Xbox 360 'Slim' CPU/GPU, Motherboard Leaked?

[baterz_up]

[citation][nom]cobot[/nom]You're missing the point......Seriously guys, there is more to it than just the best graphics.[/citation]

Incorrect, you missed my point actually. I was saying you don't need to spend 3 grand to get marginally better graphs than a console.

Asides from that, yea what he said ^

 

[baterz_up]

oops, loged into bro's account -.-

 

[princeofdreams]

God what's with all these my dick is bigger than your dick posts?

Firstly Although the PC is far better with high resolution graphics it does not improve many games, the resolution maybe higher, but the actual graphics are the same, DirectX 9 is DirectX 9 whether you play on a console or a PC, nearly all PC games are console ports anyway, so now matter how kick ass a PC is it wont make it better than the console version

As for cheaper gaming on a console, its not cheaper, you typically pay an extra $20 for a console game over and above the price of a PC game, if you just buy 1 game a month you therefore have paid an extra $240 over the period of the year for your games than a PC user has had to fork out, over the 5 years of the Xbox 360 that's $1200 dollars extra for your games, that buys a pretty nice PC, especially when you take the money spent on your console and its accessories, and this is just off 1 game a month, if your a heavy gamer and buy more then the amount extra you have paid increases also you do the maths

The PC and the console are designed for different markets, I am more than happy with my PC, my kids are more than happy with their console, different strokes for different folks

Get over yourselves and stop thinking yours is the only opinion that counts, because to be honest you're just sounding like ignorant dickheads

 

[anamaniac]

[citation][nom]Princeofdreams[/nom]God what's with all these my dick is bigger than your dick posts?Firstly Although the PC is far better with high resolution graphics it does not improve many games, the resolution maybe higher, but the actual graphics are the same, DirectX 9 is DirectX 9 whether you play on a console or a PC, nearly all PC games are console ports anyway, so now matter how kick ass a PC is it wont make it better than the console versionAs for cheaper gaming on a console, its not cheaper, you typically pay an extra $20 for a console game over and above the price of a PC game, if you just buy 1 game a month you therefore have paid an extra $240 over the period of the year for your games than a PC user has had to fork out, over the 5 years of the Xbox 360 that's $1200 dollars extra for your games, that buys a pretty nice PC, especially when you take the money spent on your console and its accessories, and this is just off 1 game a month, if your a heavy gamer and buy more then the amount extra you have paid increases also you do the mathsThe PC and the console are designed for different markets, I am more than happy with my PC, my kids are more than happy with their console, different strokes for different folksGet over yourselves and stop thinking yours is the only opinion that counts, because to be honest you're just sounding like ignorant dickheads[/citation]
DingDingDing!
We have a winner!

32nm CPU and 40nm GPU sitting side yb side, man, that'd be sick. As many size and material cost reductions as they could, and this thing could have the possibility to be tiny and cheap as hell.
It'd likely also be more cost effective to go for an elaborate heat pipe system for only a single point over trying to get heatsinks on two points.

 

[invlem]

If you're wondering why MS would bother with a slim version, a good point was brought up in the article, the RRoD issue has been beaten black and blue over the years.

If MS intends to carry on with the 360 for another 2-3 years before launching a successor then their only way of killing off the RRoD fears is to effectively relaunch the console in a shell that looks visually different to the previous models.

You can change and improve all the internals you want, if the exterior still looks the same, people will automatically attribute the old issues with the revised product because in the consumer's eyes its still the 'same'

 

[joebob2000]

Came to see CaptainToolbag bash the 360 because it red ringed on him, then slept with his mom and kicked his dog. Nice to see some things never change.

/Still love the hell out of my red-ring-free xbox 360

 

[tipoo]

I don't know why, but I laughed when I saw CoolerMaster in there. I guess Microsoft gave up on making their own heat sinks.

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]I don't know why, but I laughed when I saw CoolerMaster in there. I guess Microsoft gave up on making their own heat sinks.[/citation]
If it's a prototype, using a stock off the shelf cooler just to test could work, then enhance and shrink till done.

 

[calmstateofmind]

[citation][nom]invlem[/nom]If you're wondering why MS would bother with a slim version, a good point was brought up in the article, the RRoD issue has been beaten black and blue over the years. If MS intends to carry on with the 360 for another 2-3 years before launching a successor then their only way of killing off the RRoD fears is to effectively relaunch the console in a shell that looks visually different to the previous models.You can change and improve all the internals you want, if the exterior still looks the same, people will automatically attribute the old issues with the revised product because in the consumer's eyes its still the 'same'[/citation]

Exactly...and when the slim version screws up (chances are it will), people are just going to get even more pissed off that they wasted even more money.

