• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Verge - Microsoft sacrificed Xbox Series X sales for ‘long term ambition’ in the cloud

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
This explains the shortages. Really sad to see MS tout having the most powerful console on the market then undershipping it leaving a 4 tflops underpowered console as the main Xbox SKU for next gen.


Microsoft has been sacrificing growing its Xbox Series X / S sales numbers since launch as a tradeoff for investment in cloud and gaming content. In an internal email exchange between Xbox chief Phil Spencer and Xbox CFO Tim Stuart in December 2020, the pair discussed the reasons behind lower Xbox console volumes. The email has been revealed as part of the FTC v. Microsoft hearing.
Spencer admits that Microsoft had a “yield miss for Scarlett,” the codename for Xbox Series X / S consoles, but that it and the delay to Halo Infinite weren’t the “main factors in our console scarcity” during the initial launch period. Microsoft had cut the compute units on its Xbox Series X silicon down to 52 from 56 to improve production yield, but the company still missed a target for hardware production of the console. Microsoft also had a strategic bet on cloud that it appears to have been holding back chips for.
The email exchange references a tradeoff on spending money on Xbox console volume or content and cloud bets. “From a strategy perspective I believe in our tradeoffs for Cloud and Content in Gaming over console volume,” says Spencer. “With our strategy and opportunity console volume will still be the thing we constrain to grow our long term ambition.”

Full document in the link.

You can already see that MS is willing to downgrade the experience of its console users in order to grow their cloud business. You have to start wondering what their series s to series x ratio really is because if all those face/offs won by the XSX only impact 20% of the xbox userbase, whats the point?
 

HTK

Banned
It is quite apparent that MS strategy is fully getting behind GamePass. Additionally, recently Phil spencer comments about Series X Pro not being a thing made me think that they won't do a true next gen console hardware and if they do it may not be what we think. Just something that all these events made me think about, I think MS would be a great publishers. :)
 

Tsaki

Member
' Microsoft also had a strategic bet on cloud that it appears to have been holding back chips for.'
This doesn't seem like the primary factor. It is one of the factors. This also covers the launch period, not up until now. But it's a Tom Warren article so the headline makes sense.
 

El Sueño

Member
Why did they even launch them if they are so good at planning? It makes no sense. And obviously again, Sony did not do a good job with PS5 or 4 or whatever.
I don`t believe them anything.
 

Three

Member
So I have a hard time believing this unless Brad Smith, their president, is out there lying. They said in the UK (their second largest market) they have support for 5,000 concurrent users. That's not a whole lot of consoles to have diverted in 2 whole years.

If I had to guess it's more that they wished to move people to cloud by artificially limiting availability so as to not take a loss selling Series X in stores and they couldn't improve their margin due to their poor yield rate.
 
Last edited:

Thick Thighs Save Lives

NeoGAF's Physical Games Advocate Extraordinaire
Spencer admits that Microsoft had a “yield miss for Scarlett,” the codename for Xbox Series X / S consoles, but that it and the delay to Halo Infinite weren’t the “main factors in our console scarcity” during the initial launch period. Microsoft had cut the compute units on its Xbox Series X silicon down to 52 from 56 to improve production yield, but the company still missed a target for hardware production of the console. Microsoft also had a strategic bet on cloud that it appears to have been holding back chips for.
Interesting, so the general theory was the the yields were real bad due to the high CU count of the APU; so most of them were either binned into the Series S APU or used in the server blades for xCloud. Also, a full fat 56 CUs Series X would be around 12.9TF.
 
Last edited:

Tsaki

Member
So I have a hard time believing this unless Brad Smith, their president, is out there lying. They said in the UK (their second largest market) they have support for 5,000 concurrent users. That's not a whole lot of consoles to have diverted in 2 whole years.

