|
Xbox 360 has 54.2 percent failure rate
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 19 August, 2009
According to a GameInformer article, the Xbox 360 still has a high failure rate, of 54.2 percent, due to the dreaded RROD, e74, and other errors, a number much higher than its current console rivals.
The PlayStation 3 had a 10.6 percent failure rate and the Wii was even lower, at 6.8 percent.
The survey used 5000 readers, but the article does mention a few notes to go along with the ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 12:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
There has NEVER been a revision of the 360 that is NOT prone (there goes another operative word again) to failure.
You don't know that.
I assume that we all accept that nobody makes a 100% perfect product everytime so you must be implying with this comment that the later revisons are iunordinately prone to failure too.
Like I said, you don't know that and you do not have any credible evidence for saying so.
Originally posted by Oner:
YES they might have a lower rate but it is still RAMPANT
Well if that is really what you want to 'believe' then go ahead and provide some verifiable proof for the basis of that belief; if you want that statement to appear as anything other than pure opinion.
You can't.
There is none.
Originally posted by Oner:
you can REASONABLY say that a third of ALL 360's EVER sold could have RLOD/RROD and that the number can be much much higher ultimately.
This is pure spin, word-play and quibbling.
Why lump together an Xbox SKU sold years ago with the very different and more reliable SKU now on sale?
If you really want to be reasonable about this then you can also much more reasonably say that a diminishing % of Xboxes are prone to failure (seeing as the real problem lay with the early SKU) and that the SKUs on sale since Sept/Oct 2007 are far more reliable.
This can also much more reasonably be be said to have improved even further by the introduction of the lower power consuming, cooler running current 65nm CPU & GPU Jasper in Dec 2008/Jan 2009.
In fact they are now so much more reliable that even all the anecdotal stories of game shops seeing a stack of returns have all dried up.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
21. August 2009 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
M$ do themselves with the way they release numbers either.. how many of this 33% (so called) were refurbs which failed again and got counted again?
Experienced electronics engineers call them "the bouncer" .. that lemon that turns up almost like clockwork every few weeks or months with yet another totally unrelated fault (anybody remember the GEC 2030 chassis?)
Don't be fooled by figures.. a 33% failure rate would have led to a complete product recall.. no business can stand that kind of loss.. not even M$.. the usual rate of fail which triggers a product "withold from sale while investigated" notice is 3% ..
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 12:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Depends on the time period. 33% failed within 1-2 months is certainly recall-worthy, but 33% in warranty period sounds if anything, a little on the low side.
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
21. August 2009 @ 13:08 |
Link to this message
|
Within a 3 year warranty period it is very low.. I still wonder how many have actually failed.. individual machines... not bouncers.. we all know a refurb is suspect.. Still see the same old tired rrod first release ones circulating ebay.. going round and round... still with the tagline "probably an easy fix" .. hahahaha
A breakdown of the actual faults by type would be probably revealing... how many were sent back because a controller port was broken by the kids.. or the dvd tray got snapped off or pulled out or the psu connector got trodden on.... etc etc. People are just assuming every return was rrod.. not the case.. not possibly the case at all. lasers fail.. these cheap dvd drives fail (more often seen by me than rrod) and the power bricks fail.. not to mention power surge damage.
I'm not defending this hunk of junk in any way. If they were more reliable I would be making money repairing and flashing them.. the fact I don't should tell people what I think of them from a financial risk standpoint as a small independent repairer.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 13:11
|
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 13:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by varnull:
Within a 3 year warranty period it is very low.. I still wonder how many have actually failed.. individual machines... not bouncers.. we all know a refurb is suspect.. Still see the same old tired rrod first release ones circulating ebay.. going round and round... still with the tagline "probably an easy fix" .. hahahaha
A breakdown of the actual faults by type would be probably revealing... how many were sent back because a controller port was broken by the kids.. or the dvd tray got snapped off or pulled out or the psu connector got trodden on.... etc etc. People are just assuming every return was rrod.. not the case.. not possibly the case at all. lasers fail.. these cheap dvd drives fail (more often seen by me than rrod) and the power bricks fail.. not to mention power surge damage.
I'm not defending this hunk of junk in any way. If they were more reliable I would be making money repairing and flashing them.. the fact I don't should tell people what I think of them from a financial risk standpoint as a small independent repairer.