That's one thing I love about PC, you can always find out what's wrong and replace it yourself. Now that's simple...so to speak.

 

[buddhist2k]

I have a 360, and i play it alot, NEVER have gotten a RRoD. Though, I Have a much better gaming experience on my PC: Core2 Quad, 6GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4890. Gaming may be a much better experience on PC than the 360, however...sometimes its not very practical to lug a tower into the living room with a case of beer to play Madden NFL with your buddies. I enjoy the best of both worlds... but when it comes to MMO's and FPS's I will stick with PC!

 

[of the way]

[citation][nom]Princeofdreams[/nom]As for cheaper gaming on a console, its not cheaper, you typically pay an extra $20 for a console game over and above the price of a PC game, if you just buy 1 game a month you therefore have paid an extra $240 over the period of the year for your games than a PC user has had to fork out, over the 5 years of the Xbox 360 that's $1200 dollars extra for your games, that buys a pretty nice PC, especially when you take the money spent on your console and its accessories, and this is just off 1 game a month, if your a heavy gamer and buy more then the amount extra you have paid increases[/citation]

You forget that you're talking to people who can't/don't want to spend a lot of money. That means they probably won't buy one game a month, and if they do, it probably wouldn't be at just-released prices. And isn't the price difference usually only $10 for new releases? And don't people who spend money on a decent computer usually spend money on upgrades within that five year window?

 

[rambo117]

suxbox 360.. PC FTW

 

[cloakster]

[citation][nom]danimal_the_animal[/nom]Ion thing Microsoft has down!!!!! windows media center....you can connect any xbox to the media center for live tv...recorded shows...ect.nobody else is doing this.....i did hear a rumor about this coming to the PS3 and i would like to check it out![/citation]

The PS3 allows for you to copy files from your USB drive or external onto the PS3's hard drive, which the 360 cannot do. I would take this over the stupid media center stuff anyday.

Also, to your post before...the RRoD was not just from it normally overheating, it had to do with a fault in the GPU's cooling system. So the idea of looking at how cool it runs normally is useless.

 

[tinmann]

For $3000.00 USD I could build a MONSTER rig with dual 24 inch monitors. I've got a little over $700.00 in this one and a Xbox 360 can't touch this. Plus I'm not limited to playing games and watching movies. I've had 2 X-Bricks and one was an Elite with three heat sinks. One of the heat sinks had a smaller one attached to it with copper tubing... Maybe I'll take it apart AGAIN and fix it. I have never had an EPIC FAIL out of a PS2. I've even got a Sega Saturn, a Nintendo Snes, a Sega Genesis and a Game Gear that still work and they have got to be over 20 years old. Every now and then I'll bust out Streets of Rage, Virtual Fighter, Virtual Cop and take a stroll down memory lane. Today they build em to break.

 

[tinmann]

Now there's a game crying for a face lift. STREETS OF RAGE!!!!

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

I dont think they need to make another SLIM model, the current one is a decent size...

 

[CptTripps]

MS rushed the 360 to market to beat sony, RROD kicked their ass and they spent assloads of money to make good. If their is a slim coming I think it's a safe bet that they did more homework as they had more time to do so. My 360's still run fine so I need no slim, I enjoy many games on it but PC is my true love.

And the "marginally better graphics" line, hahaha, hohohoho, hehehehe. Quit buying PC games built for a console and just buy it on the console. BC2 was designed for PC and Console using two teams and it shows, the graphics on PC are leaps and bounds above "marginal", everything about the game screams "developed to use the latest and greatest PC's". Dirt 2 on PC, absolutey gorgeous compared to console. Stalker, only play you can play is PC.

DX10 (and 11) are quite fantastic when you have a card that can run them and the game is designed to utilize them.

I understand some people can't afford a PC though and that is where consoles come in. They are simple to use, provide a fun experience and are great for I would say the majority of people. So yeah, I am a PC gamer but I don't think less of people who aren't, I just join them when I feel like it.

 

[MxM]

[citation][nom]duckmanx88[/nom]$300 to play decent-great looking games. or $3000 to play the same games yet with marginally better graphics. i hate moronic people that think anyone can just drop $3000 to play videogames.[/citation]
If you do not have PC, then you need to buy it anyway, modern life without PC is unthinkable. The difference between just PC and gaming PC is really minor, mostly video card, and today's $100 video card with the cheapest PC absolutely own consoles.
Right now Tom's running article on front page how to build gaming PC for $750. That thing light years faster than 360. And you get a computer with it as well.
Plus, game are cheaper on PC, and no need for XBox life. And of top of this, apart from driving and may be sport games, PC has the best controller ever - keyboard + mouse. You can attach joystick or XBox controller to it too, if you want to.
So, there is case to be made that PC gaming is actually cheaper.