If I had to guess it's more that they wished to move people to cloud by artificially limiting availability so as to not take a loss selling Series X in stores and they couldn't improve their margin due to their poor yield rate.
It is not for 2 years. This covers the launch period of the consoles and more is being said about the yield problems than the SoCs diverted for cloud. It's a classic Tom Warren piece to cover for the low unit sales of Series. 'Of course they didn't sell well. You see, all those units were going to the cloud. Now the real sales will begin'.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
It is not for 2 years. This covers the launch period of the consoles and more is being said about the yield problems than the SoCs diverted for cloud. It's a classic Tom Warren piece to cover for the low unit sales of Series. 'Of course they didn't sell well. You see, all those units were going to the cloud. Now the real sales will begin'.
exactly, but over 2 years into the gen they only at maximum diverted 5,000 Series X chips to cloud in their second largest market.



ignore Jez's idiocy about it affecting less than 10,000 people. He obviously doesn't understand how concurrent users work.
They thought lets use one chip to serve multiple paying subscribers rather than sell it at a significant loss to serve 1 subscriber because it was better for them. They really didn't like losing money on the X and didn't want to come in more expensive than the PS5. Now that they've upped the price considerably they are less worried about that loss.
 
Last edited:

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
I mean, they had a plan and needed to show growth. I don't think anyone saw the chip shortage being as impactful as it was. Then they find themselves in the middle of the chip shortage and see the moves Amazon and Google were making, it makes sense why they continued to allocate their SoC for server use in an effort to not lose ground in the "cloud wars" that ended up not taking place. Yeah sure, things could have always been different, but I don't think framing the decision as "intentionally downgrading the experience of their console customers" is warranted or logical.
 

Tsaki

Member
exactly, but over 2 years into the gen they only at maximum diverted 5,000 Series X chips to cloud in their second largest market.



ignore Jez's idiocy about it affecting less than 10,000 people. He obviously doesn't understand how concurrent users work.
They thought lets use one chip to serve multiple paying subscribers rather than sell it at a significant loss to serve 1 subscriber because it was better for them. They really didn't like losing money on the X and didn't want to come in more expensive than the PS5. Now that they've upped the price considerably they are less worried about that loss.

It seems to me that bad yields and low demand are the issues. They started diverting SoCs to cloud in 2020. But there aren't that many people interested in it so they lowered or stopped sending units there. This explains the low number that Smith gave. Generally there hasn't been strong demand for Xbox consoles (comparatively) and add to that the yields issues means that X units are less common than S (whose chip size is small thus having better yields), so overall you have low total sales.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
XSX used to be 56 compute units?

So 13TF?
Xbox is still 56 compute units. just like the PS4 Pro and PS5 are 40 CUs, but only 36 are active. The PS4 was 20 CUs. 18 active.

They disable these CUs in all consoles for various reasons. My guess is just in case the CUs are defective, but dont quote me on that.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Xbox is still 56 compute units. just like the PS4 Pro and PS5 are 40 CUs, but only 36 are active. The PS4 was 20 CUs. 18 active.

They disable these CUs in all consoles for various reasons. My guess is just in case the CUs are defective, but dont quote me on that.
It is due to yields, yes. They can't guarantee that all cores will work in every chip. That would be too expensive and a lot of waste.
 

Big Baller

Al Pachinko, Konami President
Sad Happy Hour GIF
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
It is due to yields, yes. They can't guarantee that all cores will work in every chip. That would be too expensive and a lot of waste.
Yeah, thats what I remember, but I never understood how they determine which ones are faulty and if they disable them manually or if its the same 4 CUs that are deactivated on all our PS5s.

Would be nice to win the lottery and have them enable all 40 CUs if they aren't faulty. Get a nice 10% performance boost.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Yeah, thats what I remember, but I never understood how they determine which ones are faulty and if they disable them manually or if its the same 4 CUs that are deactivated on all our PS5s.

Would be nice to win the lottery and have them enable all 40 CUs if they aren't faulty. Get a nice 10% performance boost.
Yeah, I don't know how they determine it either. Probably lots of % data with laws of probability based on that. I do know if they go under the CUs needed, they are then binned to PC APUs for mostly those emulation boxes people build.
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
XSX used to be 56 compute units?

So 13TF?
And PS5 technically has 40 compute units.

They shut off two work groups (having 2 compute units each) to improve manufacturing yields. Higher yields = relatively lower chip price.

As for this post, its obvious MS didn't want to lose money on the hardware, so it made sense that the already limited number of XSX chips they got (due to the poor yields) would be better served being put in servers where one chip could potentially serve up to 4 or more users.

This is as good an indication as any that MS main focus is not on consoles anymore but rather on gamepass and ultimately, X-cloud.
 

Bry0

Member
They sacrificed Xbox hardware sales with day1 pc ports
The money goes to them either way lol, they are both MS platforms but y’all act like windows doesn’t count, why? Most pc gamers really don’t care about consoles.

