Support NeoGAF

[Rightisright]

I hear alot of people say they think the XSX will be $100 dearer than the PS5 because it's approx 2tflops more powerful.

I just don't see that at all.
So, both the XSX and PS5 will have the same fixed costs with a bluray drive, 16gb of GDDR6 RAM, power supply, plastic case, motherboard and manufacturing price.

The leaves a potential difference with the APU, SSD and cooling solution.
The XSX has an extra 16 compute units, which would add approx 20% size to the APU over the PS5. The average cost of an APU will be about $120-$140. So let's assume a 20% cost addition to MS of around $25.00 on the APU.

The PS5 has by far a more advanced SSD solution than the XSX, and that tech comes at a price. I would think, that the extra cost associated with the PS5s SSD would be at least $25.00, and possibly alot more. Just look at the cost that equiviant PC SSDs of that speed come in at.

Then there is the cooling solution. The PS5 GPU is going to generate more heat than the XSX GPU due to those clock speeds, and also add into that the extra heat the SSD will have. As such, you would expect the PS5 to need a more advanced cooling solution than the XSX, especially considering how MS has gone with a tower. If Sony go with a traditional console form factor like the PS4, then it will require even more efficient cooling than MS will need with their tower.

So all in all, I dont see any way that Sony is going to be able to sell the PS5 at a lower cost than the XSX, and may even be more expensive. Talk about being $100 cheaper are just fantasy.

 

[CrashNBurn_281]

I really do not expect a large price difference between the two. Neither party will likely want to sell at a large loss.

Yes they can make up hardware loss in software gains, but it still isnt ideal. The PS3 hurt Sony, and 360 made Microsoft go extremely cautious in their cooling solutions with the Xbone. No one likes large losses.

 

[quickwhips]

I thought sony might have gone with smaller ssd due to trying to keep the price down. I imagine them being same price or ps5 being more expensive.

 

[yurinka]

The price will be the same. PS5 has some CU less but a way more expensive SSD. Other than that, both consoles are practically the same: Zen 2 + RDNA 2.0, 16GB of RAM, 100GB bluray, etc.

 

[Lone Wolf]

So both $499?

 

[RCU005]

IMO, Sony doesn’t have anything to lose selling at a loss. Even at $100. They have the momentum to get people to buy the PS5 (granted they have great launch games). Also, the PS4 hasn’t had an official price cut in 3 years, and the Pro is still officially selling at launch price. If Sony can get many people to buy the PS5, they can repeat the same strategy.

Microsoft on the other hand, has a very powerful console that might be impossible to sell lower than $500. However, they might be comfortable with that price after Xbox One X response. With that said, Microsoft might be pretty sure that Sony will sell the PS4 at that price too.

If not, then Lockhart has to be real, because that’s the only way they could match Sony’s price of the PS5.

In conclusion, if Sony takes advantage of the huge momentum (and lead) they have, they will price the PS5 at $400, even at a loss.

Xbox Series X will be $500. There is no way it’s higher, and it seems impossible to be lower. Microsoft will have the advantage if both consoles are $500.

 

[longdi]

So both $499?

Basically this.

Sony chose customed SSD parts and 3D audio
MS chose standard SSD but better compute power.

Time will tell who chose wiser. I betting MS wins this turn. They have been so clear with everything

 

[ZehDon]

Anything resembling links, sources, or a barometer for any of the claims made in the OP, and the numbers attached?

I’m half expecting retail as USD$499 for both, because Microsoft wants to deliver the high end experience, and Sony wants to deliver customised tech.
With that said, Sony know the power of the $399 sweet spot. In terms of who’s taking the bigger hit - BOM vs RRP - I think Sony will, in order to deliver that sweet spot price that handed the PS4 it’s dominating lead early.
Microsoft are clearly going for the premium box, but are using relatively standard components to get there. I think they’ll take less of a hit and push out at the $499, knowing their console can back up that price tag.