My own experience with the console repair biz demonstrates there is a lot of weight to this "bouncer" phenomena with the X360. Seems to be about a half/half chance that you can get a RROD fixed for a decent length of time, say, a few months. Part of the problem comes down to the rubbish solder they used when stamping the chips onto the boards.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 15:16 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Originally posted by Oner:
There has NEVER been a revision of the 360 that is NOT prone (there goes another operative word again) to failure.
You don't know that.
I assume that we all accept that nobody makes a 100% perfect product everytime so you must be implying with this comment that the later revisons are iunordinately prone to failure too.
Like I said, you don't know that and you do not have any credible evidence for saying so.
Originally posted by Oner:
YES they might have a lower rate but it is still RAMPANT
Well if that is really what you want to 'believe' then go ahead and provide some verifiable proof for the basis of that belief; if you want that statement to appear as anything other than pure opinion.
You can't.
There is none.
Originally posted by Oner:
you can REASONABLY say that a third of ALL 360's EVER sold could have RLOD/RROD and that the number can be much much higher ultimately.
This is pure spin, word-play and quibbling.
Why lump together an Xbox SKU sold years ago with the very different and more reliable SKU now on sale?
If you really want to be reasonable about this then you can also much more reasonably say that a diminishing % of Xboxes are prone to failure (seeing as the real problem lay with the early SKU) and that the SKUs on sale since Sept/Oct 2007 are far more reliable.
This can also much more reasonably be be said to have improved even further by the introduction of the lower power consuming, cooler running current 65nm CPU & GPU Jasper in Dec 2008/Jan 2009.
In fact they are now so much more reliable that even all the anecdotal stories of game shops seeing a stack of returns have all dried up.
I don't need to provide any other proof. I already did, and right from the horses mouth.....Look you can try and say what you will about this or that but the FACT remains MS admitted to almost 12 Million 360 being defective (33+% not including newer ones) and that every revision has NOT fixed the problem...lessened it yes, but nothing more than that, and thus ALL 360's STILL have the problem. Plain & Simple. That is my point (yet again).
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 15:19
|
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 15:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
Meh, whatever, I still enjoy playing the thing. Regardless if they cr@p themselves and die occasionally.
They're so cheap nowadays.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 16:57 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Despite all those numbers however, only 3.8 percent of 360 owners said they would never buy another 360 console due to the hardware failure or the poor service.
This is only because of their loyalty to the brand name not because its good or not.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 17:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
Or because all the games they have are designed for it...
|
|
Morreale
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 18:12 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Or because all the games they have are designed for it...
Only because it is easier and cheaper to design for since it brings nothing new to this generation from the last except a better graphics card and whatnot. Basically upgrading an old computer, nothing crazy lol
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 18:14
|
|
jookycola
Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 19:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by JOHNSTARR:
If you play 24 hour sessions of cod / halo then when done to wind down watch a movie on netflix or dvdr then you deserve to have your 360 rrod for leaving it on too long over a course of time.
I've got 3 xbox 360's---> I have an o.g. , falcon and a jasper and all run great with respect and moderation.
Funny, over a 3 day period I played a full day of COD on my PS3, watched movies both BD and saved to the HDD, downloaded games from the PS Store, Video chated, played music from the HDD during a small party at my house, after the party we watched a few episodes of Entourage from the HDD, then I played 24 hours straight of Ghostbusters, and Uncharted. 3 days straight and my PS3 ran fine. And still does, i think it's amusing to hear you defend the 360 as running great....as long as you don't run them too long.
Irony is all about you
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 19:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Several 16 hour game stints have never done our 1st gen 360 any harm.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 20:17 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JOHNSTARR:
If you play 24 hour sessions of cod / halo then when done to wind down watch a movie on netflix or dvdr then you deserve to have your 360 rrod for leaving it on too long over a course of time.
I've got 3 xbox 360's---> I have an o.g. , falcon and a jasper and all run great with respect and moderation.
Funny, over a 3 day period I played a full day of COD on my PS3, watched movies both BD and saved to the HDD, downloaded games from the PS Store, Video chated, played music from the HDD during a small party at my house, after the party we watched a few episodes of Entourage from the HDD, then I played 24 hours straight of Ghostbusters, and Uncharted. 3 days straight and my PS3 ran fine. And still does, i think it's amusing to hear you defend the 360 as running great....as long as you don't run them too long.
