• Nibodhika@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Only after they closed their system, which they did because they were losing money to every single enterprise in the world who wanted a cluster and PS3 were the cheapest option.

    • Steve Dice@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The PS3 was using a rare CPU that you could only get from it or from some enterprise dealer at a much higher price. The Steam Machine is a standard x86 computer that can’t match the ubiquitous ThinkCentres in price/performance.

      • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If it’s sold at a loss like a console it would beat the price/performance of any other x86 chip on the market, which is why they can’t sell it at a loss, ergo my point.

          • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            If they’re sold at a loss, by definition they have to be cheaper than anything sold at a gain with the same performance.

              • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                And then we could make money having people riding her. If you’re going to start a hypothetical scenario of Valve still being able to make money selling at a loss you can’t be angry that people are replying on the basis your premise is true.