InfernalEternal

Source? I thought it was running on a prototype CELL with SLi 6800 GT's. Pretty amazing if it were just a final spec CELL.

I agree. Sony is synonymous with gaming in many parts of the world today. Its not a 'Nintendo', its not an 'Xbox', its not a Video Gaming Console, its a Playstation. Kinda like IPod and the MP3 Market. I just dont see Sony going from 100 Million (Plus by the time the PS3 reaches) to say 40 Million or less.

...pspworld.com/images/burnout-legends.jpg Yeah. Its for the Xbox 360 alright!

Either do you. Didnt you read the bit that said "Lets say Nintendo sells the Revolution.."?, ie, its a hypothetical situation. I pulled the $200 USD figure from what the competition is spending/losing. Sony is forking out something like $100 per item (BR, RSX, CELL) so I thought I'd use the same figure for the Revolution. The only 100% true thing we know is that IF these specifications are indeed correct, there is no way in hell Nintendo can sell it and make a profit from each console sold. From previous discussions from the media, we've heard from Nintendo's mouth that they plan to make another console that is profitable, afterall, a profitable console is the only thing keeping them afloat in the console wars. This kind of renders this rumour false. (Not to mention the tons of inaccuracies in the actual specs, eg, how can a IBM PowerPC 2.5Ghz produce better performance then a IBM PowerPC 3.2Ghz with three cores? Another example is the insane resolution and the hella expensive RAM/PPU) Nintendo, If these are indeed the official stats suprise me and sell it under $500.

Lets say Nintendo sells the Revolution at a $200 USD loss and sells 10 Million in the first year. Thats a 2.0 Billion USD loss just in Revolution hardware in the first year, that doesnt count advertising and everything else. If you added in all the profits from the SP/Micro/DS/Games, they'd still be making a loss.

Nintendo couldn't sustain making a $100-150-200 USD loss on each Revolution sold.