 

[Rightisright]

IMO, Sony doesn’t have anything to lose selling at a loss. Even at $100. They have the momentum to get people to buy the PS5 (granted they have great launch games). Also, the PS4 hasn’t had an official price cut in 3 years, and the Pro is still officially selling at launch price. If Sony can get many people to buy the PS5, they can repeat the same strategy.

Microsoft on the other hand, has a very powerful console that might be impossible to sell lower than $500. However, they might be comfortable with that price after Xbox One X response. With that said, Microsoft might be pretty sure that Sony will sell the PS4 at that price too.

If not, then Lockhart has to be real, because that’s the only way they could match Sony’s price of the PS5.

In conclusion, if Sony takes advantage of the huge momentum (and lead) they have, they will price the PS5 at $400, even at a loss.

Xbox Series X will be $500. There is no way it’s higher, and it seems impossible to be lower. Microsoft will have the advantage if both consoles are $500.

MS is in a far better financial position than Sony to discount their console.
Getting off to a good start is important at a console launch. MS learnt a lot of lessons with the Xbone, one being that a $100 dearer was a bad thing. Phil said they won't be beaten out on power or price this gen. He followed up on point 1, and I don't doubt they will on point 2.

 

[Trainsmove]

The smaller die size of the weaker 36cu PS5 makes it the cheaper $399. That's easy....

 

[Rightisright]

The smaller die size of the weaker 36cu PS5 makes it the cheaper $399. That's easy....

So what about the more expensive SSD?

 

[The Pleasure]

Basically this.

Sony chose customed SSD parts and 3D audio
MS chose standard SSD but better compute power.

Time will tell who chose wiser. I betting MS wins this turn. They have been so clear with everything

Betting on Microsoft winning is like betting on the LA Clippers winning a season.

 

[icerock]

Don’t agree with you OP, Sony have made cost savings on nearly every major component of a console.

APU, the biggest cost sink of any console is APU, Series X has a 360mm2 die and it is housing 44% more CUs. Sony’s APU should be around ~300mm2 which gives them ~15% savings on the cost. Accounting for node if Series X SoC is going to cost ~$175 to manufacture, Sony are saving ~$25-$35 on APU.

RAM, while both have 16GB of GDDR6 memory. Microsoft are buying 2 more modules compared to Sony who are buying 8. Plus Microsoft are also spending more on a wider memory bus. Sony are again saving ~$25-$30 here.

Storage - This is difficult to gauge because Sony are using 12 channel and attaching them each with a small storage module. Microsoft are using 4/8 channel but attaching them with bigger storage module. These storage modules don’t come cheap with size so its probably a wash out. Also, keep in mind what’s making Sony SSD so different is a bunch or I/O customisation they have done on the die itself. As for the actual setup, both are using PCIe 4.0 and custom I/O controller.

Cooling and other peripherals, Sony’s cooling solution according to patent is unique but Microsoft themselves are using a huge vapor chamber. I doubt rest of peripherals would vary much. But, lets assume they’re spending $10 more.

Accounting for all of this, Sony are saving to the tune of ~$50-$60 which is where Bloomberg article and ZHuge pegged it. That difference might not sound much but remember every additional $10 they eat on BOM cost them $1B for every $10m units sold.

Finally, guessing MRP on basis of BOM alone is a fruitless endeavour given other factors which make the pricing very delicate. Most important being position and price of competitors product. Keep in mind Microsoft are planning to launch with a lower-spec machine at $249-$299. Sony have to price the PS5 correctly to undercut both of Microsoft SKUs, one at power, other at price. A ~$50 savings on BOM puts them in a stronger positon to make the necessary call of eating bigger losses (than intended) at launch since they wouldn’t be as substantial in the long run.

 

[Rightisright]

Don’t agree with you OP, Sony have made cost savings on nearly every major component of a console.

APU, the biggest cost sink of any console is APU, Series X has a 360mm2 die and it is housing 44% more CUs. Sony’s APU should be around ~300mm2 which gives them ~15% savings on the cost. Accounting for node if Series X SoC is going to cost ~$175 to manufacture, Sony are saving ~$25-$35 on APU.

