MS to lose $75 per X360
- Thread starter ims
- Start date
passby said:Pretty invalid comparison as they are about 20 mths apart. In over-simplified Moore's Law considerations they are in a different generation. It is likely possible to produce the same 1.5 yr-old stuff at half the cost.(*)PC-Engine said:
And there were never any official manufacture costs numbers from anyone. MS officially stating the figure for XB1 is maybe the first time in recent console generations.
(*) And if we think about the 'half-cost issue' carefully, you can imagine how very quickly Sony turns a profit, since they control a large portion of their own costs. Think about this 'half-cost' issue now, then think about how much profit a PS2 unit is earning from the 299 you forked out in 2001.
I doubt PS2 cost less to manufacture than GCN back when GCN launched, considering to date PS2 has already gone through many revisions and still looks to cost more than GCN which hasn't gone through too many revisions.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, Allard said in an interview something to suggest not this time around. But I've no link and can't confirm that. It's just a possibility, instead of the inevitable EU hikeup
mckmas8808
Legend
I still think that there is a small possiblity that the PS3 could be priced the same as the X360. For the exact reason that DiGuru was stating. Sony could be willing to take a bigger loss per console than normal if the other divisions are going to be profitting more due to the new fabs.
mckmas8808 said:
Heh, they do make crazy profits from their criminally overpriced plasmas and stuff....
Though i know my Sony and i know there will be a premium on PS3, just because it's a new playstation and it's Sony. Not only that but now they also have the whole "it's more powerful and it's got lots of features all included" thing going on for them, i really expect them to use that in their favour.
They'll keep it competitively priced, but really, PS2 is still selling for 150 quid. they know they can sell lots at that pricepoint and will not lower it just because we ask nicely.
Price cuts will happen, but i expect PS3 to have a premium for a long time for the above reasons.
mckmas8808 said:
It all depends . If the x360 costs 375$ to make and the ps3 costs more than that lets say 425$ (What the xbox cost ) thats 50$ . So sony would loose 50$ more per console .
But now ms can reduce the price. Can sony follow ? Can they loose a 100$ per console ?
What if ms gets off to a good start with great games early on and manages i dunno a 5-6 m unit world wide lead by the time march roles around and the ps3 launches in japan ? If ms keeps selling well and keeps putting distance between them more devs will develop on the xbox360 , its what happened with the xbox and if ms can keep hitting lower prices and loose less than sony they can make it harder and harder for sony to recoup the costs .
This is not a great thing for sony as they will most likely still be taking hits on the psp hardware and taking more losses on the ps3 launch could break the company .
Its a tricky situation to be in for both of the companies
mckmas8808
Legend
jvd, I agree with the possiblity of everything that you said could happen. I just can't see the PSP and PS3 breaking the company. Those two units are suppose to be the holy grail for other divisions for Sony. Imagine the number of downloads for music and movies from Sony Connect from both the PSP and PS3.
MS duo pro sales couldn't be nowhere near as high as it is now without the PSP. So that helps them in a lot of ways. Every UMD and Blu-ray sale will add money to Sony's pocket. There are so many ways that Sony can profit off the PS3 and PSP that I don't think it will take them under.
I honestly don't think Sony will let this happen. But thats just how I see things.
MS duo pro sales couldn't be nowhere near as high as it is now without the PSP. So that helps them in a lot of ways. Every UMD and Blu-ray sale will add money to Sony's pocket. There are so many ways that Sony can profit off the PS3 and PSP that I don't think it will take them under.
I honestly don't think Sony will let this happen. But thats just how I see things.
Acert93 said:
The only die size known at the moment is for Cell, which is 221mm^2 and sporting 234 million transistors.
RSX is supposedly ~300 million transistors, R500 around ~220 or something (not bothering to look it up) with an additional 90 million or so for the edram - something I would usually include but you really can't since it's being fabbed seperate, which is better for yields.
As for XeCPU - no info whatsoever that I know of, except it should be smaller than Cell by a fair bit.
PS3's chips, given identical manufacturing conditions, would clearly be the more expensive chips though to fab. Now, given that conditions are NOT identical, I'm sure they'll just dance around each other price-wise throughout the lives of these consoles.
mckmas8808 said:
Not everything is for sony to decided .
Its the consumer that decides these thigns and when your selling a million consoles at a 50$ loss that is 50million lost right there . These are big hits and right now the only two parts of sony that are making money are the games and movie division. However this can change at any moment .
Look at the movies industrys , sony can have a string of bombs very easily because the consumer decides what does well and what doesn't .
Its the same in the console industry and as with the ps2vs xbox the one with more games will win . Its happened in every generation expect the genesis vs supernes where the two companys basicly split 3rd party support.
Ms will have a time advantage we all know that , sony admits to it and depending on how long that time advantage is can be the diffrence between sony succeeding or failing .
6 months between us launches may not be that bad for sony , but if its a year then sony will be in hot water . The x360 will have had a year on japan , europe and american shelves and while i doubt they sell more than a million or two in japan that year , I expect the e.u and america to buy alot of units through out that year .
Its just not very wise for sony to loose alot of money per system this time around . Teasy has his doubts about the x360 costing 375$ and if he is right and its more than the xbox cost I don't see the ps3 being less than the x360. WHich would put both at 425$ and the ps3 closer to 500$ imo . To hit the 300$ price point sony may be eating 200$ per console .. That is alot of money
i don't think that's the reason you see differently now. Back on topic:
Anyway I think people need to take what Allard actually said into account and not think it meant something else. He was asked a question about the hardware being more expensive and he answerd that they are paying more on the chip(s). He didn't say the console costs more then the original xbox, only the chips (which they are using less of this time around).
Anyway this is all speculation, but i think MS has made a cheaper box over all compared to last time. Other then the CPU & GPU i think everything else is costing less this time around.
Similar threads