Irony is all about you
if im not mistaken Sony wasn't smacked in the face with a RoHS compliance Either.
with all due respect, there is a thing called the outside its a mysterious place with Tree's UV rays and vitamin D.
|
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 21:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Or because all the games they have are designed for it...
Zing!
Originally posted by Morreale:
Only because it is easier and cheaper to design for since it brings nothing new to this generation from the last except a better graphics card and whatnot. Basically upgrading an old computer, nothing crazy lol
I really fail to see what's wrong with "easier and cheaper to design for", a certain games publisher would agree with me. C'mon, as far as things have turned out, they're about on par.
Apart from the fact you seem to know little about the X360s architecture by regurgitating that old lie- your argument falls flat because there is no evidence of these fantastic games that should therefore exist if the PS3 was that uber-awesome. I mean where are they? I'm still waiting...
I suppose it's possible that the 360 is taking focus away from the PS3. In a perfect world the Sony would have a monopoly and all developer's energies would be devoted to the PS3, forcing them by sheer dint of it's weirdness and idiosyncratic difficulty to be more creative and usher in an incredible new era of gaming blah blah blah... Well, dream on.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 21:04
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 21:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
I don't need to provide any other proof.
You have not provided the slightest bit of proof regarding the console SKUs sold after July 2007 (the date of the link, you call it 'proof', you submitted here).
You're as entitled to your opinion as anyone, fine, of course that's perfectly OK & normal enough.
But if you're going to ignore the fact that the Xbox changed significantly twice since that report/comment you gave and then go on to continue to make claims like the later SKU have a "rampant" "problem" then it's only reasonable to ask that you back that up with some sort of verifiable proof.
Or at least admit that it is merely your own opinion.
Sorry but your opinion is all I'm seeing here.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 21:09
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 21:24 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Oner:
I don't need to provide any other proof.
You have not provided the slightest bit of proof regarding the console SKUs sold after July 2007 (the date of the link, you call it 'proof', you submitted here).
You're as entitled to your opinion as anyone, fine, of course that's perfectly OK & normal enough.
But if you're going to ignore the fact that the Xbox changed significantly twice since that report/comment you gave and then go on to continue to make claims like the later SKU have a "rampant" "problem" then it's only reasonable to ask that you back that up with some sort of verifiable proof.
Or at least admit that it is merely your own opinion.
Sorry but your opinion is all I'm seeing here.
Just because there are no official numbers doesn't mean you have to be in denial. the only thing that should matter is the fact that the xbox 360 is and will be the highest failing console in history.
|
|
chris4160
Suspended permanently
|
21. August 2009 @ 21:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Originally posted by Interestx:
Originally posted by Oner:
People want PROOF of how the 360's fail rate is at least 33%, well that's easy...how is Microsoft themselves admitting that 12 MILLION 360's are defective
Note that this article is dated July 2007.
Before the Falcon SKU appeared & long before Jasper.
Originally posted by Oner:
so lets do some math shall we?
Why?
Your basis for comparison is null & void.
You cannot just extrapolate the early SKU numbers as if they accurately apply to the 2 later SKUs.
The Falcon & the Jasper introduced significant changes to the hardware and the cooling systems used.
The Falcon & the Jasper are manifestly not the same and therefore a straight comparison as if they were is completely invalid.
Originally posted by Oner:
There you go. Proof. With VERIFIABLE factual information...
Nope.
The fact is there's actually not a shred of proof here at all.
There is a Microsoft comment that all Xboxes (prior to the July 2007 date this was published) might be effected (although even here the fail rate is not 100% as the article implies......everyone says they know someone with a failed Xbox but I see a lot of early Xbox owners saying their one is still going strong).
Nobody has produced anything to say that the Falcon (from Sept 2007) and Jasper (from Dec 2008/Jan 2009) SKUs have anything even close to the original fail rates.
Originally posted by chris4160:
Originally posted by Oner:
People want PROOF of how the 360's fail rate is at least 33%, well that's easy...how is Microsoft themselves admitting that 12 MILLION 360's are defective so lets do some math shall we?
Current Xbox 360 TOTAL sales are what 31-32 Million or so right? So that means the percentages (12 Million of 32 Million) is actually MORE than 33% and that does NOT include how EVERY SINGLE REVISION of the 360 has had and continues to have an an unusually high failure rate.
