I find it interesting that Nintendo was able to create a game console that produced graphics nearly as good as the Xbox, but for almost half the cost. I remember reading that the Xbox cost Microsoft around $400 to produce at launch, while the GameCube cost Nintendo a little under $200 to produce at launch.

Yes, the Xbox contained a 10 GB hard drive. How much was Microsoft paying for that in bulk, in 2001? Let's say...I don't know...maybe $60 each. I'm just guessing. So $400 minus $60 equals $340 to manufacture the Xbox (sans hard drive) vs. let's say $195 to manufacture the GameCube - and both machines produce similar graphics.

I just wonder why one company needed to spend roughly $340 per console (again, sans hard drive), while another company spent roughly $195 per console, which was nearly as powerful.