• Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 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
        ·
        11 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
          ·
          9 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
              ·
              4 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
                  ·
                  3 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.