There you go. Proof. With VERIFIABLE factual information...
That article you linked was talking about the x clamps, which isn't even the main cause for rrod. Your "proof" is not even related to the subject, your logic that 12 million units have had rrod is complete bs and if you knew anything about the xbox 360 you would of seen that for yourself.
@ Jemborg Microsoft named the xbox 360 the xbox 360 because it is a complete revolution in gaming consoles (1 revolution = 360 degrees).
I knew this was going to happen...look I am not going to directly break down every reply to what I said but will clarify (as usual) the point I meant overall.
As I said, MS themselves admitted that EVERY SINGLE 360 sold in the first 19 months (about 12 Million) where defective (operative word & reading comprehension is key here). Understand that? Right? Okay...good. So back to the numbers ~ when you do the math on just that alone it is more than a third of every 360 EVER sold are defective (operative word here) NOT that ALL 12 Million have RLOD/RROD and have failed but fall under that they are extremely highly prone to be DEFECTIVE ~ Hence the comment I made of 33%+ is going off of that...Got it? Okay?
Is that a bit clearer to re-iterate? Probably not but I will continue...I glanced over a comment of later revisions falcons etc yada yada yada. It does not matter. There has NEVER been a revision of the 360 that is NOT prone (there goes another operative word again) to failure. YES they might have a lower rate but it is still RAMPANT, so it doesn't matter because the rates of the TOTAL SOLD (not just ones you want to pick and choose) are absolutely horrible.
So when you do the estimates (because MS will never actually release how many have and will be affected) you can REASONABLY say that a third of ALL 360's EVER sold could have RLOD/RROD and that the number can be much much higher ultimately.
I don't understand why you don't understand this. The article you linked was referring to the x clamps. Microsoft announced that they were a design flaw years ago. But that does not mean that all of the xbox 360's have had rrod. All xbox 360's still have the same x clamps in them, but there is a significantly decrease in failures in the newer models, so that says that the x clamps are not the main problem. The main cause for failure is the cheap lead free solder they used.
So, 12 million units are not defective, they are prone to being defective, but since all units use the x clamps, they could all possibly be defective... but the failure rates in the motherboard revisions are a lot lower than the release date consoles. Saying that 33% of xbox 360's are defective because of the x clamps is complete bs, 100% of them are possibly defective because of the x clamps, but not 100% have had rrod...
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
21. August 2009 @ 21:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
X clamp causes the mainboard to warp. popping off the solder joints on the Cpu.
some of the new xbox's do indeed lack the xclamp.
|
Senior Member
|
21. August 2009 @ 22:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
the fact that the xbox 360 is and will be the highest failing console in history.
*gasp* in ALL of history DXR88 :P
I would have thought they way things were going the next gen will be even worse lol.
You are both right, it is a combination of factors, including solder and warping. Sometimes the warping is so bad it's quite permanent. In other cases it's not. The cheap brittle lead-free solder does not help- especially in the case of repairs (where the X clamps have been removed) because it will not remelt well and rejoin effectively.
A word of caution, if one chooses to add extra fan ventilation to their 360 be advised to use an independent power supply. If you don't you're likely to cause the very thing you're trying to avoid.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. August 2009 @ 22:17
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
22. August 2009 @ 07:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
Just because there are no official numbers doesn't mean you have to be in denial.
I'm not "in denial" about anything.
I am well aware that the 1st Xbox SKUs had a problem.
I have not denied that.
I am (correctly) pointing out that using what little info about the reality of the 1st SKU to claim that the 2 latest SKUs are inordinately prone to failure (when there is no credible data for making such a claim) is not only illogical and beneath this discussion but also this quality info site.
The use of a Microsoft comment (made before 1 of the later SKUs appeared and long before the most recent SKU) to pretend that this amounts to verifiable evidence against the reliability record of those SKUs is at best misguided and at worst dishonest.
I thought we were supposed to be for accuracy & truth?
Originally posted by DXR88:
the only thing that should matter is the fact that the xbox 360 is and will be the highest failing console in history.
.....and whatever happened to being accurate and reasonable with the facts?
You may well be right that the original Xbox SKU was very bad, but,
you cannot logically just blithly claim that the significantly changed later variants are the same or close to the same.
Especially when that claim is made entirely 'evidence free'.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. August 2009 @ 07:47
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
22. August 2009 @ 12:07 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Just because there are no official numbers doesn't mean you have to be in denial.