RAM, while both have 16GB of GDDR6 memory. Microsoft are buying 2 more modules compared to Sony who are buying 8. Plus Microsoft are also spending more on a wider memory bus. Sony are again saving ~$25-$30 here.

Storage - This is difficult to gauge because Sony are using 12 channel and attaching them each with a small storage module. Microsoft are using 4/8 channel but attaching them with bigger storage module. These storage modules don’t come cheap with size so its probably a wash out. Also, keep in mind what’s making Sony SSD so different is a bunch or I/O customisation they have done on the die itself. As for the actual setup, both are using PCIe 4.0 and custom I/O controller.

Cooling and other peripherals, Sony’s cooling solution according to patent is unique but Microsoft themselves are using a huge vapor chamber. I doubt rest of peripherals would vary much. But, lets assume they’re spending $10 more.

Accounting for all of this, Sony are saving to the tune of ~$50-$60 which is where Bloomberg article and ZHuge pegged it. That difference might not sound much but remember every additional $10 they eat on BOM cost them $1B for every $10m units sold.

Finally, guessing MRP on basis of BOM alone is a fruitless endeavour given other factors which make the pricing very delicate. Most important being position and price of competitors product. Keep in mind Microsoft are planning to launch with a lower-spec machine at $249-$299. Sony have to price the PS5 correctly to undercut both of Microsoft SKUs, one at power, other at price. A ~$50 savings on BOM puts them in a stronger positon to make the necessary call of eating bigger losses (than intended) at launch since they wouldn’t be as substantial in the long run.

You havent given a number of the price difference for the SSD, which will have the biggest cost factor. It will cost more than the XSXs, and will be a minimum of $25, maybe even more. You are talking a $300-$400 part on a PC.
So even if MS is $25 dearer, MS can easily match Sony's price.
My guess is they are both $499.
At this stage it looks like both Sony and MS are waiting for the other to put a price on their console.
And in reality, Sony can afforded to be $50 more expensive than the XSX. That won't hurt their sales, whereas MS cant afford to be more expensive than the PS5.

 

[longdi]

Storage - This is difficult to gauge because Sony are using 12 channel and attaching them each with a small storage module. Microsoft are using 4/8 channel but attaching them with bigger storage module. These storage modules don’t come cheap with size so its probably a wash out. Also, keep in mind what’s making Sony SSD so different is a bunch or I/O customisation they have done on the die itself. As for the actual setup, both are using PCIe 4.0 and custom I/O controller.

Cooling and other peripherals, Sony’s cooling solution according to patent is unique but Microsoft themselves are using a huge vapor chamber. I doubt rest of peripherals would vary much. But, lets assume they’re spending $10 more.

With expandable storages, Sony will have to use more PCIe 4.0 lanes. MS could get away with 4x.

As seen with Zen2 laptops which used back PCIe.3.0, the 4.0 will cost a healthy bit, in cooling and in price.

 

[48086]

The question you need to ask is how much is Sony and Microsoft willing to lose on hardware costs. Microsoft as a whole is moving towards a services based recurring revenue business model. Lots of people think services like Game Pass and xCloud are services created because the X1 sold so poorly. That's not the case. They were created in order to move more gamers into a services based spending model. Instead of people buying an Xbox game every one or two months, Microsoft wants people paying them $___ every month for services that includes games.

Once you take that into consideration, you can see how it's likely that Microsoft will match the PS5's price and even potentially charge less than the PS5. If the PS5 is $499, I wouldn't be surprised to see the XSX come in at $450.

 

[Deeper Underground]

MS is in a far better financial position than Sony to discount their console.
Getting off to a good start is important at a console launch. MS learnt a lot of lessons with the Xbone, one being that a $100 dearer was a bad thing. Phil said they won't be beaten out on power or price this gen. He followed up on point 1, and I don't doubt they will on point 2.

Off the bat, incorrect. Sony’s gaming division not too long ago made more money in a FY than MS and Nintendo combined. Cerny kept bringing up several times throughout the PS5 deep dive that Sony is being very price conscious of the PS5. They know $399 was a game breaker and if they can do it again while XSX has to be sold at $499, they will win again. I’m not sure where this idea that Sony isn’t capable of selling the PS5 at $399 is coming from because they absolutely can easily. The only question is if MS is willing to bite that bullet too.

 

[-Arcadia-]

If Sony doesn’t have a price advantage, I have to kind of wonder, ‘What was the point?’.

At $100 less or so, they look great. Similar levels of capability at a more mainstream price, and with a really cool possible no-loading feature.

At the same price, they just look underpowered. Getting rid of six-second load times on the Xbox One X, if that’s indeed what we can expect, isn’t enough to balance the scales against less capable hardware.

My thinking is that what we’ve seen on the hardware front matches the PS4 Pro development ideology pretty well, in terms of delivering what customers expect with smart engineering decisions and cheaper components, and I would be surprised to not see that reflected in the price tag.

 

[Tripolygon]

The price will be the same. PS5 has some CU less but a way more expensive SSD. Other than that, both consoles are practically the same: Zen 2 + RDNA 2.0, 16GB of RAM, 100GB bluray, etc.

I think people are over estimating the cost of the SSD in PS5. If it is soldered on, they just buy low capacity nand chips and put it on the motherboard since they are making their own controller which would be very cheap.

 

[-Arcadia-]

Off the bat, incorrect. Sony’s gaming division not too long ago made more money in a FY than MS and Nintendo combined. Cerny kept bringing up several times throughout the PS5 deep dive that Sony is being very price conscious of the PS5. They know $399 was a game breaker and if they can do it again while XSX has to be sold at $499, they will win again. I’m not sure where this idea that Sony isn’t capable of selling the PS5 at $399 is coming from because they absolutely can easily. The only question is if MS is willing to bite that bullet too.

What an obnoxious way to reply to someone.

Similarly, this:

MS is in a far better financial position than Sony to discount their console.

...is not an ‘incorrect’ statement. Your position is that Sony had a good quarter, and that somehow invalidates the titanic difference between an American mega-corp with near limitless resources, and one that was hawking off parts of itself a few years ago just to survive?

 

[Rightisright]

Off the bat, incorrect. Sony’s gaming division not too long ago made more money in a FY than MS and Nintendo combined. Cerny kept bringing up several times throughout the PS5 deep dive that Sony is being very price conscious of the PS5. They know $399 was a game breaker and if they can do it again while XSX has to be sold at $499, they will win again. I’m not sure where this idea that Sony isn’t capable of selling the PS5 at $399 is coming from because they absolutely can easily. The only question is if MS is willing to bite that bullet too.

Gaming is one of Sonys only money making divisions. The profit it makes is propping up the rest of Sony. Sony doesnt have the ability to use that profit to discount their new console too much. They need that money. MS on the other hand could take that loss not a problem.

 

[Rightisright]

I think people are over estimating the cost of the SSD in PS5. If it is soldered on, they just buy low capacity nand chips and put it on the motherboard since they are making their own controller which would be very cheap.

If it was that easy and cheap to make a super fast SSD everyone including MS would have done it as well.
Make no mistake, that SSD is pretty high tech. In fact, Sony was beating out companies that specialize in making super fast SSD. I'm glad to see Sony push that tech, just as it's good to see them push the clocks on the GPU, I just dont think that outside of loading times it will make a difference.

 

[Portugeezer]

That's why it's 825GB, to be cheaper.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Some things to consider:

1. Cost of PS5's SSD vs. SeX

2. Cost of generally better specs otherwise in SeX

3. How much of a margin hit each of them is willing to take. Generations ago, MS and Sony would eat up $100+ per unit. But current gen, I think both companies basically sold at breakeven or maybe even a bit of profit right off the bat. No more sinking in a hole and relying on gamers to dig them out with game and sub plans over the few next years to make that gamer a profitable customer

Game changer this gen and going forward
Sony and MS now make ton more money off sub plans and third party digital cuts (30%). That third party $60 new release and handful of digital deals or indie games totaling $100 of purchases just netted them $30. Do that a couple times a year and add in a first party game which they get full dollar and right there is probably $100 of profit.

