmic problems in game programming, when modeled right, can exhibit that behavior. And as chance would have it, those problems are located in the most computationally expensive domains besides 3D rendering, AI and physics.

          Yes there is a reason many games to this day still don’t use multiple cores too well. It’s because game programmers these days are incompetent and lazy to top it off.

          “Threading also brings in their own sets of problems.”
          That has to be the worst excuse I’ve ever heard. No problem that threading introduces is even remotely bad enough to pose a serious obstacle to anyone who had any halfway decent computer science education.

        • Anonymous says:

          Ummm no? Scientific processing and game processing are completely different. Supercomputers these days uses many cores is because their tasks are inherently paralleled. Game, however, are generally NOT. It is actually quite difficult to make games efficiently use many cores evenly as you have many things that are serial in nature (as well as most programmers think serially because it’s easier). There is a reason why many games to this day still don’t use multiple cores too well. Threading also brings in their own sets of problems.

        • Anonymous says:

          @ anon 12:28 – Computer illiterates you say? Now look who’s talking. Ever wondered why supercomputers today mostly employ consumer-level CPUs? (yes, I consider Itanium-2 and friends consumer-grade.) Architecture is irrelevant in the face of complexity theory. Many problems in game programming actually allow for algorithms with superlinear scalability. The number of cores is the only thing that really matters to the well-educated, modern game programmer.

        • Anonymous says:

          Ah, cores and ghz, the opium of the computer illiterate masses…

          Ever wondered why current generation AMD processors couldn’t make the benchmarks? Simplistic and inferior architecture don’t do much work per cycle.

      • Anonymous says:

        define “been around”
        the Playstation 2 has “been around” for 12 years now.

        but the more meaningful point is even though both MS and Sony claimed to be aiming for a 10 year lifespan, they’re both being forced by rapidly shrinking sales to put out a new console within the next 1-2 years (at least if rumors are to be believed).

        if you listen to most publishers, they’ve already pushed the life span too long by 2-3 years already and they “needed to” have released a new console already.
        that the current doom and gloom “dying game industry” is really just the result of MS and Sony (the only consoles of meaningful consequence atm. the Wii has already completely fallen out of relevence) dragging out their consoles lifespans too long.

        • Anonymous 12:36 finally someone with sense and speaking some words of true!!!These gen is already dead,and the proof is that,for the first time,the best game of E3(Watchdog)is showed running on a high-end PC and not on consoles

        • Anonymous says:

          ORLY, Yeah totally. Nintendo only made more money than Sony and MS combined. It’s not their fault 3rd party publishers are idiots and don’t release as many good games instead of shovelware on it.

      • Anonymous says:

        That just means graphics of major cross-platform titles are being held back by 8 years because of it (Xbox 360’s X1800 variant gpu was already 2 generations out of date at time of release).

        The faster these things die and get replaced, the better it will be for the gaming community as a whole.

      • Noodlestein says:

        With the specs that chart is showing for it, if it does last for 10 years, I’ll feel horrible for the gaming community as a whole because that console will be holding graphics back for a long time.
        ie: it’s specs from that chart are shit.

  • Anonymous says:

    If it does not come with a I7 motherboard don’t bother. It has to have that architecture and some changable gpu-cpu upgradeable by the owner of the box. Being stuck with a updated atari2600 vesion of the same crap over and over stinks.