I'm not "in denial" about anything.
I am well aware that the 1st Xbox SKUs had a problem.
I have not denied that.
I am (correctly) pointing out that using what little info about the reality of the 1st SKU to claim that the 2 latest SKUs are inordinately prone to failure (when there is no credible data for making such a claim) is not only illogical and beneath this discussion but also this quality info site.
The use of a Microsoft comment (made before 1 of the later SKUs appeared and long before the most recent SKU) to pretend that this amounts to verifiable evidence against the reliability record of those SKUs is at best misguided and at worst dishonest.
I thought we were supposed to be for accuracy & truth?
Originally posted by DXR88:
the only thing that should matter is the fact that the xbox 360 is and will be the highest failing console in history.
.....and whatever happened to being accurate and reasonable with the facts?
You may well be right that the original Xbox SKU was very bad, but,
you cannot logically just blithly claim that the significantly changed later variants are the same or close to the same.
Especially when that claim is made entirely 'evidence free'.
the xbox 360 is and will by the highest failing console in history.
being a gamer from the NES days i don't need fabricated useless numbers i know it is. you keep telling yourself its not, and when xbox 720 rolls around and all support is abruptly ended like it was for the xbox.
you can say dame that asshole was right.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
22. August 2009 @ 13:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
the xbox 360 is and will by the highest failing console in history.
I see this as nothing less than the sort of determined word-play the fanboy element use.
Xbox may have originally have had problems but they are long over now, why is it so important for you to pretend otherwise?
Looking at their sales numbers nobody else is that bothered.
Originally posted by DXR88:
being a gamer from the NES days i don't need fabricated useless numbers i know it is.
Ah, I see, so any old rumour and 'viral' BS will do, is that it?
Originally posted by DXR88:
you keep telling yourself its not
I don't have to tell myself a thing.
I just look around at the rather silly straws those who are trying to keep this stuff alive clutch at when asked to prove their point.
It's ok, you can 'believe' what you like, that's you right.
Just don't pretend it's based on anything more than personal prejudice and rumour, it sure as hell has nothing to do with any actual credible independant verifiable proof.
Originally posted by DXR88:
and when xbox 720 rolls around and all support is abruptly ended like it was for the xbox.
Firstly, what has this to do with anything?
Secondly don't you know why the first Xbox was dropped so abruptly?
The problem was Microsoft did not own and hold all the rights to a lot of the hardware used in the first Xbox.
When they had their almighty row with Nvidia (who then, surprise surprise, went into the PS3 project with Sony) they were stuck and had nowhere to go with the project.
Nvidia wanted to stop making the (by then aging) GPU in the first Xbox and because Microsoft did not hold all the necessary rights they were left high and dry.
Why do you think the first Xbox saw none of the usual manufacturing upgrades and improvements throughout it's life?
It was because of the rights situation - a mistake they learned from and have not repeated with Xbox 360 btw.
Originally posted by DXR88:
you can say dame that asshole was right.
Right about what?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. August 2009 @ 13:28
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
22. August 2009 @ 20:02 |
Link to this message
|
you go find your numbers,ill keep playing my xbox.
let me know when you do, beside i'm still waiting for some facts and proof that the xbox360 is not the highest failing console ever invented.
so whats your excuse?
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
22. August 2009 @ 22:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
you go find your numbers
Er, I don't have to find anything, I'm not the one trying to make exaggerated claims about the thing.
I can spot evidence-free nonsense when I see it and I called it for what it was here.
Originally posted by DXR88:
ill keep playing my xbox.
Just like I do then, without so much as a hiccup.
Originally posted by DXR88:
i'm still waiting for some facts and proof that the xbox360 is not the highest failing console ever invented.
so whats your excuse?
Er, that's at best illogical and at worst typical trolling behaviour.
You can't actually 'prove' a negative.
I don't have to excuse myself from anything as I was not the one making critical claims with no relevant facts to back my claims up, thanks. :P
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. August 2009 @ 22:00
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
22. August 2009 @ 23:09 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
You can't actually 'prove' a negative.
since when? the court system has been built around proving a negative.
Quote:
I don't have to excuse myself from anything as I was not the one making critical claims with no relevant facts to back my claims up, thanks.
yeah you did, you claimed the xbox360 does not have a high rate of failure.
Prove it.
|