 

[athreex]

[citation][nom]warmon6[/nom]you're right, it does looks like the stock 478 socket HSF design. 0.o[/citation]

I differ. 478 have side clips. This one looks more like 775-ish. Moreover, if you pay close attention, that's a PWM fan.

I don't have an Xbox console, but I do have a Gaming PC. Still, I've never been interested in the xbox and PC bashing. But integration of both CPU/GPU along with a smaller manufacturing process will yield in good results.

Is there something that can go wrong? Probably. That depends on the case design. Specifically, the heat removal process. This could turn in a good revision, but if the Xbox case turns out to be mediocre in heat dissipation, then nothing have changed. OTOH, a good case might make this an excellent and efficient console.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]calmstateofmind[/nom]why is MS even investing their time and money into a "slim" version?[/citation]
It's not an issue of "originality" at all; (Nintendo beat Sony to making "slim" revisions making a smaller NES back in like 1992) but rather, a case that making big things costs more money. Moore's law can solve the price of chips through die shrinks, but the price of producing a motherboard and case, sans chips, will remain rather constant, as will the price of making a package for a chip with x-number of pins. Hence, this is why they make these revisions; it makes the console cheaper to produce. This translates into higher profits, which they can cut into a bit to give the customers a price cut. Basically, if the console was of any large size to begin with, it's a silly idea NOT to do this when possible, since it takes almost no resources to revise a console compared to making a new one.

[citation][nom]calmstateofmind[/nom]And another thing...the purpose of Sony coming out with slim versions is because their consoles tend to be larger than others (performance also seems to be higher with Sony consoles when compared to other current gen consoles).[/citation]
This doesn't explain the reasoning for the "slim" revisions for the PS1 or PS2, neither of which came CLOSE to being the most powerful consoles of their respective (5th and 6th) generations; the Nintendo64 and Xbox, respectively, trumped them in power. (though Sony trumped both in sales by massive margins) The size of the console itself being "perceived" as something bad has little/nothing to do with it; after all, the original Xbox remains more massive than any console other than the original PS3, and still more "bulky" overall.

[citation][nom]calmstateofmind[/nom]If they want to increase performance for current 360's, why not instead just make a device that takes some computing away from the cpu/gpu and also cools the system? A USB device maybe...?[/citation]
Such products don't actually deliver on any of their claims, especially on a closed system like the Xbox 360. (a main weakness: the comparatively poor bandwidth USB offers compared to direct, on-motherboard interfaces, which START in the multitude of gigabytes per second) In other words, it'd be useless.

[citation][nom]calmstateofmind[/nom]I personally believe that MS should be focusing all their efforts (at least in the video game dept) on a next gen console. Isn't it time by now??? Xbox 360 is going on its 5th year, which is now MORE time than the amount between the original Xbox and the 360 (11/01-11/05). Also, the same applies for the PS1, PS2 and PS3 (11/94-10/2000-11/06), and even Nintendo too...I'm not looking up the dates again lol. I would MUCH rather be reading an article on a leaked motherboard pic of the NEW console that MS would be coming out with, aside from just a lame slim version that I won't buy; or even a screenshot/trailer of the next gen launch title.[/citation]
Actually, since you're going on North American releases for the PS2 and PS3, you should NOT try to make the PS1's release seem farther back by using the Japanese release instead; it didn't hit US shores until 9/1995.

But yes, this generation IS going on longer than the others. Part of it is because Sony/Microsoft's own plans on an 8th-gen console both hinged on "winning" the current (7th) generation console war... Meanwhile, Sony has only 24% market share, and Microsoft 28%; both could be said to have "lost," with, this late in, no hope of re-taking #1 from Nintendo. Both of them hoped to sell more consoles by this time; they're probably gonna wait until they hit their goals before potentially killing sales by announcing their next consoles; probably around 60-70 million, which at the current rate will take a year or two.

[citation][nom]calmstateofmind[/nom]Wouldn't you?[/citation]
No, I sure as hell wouldn't. It'd just create empty hype, since such pre-release screenshots and trailers are all non-real-time; they're done on PCs with vastly more potent graphics arrays, and often done in slow-mo to ensure smoothness. As a result, it may LOOK drool-inducing, but will look less than 1% as good once it's actually on the console in your home.