Betting the farm on xcloud seems hilariously dumb though, but I don’t know how popular x loud really is. I just know anecdotally there is nobody around me who likes to actually use it.
 

tr1p1ex

Member
I wouldn't put it past MSFT to do this just to make themselves look weaker to help approval of their ATVI buyout.

It never made sense to me why the Xbox went from stock last summer to no stock this year. Something weird was up and maybe still up.

I don't feel like they blindly killed retail sales for cloud when they had to know cloud wasn't taking off. They are even on record saying cloud will take some time.
 
Last edited:

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
So, does this mean the console that was having yield issues was the Series X and not the PS5?

Because at one point yield issues was thrown around for PS5.

Also....are we gonna get BOM numbers from this case? Because that would be amazing.
 
Last edited:

hepfom

Member
I wonder how many of the streaming companies Microsoft cut "10 year deals" with use AWS versus Azure. It doesn't seem like any of this is about Xcloud but rather about Azure. Xcloud just seems to be a byproduct of this.
 

mrmustard

Banned
The money goes to them either way lol, they are both MS platforms but y’all act like windows doesn’t count, why? Most pc gamers really don’t care about consoles.
Money is not the point, although i don't see how Microsoft makes much money with hardware they don't sell and free Windows 10/11, no online sub and no 3rd party cut.

I was just talking about the Xbox sales and with day1 pc ports they sell less of course, because no pc gamer buys one and people who were interested in buying one can go for a pc instead.
 
Last edited:

Fess

Member
And functionally it’s still behind Stadia. I’ve never been able to have stable performance on xcloud.
 

Bry0

Member
Money is not the point, although i don't see how Microsoft makes much money with hardware they don't sell and free Windows 10/11, no online sub and no 3rd party cut.

I was just talking about the Xbox sales and with day1 pc ports they sell less of course, because no pc gamer buys one and people who were interested in buying one can go for a pc instead.
Those day1 ports are first party. That’s a whole other audience buying copies and Buying into the brand because they seem to want the brand to be more than just a piece of hardware. Personally I don’t like cheering for exclusives. The support they are giving pc is what I always wanted them to do and I think it’s great as pc is my primary platform. It got people playing forza and halo who I known never would have bought an Xbox to play those or really any console exclusive game.

I’m not convinced day1 pc ports for first party are a net loss until it can be proven, but between these shortages on the x and the brand damage from the Xbox one, those seem to be way bigger factors in hardware sales loss than day1 pc ports
 
Last edited:

Brucey

Member
So I have a hard time believing this unless Brad Smith, their president, is out there lying. They said in the UK (their second largest market) they have support for 5,000 concurrent users. That's not a whole lot of consoles to have diverted in 2 whole years.

If I had to guess it's more that they wished to move people to cloud by artificially limiting availability so as to not take a loss selling Series X in stores and they couldn't improve their margin due to their poor yield rate.
Assuming an Xbox series x apu "in the cloud" can be used for four xb series s streams, then the actual number of xcloud units would be 1250 for the UK?
 
They sacrificed nothing as they can't sell out even the units that have been available on shelves for months

LOL
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
So I have a hard time believing this unless Brad Smith, their president, is out there lying. They said in the UK (their second largest market) they have support for 5,000 concurrent users. That's not a whole lot of consoles to have diverted in 2 whole years.

If I had to guess it's more that they wished to move people to cloud by artificially limiting availability so as to not take a loss selling Series X in stores and they couldn't improve their margin due to their poor yield rate.

That sounds like some classic tin foil conspiracy my friend.

Anyway, we've known about them converting their infrastfucture to Series X's a while ago, even before these emails. This isn't exactly new news.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
That sounds like some classic tin foil conspiracy my friend.

Anyway, we've known about them converting their infrastfucture to Series X's a while ago, even before these emails. This isn't exactly new news.
What on earth are you talking about? How do you refute something from the horses mouth with this bullshit?
 

Spyxos

Member
This cloud expansion doesn't seem to work very well. Every time I want to play Xcloud in the evening, I see a 10 minute wait timer.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
What on earth are you talking about? How do you refute something from the horses mouth with this bullshit?




We've known about the xcloud infrastructure moving to Series X's for almost 2 years now. I'm saying these emails are't exactly telling us anything we didn't know (for this particular item) about quote unquote sacrificing console sales for cloud.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom