PlayStation 4 Costs Sony $381 To Build

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
PlayStation 4 Costs Sony $381 To Build

A teardown reveals Sony's PlayStation 4 costs $18 less than retail price.

Pricing a console means balancing profit for the company and how much consumers are willing to spend. It's no surprise that giants like Sony look to make a profit on games and controllers as opposed to the sale of the console itself. Sony will make $18 with the sale of each PS4 system, an analysis research firm IHS revealed. With a $399 retail price, the cost of the parts of the PS4 and the cost of the labor required to assemble those parts totals $381.

It's still an improvement over the cost to build the PS3. Sony sold the PS3 at launch for $599, but it cost about $805 to build. Even later on when the system sold for $299, it cost $336 to build.

IHS noted how much each part cost in one system. The Advanced Micro Devices microprocesser costs $100 to build, and the 16 individual memory chips add up to be $88. IHS noted that the microprocesser chip is about three times as big as the next-biggest chip the firm had seen, and chips with a larger surface area have a higher probability of manufacturing defects. IHS estimates about one-third of the chips are defective and aren't used, which increases the cost. The other parts in the PS4 are much cheaper. The Seagate hard drive is $37, and wireless chips from Marvell and Skyworks plus an optical drive cost $28.

The DualShock 4 is an area where Sony can make a bit more of a profit. The controller costs $18 to build, and its retail price is $60. The controller contains Qualcomm Bluetooth chips, a Wolfson Microelectronics audio chip, and a Bosch motion sensor chip.

Sony's business practice in this regard hasn't changed much, but the cost to make a PS4 at launch is greatly less than the at-launch price to build the PS3. Even so, Sony will be looking to push games sales to make a profit.

Source: AllThingsD [http://allthingsd.com/20131119/teardown-shows-sonys-playstation-4-costs-381-to-build/?mod=tweet]


Permalink
 

silverbullet1989

New member
Jun 7, 2009
391
0
0
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
 

M920CAIN

New member
May 24, 2011
349
0
0
Yeah, I don't believe it. They're paying small salaries to the factory workers, surely they're making about 299 dollars profit per console. Those executives they've got need huge loads of money to keep their life styles going.
 

XMark

New member
Jan 25, 2010
1,408
0
0
Not really a big surprise. Consoles themselves aren't usually very profitable, and sometimes are sold at a loss. They're a long-term investment to get future revenue from the games.
 

CrazyCapnMorgan

Is not insane, just crazy >:)
Jan 5, 2011
2,742
0
0
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
 

MCerberus

New member
Jun 26, 2013
1,168
0
0
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,652
0
0
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.

XMark said:
Not really a big surprise. Consoles themselves aren't usually very profitable, and sometimes are sold at a loss. They're a long-term investment to get future revenue from the games.
Which make me wonder why don't they just embrace the PC. They don't have to do anything except make video games for it. And maybe they will do that after this generation of consoles is over. Maybe the Steam Machine and Steam OS will have something to do with it. It makes the uncertain future certainly interesting.
 

CrazyCapnMorgan

Is not insane, just crazy >:)
Jan 5, 2011
2,742
0
0
MCerberus said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
The joke was made to imply that making good games for the console would've helped in the very situation you just described. Thank you, though, for that additional input.
 

Covarr

PS Thanks
May 29, 2009
1,559
0
0
roseofbattle said:
Sony will make $18 with the sale of each PS4 system, an analysis research firm IHS revealed.
No they won't. There's labor costs for assembly, factories and storage, the retailer's cut... They're not even breaking even per unit sold. It's worse if you start to figure in advertising and R&D costs that they pour into the PS4.

Still, the amount they're losing per system sold is low enough they can make it back fairly quickly. A game and a PS+ subscription on average per unit should be more than enough to make up the difference.

P.S. Thanks
 

JoJo

and the Amazing Technicolour Dream Goat šŸ
Moderator
Legacy
Mar 26, 2020
7,126
66
53
Country
šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§
Gender
ā™‚
Wait a minute, this article doesn't make sense. It assumes that retail price - manufacturing costs = profit for Sony. That would be true... if the stores selling the PS4 didn't take a cut of the profit, which is about as likely as pigs flying. Factor in the cost of shipping and advertising too, and it's more likely that the profit for Sony is minimal at best, if not negative. Of course, the extras and game sales are where the real cash is.

Edit: Rats, ninja'd by Covarr whilst I was writing this!
 

silverbullet1989

New member
Jun 7, 2009
391
0
0
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
MCerberus said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
The joke was made to imply that making good games for the console would've helped in the very situation you just described. Thank you, though, for that additional input.
Adam Jensen said:
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
It maybe clever the way they do things, but when they cant even run games at 1080 in 2013 then what in the hell was the point in releasing a new gen of consoles to last another 7-10 years?
 

Zer0Saber

New member
Aug 20, 2008
283
0
0
Now I'm waiting for the xbox one cost to build. with a little less performance hardware than the PS4, but inclusion of the kinect I wonder how justifiable their price will be.
 

RhombusHatesYou

New member
Mar 21, 2010
5,800
0
0
Adam Jensen said:
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
Exactly. The Jaguar APUs aren't outdated, they're AMD's current low-power laptop APU. They are comparatively underpowered but maybe metaphorically taping two of them together will help. The next-gen consoles should see a minor jump in performance if devs learn to effectively code for that many cores (most devs are shit at that sort of thing at the moment).
 

taciturnCandid

New member
Dec 1, 2010
363
0
0
Adam Jensen said:
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
I don't think desktops will ever use hUMA. Maybe laptops, but not desktops. It kinda kills the ability to choose your processor and isn't really an advancement for anything but mobile devices or devices that you can't change the hardware.
 

Toadfish1

New member
May 28, 2013
204
0
0
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
I'd advise checking out the indie titles before that. There's some amazing stuff coming from independent artists lined up for the machine before the end of the year.

silverbullet1989 said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
MCerberus said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
The joke was made to imply that making good games for the console would've helped in the very situation you just described. Thank you, though, for that additional input.
Adam Jensen said:
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
It maybe clever the way they do things, but when they cant even run games at 1080 in 2013 then what in the hell was the point in releasing a new gen of consoles to last another 7-10 years?
....who told you they can't run games at 1080p? Thats the Xbox ONE - the Ps4 is the one that can do native 1080p for COD: Ghosts, a game whose developers do not give even the slightest shit about optimization.
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
0
0
silverbullet1989 said:
When they cant even run games at 1080 in 2013 then what in the hell was the point in releasing a new gen of consoles to last another 7-10 years?
I assume it was also people like you saying that "current gen consoles are holding back gaming 'cos they are running on 8 year old hardware" ... they simply can't win.

Yeah they could start releasing top of the line gaming pc's packaged as consoles but people started shouting at Sony at the cost of the PS3.

Simple fact is most people wont even notice the difference between the resolutions, even in a side by side, which most people will never do in there homes.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
The DualShock 4 is an area where Sony can make a bit more of a profit. The controller costs $18 to build, and its retail price is $60.
Read more at http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/129793-PlayStation-4-Costs-Sony-381-To-Build#YRZpkO1Z44i40EhE.99
You know, I almost bought a second PS4 controller today. Glad I didn't. That's highway robbery right there. I'll wait for a sale.

You could at last go to $50 or even $45, Sony. That's still plenty of profit without screwing your customers over.
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
Sony is losing money on these, probably. I say probably because of a few factors. First, no console is worth a profit margin of less than ten dollars. Second, labor is still a cost. Of course, Sony is buying these chips in bulk, and isn't paying full retail for any part at all. It might actually be close to profit neutral for Sony.
 

Psychobabble

. . . . . . . .
Aug 3, 2013
525
0
0
XMark said:
Not really a big surprise. Consoles themselves aren't usually very profitable, and sometimes are sold at a loss. They're a long-term investment to get future revenue from the games.
Yep completely true. Which sadly I feel is one of the reasons AAA game spending and DLC double dipping has become so insanely out of control. It also goes a long way in explaining why there have been so many AAA multimillion dollar selling "failures" these last few years. With the release of the PS4 and the Xbone, and in the wake of companies trying to chase GTA V money without understanding just why that game made so many sales, I feel it's safe to say we can all expect our games to get a bit worse this generation, as these not very profitable selling console companies manipulate AAA studios to try to increase their profit margins.
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
Covarr said:
roseofbattle said:
Sony will make $18 with the sale of each PS4 system, an analysis research firm IHS revealed.
No they won't. There's labor costs for assembly, factories and storage, the retailer's cut... They're not even breaking even per unit sold.
Labour is accounted for in the numbers. Also, storage isn't that expensive considering most of the consoles are sitting in factories owns by the retailers that sell them. i.e. Wal-Mart, Target. That and the manufacturers don't charge Sony for keeping the PS4's there. Meaning Sony's not paying anyone for storage. I also think it'd make sense for Sony to have a corporate shipping contract with a company for all Sony Products so I think that's also a non issue. And the retailer's cut is tiny. $18 profit per unit sold is a believable number. The analysts did their job on this one.

vxicepickxv said:
Sony is losing money on these, probably. I say probably because of a few factors. First, no console is worth a profit margin of less than ten dollars. Second, labor is still a cost. Of course, Sony is buying these chips in bulk, and isn't paying full retail for any part at all. It might actually be close to profit neutral for Sony.
Firstly, consoles are usually sold at a loss. Manufacturers make money mostly in software sales. The PS4 coming in at $18 profit is actually really good all things considered.

Secondly, labour is accounted for in the $381. Says so in the article:
roseofbattle said:
With a $399 retail price, the cost of the parts of the PS4 and the cost of the labor required to assemble those parts totals $381.
So yeah. Sony's making money right off the bat this time.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,147
0
0
silverbullet1989 said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
MCerberus said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, let's do some maths, shall we people?

A million units sold in North America at an $18 profit in 24 hours - $18 million.

Sony's projected 3 million unit sales worldwide before the end of 2013 - $54 million.

A decision to make some worthwhile games readily available at launch? - Priceless.

Granted, I got Killzone: Shadow Fall because me and my brother like some Killzone, but I'm basically waiting until my birthday until the releases of inFamous: Second Son and Final Fantasy 14: A Realm Reborn for PS4.
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
The joke was made to imply that making good games for the console would've helped in the very situation you just described. Thank you, though, for that additional input.
Adam Jensen said:
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
It maybe clever the way they do things, but when they cant even run games at 1080 in 2013 then what in the hell was the point in releasing a new gen of consoles to last another 7-10 years?
The PS4 does do 1080p, it's the xbox one that can't, being stuck with 720p. Also remember it's still an improvement over the PS3, sure it's not a top of the line PC but consoles have never been PC level of power.
 

Covarr

PS Thanks
May 29, 2009
1,559
0
0
RicoADF said:
The PS4 does do 1080p, it's the xbox one that can't, being stuck with 720p.
Even that's not entirely accurate. The Xbox One can do 1080p, it's just Call of Duty: Ghosts (and possibly some other games) that couldn't. That's more on Activision than on Microsoft. You can bet that if Rayman Legends gets ported to Xb1, it'll run at 1080p.

P.S. Thanks
 

Little Gray

New member
Sep 18, 2012
499
0
0
MCerberus said:
Actually it's pretty far in the red. First you need to take out the retailer cut. Then you must assign indirect and fixed costs to the unit.
The source article actually talks about that but they failed to mention it in the news article.
With the component cost and the retail price so close, it?s possible, Rassweiler said, that Sony is taking a very small gross margin or even a possible loss on the console in hopes of making it back on games. ?If your cost is within $10 to $20 of the retail prices, there?s very little chance you?re making a profit on the console,? he said. /quote]

They also failed to take into account that Sony is not paying retail price for those components and they did not include things like the cost to build the case, lights, wires, etc as well as storage and shipping costs.
 

Gailim

New member
Oct 13, 2009
79
0
0
Adam Jensen said:
silverbullet1989 said:
going on how out dated the hardware already is in this "next gen" of consoles, i'd have been more surprised had they been selling the damn things at a loss this time round.
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
Unified memory architectures are nothing new, the Xbox 360 had a unified memory architecture too. Its not some great feature, its a cost cutting strategy that hurts the machines performance. Different tasks are handled better by different types of memory, the PS4 (and the 360 before it) uses memory tuned specifically for graphics performance, basically it has extremely fast speed at the cost of huge latency. while great for graphic operations it sucks for anything else. This is why PC have two types of memory, GDDR memory on the GPU and DDR for everything else.

basically unified memory hurts performance in non graphical operations. it is a sensible cost cutting measure in a machine primarily used for playing games, but not something to be trumpeted as an achievement
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
JoJo said:
Wait a minute, this article doesn't make sense. It assumes that retail price - manufacturing costs = profit for Sony. That would be true... if the stores selling the PS4 didn't take a cut of the profit, which is about as likely as pigs flying. Factor in the cost of shipping and advertising too, and it's more likely that the profit for Sony is minimal at best, if not negative. Of course, the extras and game sales are where the real cash is.

Edit: Rats, ninja'd by Covarr whilst I was writing this!
Actually, I talked to some stores just before launch (not intentionally, it just happened) and they said they'll be making a good $10 profit on each PS4 sold.

---

Back to the article... it seems lacking. The numbers aren't really there. That $381 is for parts and assembly only. But, it's still not too far off. And I have to say... HA! You guys are getting what you paid for. Console buyers constantly demand cheap hardware so now this stuff is being built with older tech to keep the costs down.

Okay okay, I don't actually see anything wrong with this. Consoles are dedicated computers (I guess not so much anymore) and is way more efficient with it's resources than a PC (or Mac) so it doesn't need the same kind of specs a gaming PC does. Console buyers should be okay with lesser stats because they get a good run from the hardware.

Except for the video card, obviously. Wait... HA! You get what paid for.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
RicoADF said:
The PS4 does do 1080p, it's the xbox one that can't, being stuck with 720p. Also remember it's still an improvement over the PS3, sure it's not a top of the line PC but consoles have never been PC level of power.
The Wii U can do 1080p, in fact the Wii U probably has more games in native 1080p than either of them. The shiny games like Battlefield 4? Neither the Xbone or the PS4 can manage native 1080p for games like that.
 

rasputin0009

New member
Feb 12, 2013
560
0
0
It'll be $100 profit after one year. I'm surprised they got it that low for initial production. And since they have such solid demand, the PS4 will be printing money for Sony.
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
So?

I'd worked a game store for years, back when the SNES was king and the PS1 had just been born, and we (along with everyone else) pretty much sold sytems at cost - the games and used sales were where the money was.

This isn't news to me, it's pointing out the obvious.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
Interesting. I was wondering how Sony was doing on profits per console. And it seems that they aren't entirely boned. With the way they have apparently been selling (like hotcakes), it seems Sony will be enjoying a green Christmas. If not immediately based on the console, it doesn't seem like they have to make up for much of a loss.

I've been really impressed with Sony so far. It seems that they learned the lessons of the PS3. Keep pricing down. Don't sell at too much of a loss. Don't let the major competitor get a extended jump start. Don't assume people have to have a new system or expect sales like the PS2.

Maybe I'm just imagining that, but it seems that they are actively avoiding those same pitfalls.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
roseofbattle said:
The Advanced Micro Devices microprocessor costs $100 to build, and the 16 individual memory chips add up to be $88. IHS noted that the microprocessor chip is about three times as big as the next-biggest chip the firm had seen
You're welcome.

Also, great news! Sony is making a profit on consoles. Awesome.
 

Daaaah Whoosh

New member
Jun 23, 2010
1,041
0
0
I remember when the PS3 cost more to make than it sold for. I used it as another reason why the Xbox was better.

Now, all I can say is that I wish they were selling the PS4 for hundreds of dollars less than it costs to make, because then I could probably afford to buy one right about now.
 

mysecondlife

New member
Feb 24, 2011
2,142
0
0
If what Sony says on taking loss for PS4 is true, they should really talk to those "analysts". Maybe they can figure something out to make it more profitable
 

aelreth

New member
Dec 26, 2012
209
0
0
At least they are not selling it at a loss and making up the loss by selling them in volume.

I would be focusing more on insisting on LAN games rather than making everything PSN centralized.
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
mysecondlife said:
If what Sony says on taking loss for PS4 is true, they should really talk to those "analysts". Maybe they can figure something out to make it more profitable
As I said, systems have almost never made a profit - the money's in the software, not the hardware.

Really , none of you should find this surprising; it's pretty much standard.
 

Mad World

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
795
0
1
Country
Canada
FogHornG36 said:
ah, so when they lower the price for the first time, they will no longer be making any money.
Well, the price may also lower for Sony (to make each console).
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
IF consoles are being released with no margin going to the retailer, then digital distribution for consoles fail because there's no reason for retailers to stock a unit that makes them no money in game sales.

Which is the real reason XBone gave up on their digital only dreams.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
They arent making any profit. The assembly costs is 381 dollar.
You must then add:
Storage Costs
Shipping Costs
Retailers Cut
Promotion prices
Indirect costs
Static costs
Research and developement costs
And in the end its probably costing them 600 dollars to sell one 400 dollar console and they are hoping they are going to make it back by holding a monopoly on games and taking their cut from every developer.

omega 616 said:
I assume it was also people like you saying that "current gen consoles are holding back gaming 'cos they are running on 8 year old hardware" ... they simply can't win.

Yeah they could start releasing top of the line gaming pc's packaged as consoles but people started shouting at Sony at the cost of the PS3.

Simple fact is most people wont even notice the difference between the resolutions, even in a side by side, which most people will never do in there homes.
Last-gen (yes, lets get used to that one, it was as hard to type for me as it will be for you) consoles was holding gaming back. In fact, current gen consoles already ARE holding gaming back thanks to their inability to run 1080p properly.
Heck, next year there will be a PHONE that is as powerful as this console.
And i think we have already been over the fallacy of "you cant see reslution dur durr"

Adam Jensen said:
People keep saying that but it isn't true. There's more to the console hardware than which series of GPU it uses. It isn't outdated. The way the unified memory architecture within the PS4 works is quite novel and won't be available to PC gamers until 2014.
What people were saying is that last gen was outdated - it was true, it had a frigging 512 mb of ram to begin with.
What they are saying about current gen (yes time to get used to that.... ech) is that it is underpowered. and that is also true - the 16 cores of AMD monstrocity even if utilized with maximum efifcinecy (we already saw what hell it is to program for many slow cores before, developers wont be jumping on this) still get beat by a now quite old 4 core i5. Noone was expecting miracles with consoles, they were expecting them to be at least on part with mid-high range PCs though. I mean, in the past consoles were always up there with high-end PCs during the launch at least.



vxicepickxv said:
Sony is losing money on these, probably. I say probably because of a few factors. First, no console is worth a profit margin of less than ten dollars. Second, labor is still a cost. Of course, Sony is buying these chips in bulk, and isn't paying full retail for any part at all. It might actually be close to profit neutral for Sony.
Sony definitely is loosing money. no matter how many units you ship the shipping, storage, static and research costs are going to be more than 18 dollars per unit. I mean technically i guess if they got magic gnomes working for them and they bought all those advertisements for a steal.

J Tyran said:
The Wii U can do 1080p, in fact the Wii U probably has more games in native 1080p than either of them. The shiny games like Battlefield 4? Neither the Xbone or the PS4 can manage native 1080p for games like that.
Though if you look at WiiU games that do native 1080p youll soon realize that your grandads PC could do them in 1080p as they arent more complex than your average flash game nowadays.

mysecondlife said:
If what Sony says on taking loss for PS4 is true, they should really talk to those "analysts". Maybe they can figure something out to make it more profitable
Yes, like making analysts account for other things than just raw assembly price (part of changing costs only).

DracoSuave said:
IF consoles are being released with no margin going to the retailer, then digital distribution for consoles fail because there's no reason for retailers to stock a unit that makes them no money in game sales.

Which is the real reason XBone gave up on their digital only dreams.
which is why you see more consoles sold in places like WallMart than specialized retailers.
 

enex

New member
Sep 6, 2013
10
0
0
Pebkio said:
JoJo said:
Wait a minute, this article doesn't make sense. It assumes that retail price - manufacturing costs = profit for Sony. That would be true... if the stores selling the PS4 didn't take a cut of the profit, which is about as likely as pigs flying. Factor in the cost of shipping and advertising too, and it's more likely that the profit for Sony is minimal at best, if not negative. Of course, the extras and game sales are where the real cash is.

Edit: Rats, ninja'd by Covarr whilst I was writing this!
Actually, I talked to some stores just before launch (not intentionally, it just happened) and they said they'll be making a good $10 profit on each PS4 sold.

---

Back to the article... it seems lacking. The numbers aren't really there. That $381 is for parts and assembly only. But, it's still not too far off. And I have to say... HA! You guys are getting what you paid for. Console buyers constantly demand cheap hardware so now this stuff is being built with older tech to keep the costs down.

Okay okay, I don't actually see anything wrong with this. Consoles are dedicated computers (I guess not so much anymore) and is way more efficient with it's resources than a PC (or Mac) so it doesn't need the same kind of specs a gaming PC does. Console buyers should be okay with lesser stats because they get a good run from the hardware.

Except for the video card, obviously. Wait... HA! You get what paid for.
I knew that it wasn't shiny as it seemed.Thanks for explanation.
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
0
0
Strazdas said:
Last-gen (yes, lets get used to that one, it was as hard to type for me as it will be for you) consoles was holding gaming back. In fact, current gen consoles already ARE holding gaming back thanks to their inability to run 1080p properly.
Heck, next year there will be a PHONE that is as powerful as this console.
And i think we have already been over the fallacy of "you cant see reslution dur durr"
But what do you want? Them to charge a couple of grand for a PC like console that can't be upgraded? Who is going to buy that? You want super powerful machine capable of running at great resolutions and at 100+ FPS but it to cost $400, it's just not going to happen.

People who buy consoles aren't really into making the most of the games, as long as it is the shiny shiny and runs ok it doesn't really matter. If you want the greatest and best from gamers you will buy a PC and fill it with top of the range parts that cost the same as the consoles by themselves, you will get mods for games and all that other fiddly crap.

Consoles serve one demographic of games and pc's serve another, which is why resolution doesn't matter ... the only reason a fuss is being kicked up over it, is 'cos PC guys are like "well they should be running that anyway" and console guys are saying "ps4 has a better resolution that xbone". Only the PC guys who actually give a rats ass about it can tell the differences.

I've been watching a lot of coverage of the new consoles and I've people say the same thing, that it's quite hard to tell the differences and even when you do, after an hour or so of gaming you stop thinking about it and it doesn't matter at all.

To be honest when I game on a pc the resolution doesn't bother me that much, as long as it doesn't look like total ass I will play it at whatever.
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
omega 616 said:
Strazdas said:
Last-gen (yes, lets get used to that one, it was as hard to type for me as it will be for you) consoles was holding gaming back. In fact, current gen consoles already ARE holding gaming back thanks to their inability to run 1080p properly.
Heck, next year there will be a PHONE that is as powerful as this console.
And i think we have already been over the fallacy of "you cant see reslution dur durr"
But what do you want? Them to charge a couple of grand for a PC like console that can't be upgraded? Who is going to buy that? You want super powerful machine capable of running at great resolutions and at 100+ FPS but it to cost $400, it's just not going to happen.

People who buy consoles aren't really into making the most of the games, as long as it is the shiny shiny and runs ok it doesn't really matter. If you want the greatest and best from gamers you will buy a PC and fill it with top of the range parts that cost the same as the consoles by themselves, you will get mods for games and all that other fiddly crap.

Consoles serve one demographic of games and pc's serve another, which is why resolution doesn't matter ... the only reason a fuss is being kicked up over it, is 'cos PC guys are like "well they should be running that anyway" and console guys are saying "ps4 has a better resolution that xbone". Only the PC guys who actually give a rats ass about it can tell the differences.

I've been watching a lot of coverage of the new consoles and I've people say the same thing, that it's quite hard to tell the differences and even when you do, after an hour or so of gaming you stop thinking about it and it doesn't matter at all.

To be honest when I game on a pc the resolution doesn't bother me that much, as long as it doesn't look like total ass I will play it at whatever.
I'll play it even if it DOES look like ass. I LOVE YOU MINECRAFT!

Yeah, I have to agree with you there, I don't think resolutions really matter. We don't even think of it as 1080p, really. That's for restrictive televisions. We care about optimal gameplay, really, and we REALLY only care about what settings we can run it on for affirmation: "Well I can run it at full settings with no loss in framerate... check out my glorious package. *hip-thusting*"

That's why PC gamers are making a big deal of their resolutions right now... Xbone and PS4 fans are flinging poo at each other and we can't help but stick out heads in and scoff. "Pffft, 1080p? What a baby argument. You sad, pathetic, console scrubs. Check out our glorious packages *hip thrusting with the slam to the pelvis region with open palms*."

So if you'd only stop crying about your terrible graphics, we wouldn't say anything.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
omega 616 said:
Strazdas said:
Last-gen (yes, lets get used to that one, it was as hard to type for me as it will be for you) consoles was holding gaming back. In fact, current gen consoles already ARE holding gaming back thanks to their inability to run 1080p properly.
Heck, next year there will be a PHONE that is as powerful as this console.
And i think we have already been over the fallacy of "you cant see reslution dur durr"
But what do you want? Them to charge a couple of grand for a PC like console that can't be upgraded? Who is going to buy that? You want super powerful machine capable of running at great resolutions and at 100+ FPS but it to cost $400, it's just not going to happen.

People who buy consoles aren't really into making the most of the games, as long as it is the shiny shiny and runs ok it doesn't really matter. If you want the greatest and best from gamers you will buy a PC and fill it with top of the range parts that cost the same as the consoles by themselves, you will get mods for games and all that other fiddly crap.

Consoles serve one demographic of games and pc's serve another, which is why resolution doesn't matter ... the only reason a fuss is being kicked up over it, is 'cos PC guys are like "well they should be running that anyway" and console guys are saying "ps4 has a better resolution that xbone". Only the PC guys who actually give a rats ass about it can tell the differences.

I've been watching a lot of coverage of the new consoles and I've people say the same thing, that it's quite hard to tell the differences and even when you do, after an hour or so of gaming you stop thinking about it and it doesn't matter at all.

To be honest when I game on a pc the resolution doesn't bother me that much, as long as it doesn't look like total ass I will play it at whatever.
I want them to at least give service worth the money. You dont need couple grand for a PC to run 1080p You need closer to 600 dollars to spend on a PC that will run every current game on 1080p without problems. And thats consumer price, if we take mass production manufacturer price that 600dollars is probably closer to those same 400 dollars. There was a study that shown that PS4 ahrdware even at purchasers price cost 382 dollars, for mas production thats probably more like 300, they area already taknig a large cut on top for each consoel sold (granted, there are costs to be had they need to cover which is fair enough). you heavily overestimate the value of things your getting. The new consoles from a hearware perspective arent worth the money they are asking you for.

You seem to realize there is no middle ground. you dont have to be a PC building crazyperson to be a PC gamer. In fact thanks to the new consoles PCs are now cheaper option too! And you can get the same (and more) shinies.

Consoles USED TO serve one demogrpahic of games. Now all they are are overpriced limited underpowered PCs with locked hardware and software.

And you once again seem to have only one argument: i cant tell the difference therefore only idiots care. sorry, that doesnt work.

Resolution matters, and looking better is only a small part of benefits of reoslution.
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
0
0
Strazdas said:
My brother made me a computer, picked out and assembled them himself ... I have since put a new sound card, graphics card and ram into it and it comes in the ball park of Ā£500 I've spent on it. My PC can't even play planetside 2 ... guess which console can ...

I'm not saying I have been the greatest parts shopper but I don't think I was awful and I am just one case, so that as you will.

Woah, woah, woah there sparky! "I cant tell the difference therefore only idiots care." I never said that, my opinion is "only people who give a massive crap care and even then after playing the game for a time they get over it" as nobody is sitting there 5 hours into a gaming session thinking "fucking resolution fucking sucks *mumble, grumble*"
 

krazykidd

New member
Mar 22, 2008
6,099
0
0
M920CAIN said:
Yeah, I don't believe it. They're paying small salaries to the factory workers, surely they're making about 299 dollars profit per console. Those executives they've got need huge loads of money to keep their life styles going.
I... What? Did you read the article? The peices to make the console cost money , no one cares about the small salaries workers.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
omega 616 said:
Strazdas said:
My brother made me a computer, picked out and assembled them himself ... I have since put a new sound card, graphics card and ram into it and it comes in the ball park of Ā£500 I've spent on it. My PC can't even play planetside 2 ... guess which console can ...

I'm not saying I have been the greatest parts shopper but I don't think I was awful and I am just one case, so that as you will.

Woah, woah, woah there sparky! "I cant tell the difference therefore only idiots care." I never said that, my opinion is "only people who give a massive crap care and even then after playing the game for a time they get over it" as nobody is sitting there 5 hours into a gaming session thinking "fucking resolution fucking sucks *mumble, grumble*"
As it happens i am looking to buy new PC soon so i follow te pricing closely. For equivalent in local currency to 500 GBP i could build a high end PC (think I5 4xxx, 660GTX, ect). It could most definatelly play Planetside. Heck, for that money i could buy a very decent pre-built PC so you dont even have the excuse of not having to build yourself. Im not sure whether it is bloted prices in britain or you making poor choices o you just buying hardware back when it was mroe expesive and its value degrading over time (that happesn very fst with computers), but there is a problem with your setup.

People get used to being tortured too, does not mean its good thing to do this. The fact is there is a difference and people can see it. Does that mean they will stop playing because of low resolution? perhaps. should a modenr amchine be able to run 1080p at least (for all games) - most definatelly. especially one that costs this much.