Add in Gold and PS+ for around $50/yr.

With so much extra revenue coming from third party digital cuts, the profits must be huge. Basically taken away from stores who sold discs.

The question is whether they will keep these growing digital profits or use some to subsidize the hardware.

 

[Rightisright]

That's why it's 825GB, to be cheaper.

Not according to Cerny. He gave the reason for that size. Plus, the cost is in the controller part of it, not the actual memory size.

 

[joe_zazen]

So both $499?

$705 canadian

 

[Rightisright]

Some things to consider:

1. Cost of PS5's SSD vs. SeX

2. Cost of generally better specs otherwise in SeX

3. How much of a margin hit each of them is willing to take. Generations ago, MS and Sony would eat up $100+ per unit. But current gen, I think both companies basically sold at breakeven or maybe even a bit of profit right off the bat. No more sinking in a hole and relying on gamers to dig them out with game and sub plans over the few next years to make that gamer a profitable customer

Game changer this gen and going forward
Sony and MS now make ton more money off sub plans and third party digital cuts (30%). That third party $60 new release and handful of digital deals or indie games totaling $100 of purchases just netted them $30. Do that a couple times a year and add in a first party game which they get full dollar and right there is probably $100 of profit.

Add in Gold and PS+ for around $50/yr.

With so much extra revenue coming from third party digital cuts, the profits must be huge. Basically taken away from stores who sold discs.

The question is whether they will keep these growing digital profits or use some to subsidize the hardware.

Plus I think both companies see this time period where they grow the amount of people in their ecosystem. That one extra person equates to far more money than back in the old days. You basically cant go without Xbox Live for instance. Gamepass is growing at a really fast rate, and then XCloud moving forward. So now is when you want people to have your console.

 

[Rightisright]

$705 canadian

And I just hate to think of what they will charge us here in Australia.

 

[quest]

If it was that easy and cheap to make a super fast SSD everyone including MS would have done it as well.
Make no mistake, that SSD is pretty high tech. In fact, Sony was beating out companies that specialize in making super fast SSD. I'm glad to see Sony push that tech, just as it's good to see them push the clocks on the GPU, I just dont think that outside of loading times it will make a difference.

Pretty much everyone wants to under estimate the SSD cost so badly lol. That thing is expensive plain and simple it easily eats the costs of the bigger apu of Microsoft.

Those expecting either to eat a big loss those days have passed stock holders will get people fired for that now days. They don't care about future revenue they care about now and losing millions now different era.

 

[hybrid_birth]

$705 canadian

$2,000 Brazilian

 

[Stuart360]

I think they will both be the same price. Its obvious that they are waiting for each other to reveal the price, its really the only major thing left to reveal (well apart from the PS5 itself of course).
I dont think Sony will be selling at $399 because i'm sure they would of already said so if that was the case. Microsoft at best could match that $399, but no way could they go lower.
I think both will be $450-$500.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Valuable tip for all

Buy your console at Costco. Game systems are not part of the 90 day electronics return policy.

So if it breaks 3 years later, you can return it and get your money back. Just make sure you can redownload your games and cloud game saves. So a new system will require downloading shit all afternoon, but better than losing big $$$.

Of if you want, buy a new system first, figure out transferring data from drive to drive (if it's doable like 360 had a transfer cable if you bought a new MS external HDD), then refund the broken system.

 

[Stuart360]

Pretty much everyone wants to under estimate the SSD cost so badly lol. That thing is expensive plain and simple it easily eats the costs of the bigger apu of Microsoft.

Those expecting either to eat a big loss those days have passed stock holders will get people fired for that now days. They don't care about future revenue they care about now and losing millions now different era.

I saw some tech sites say that a similar level SSD on PC would cost about $300. Now thats $300 to us, and Sony buying in bulk would obviously get it much cheaper, but how much cheaper?, $150?, $100?.

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

MS is in a far better financial position than Sony to discount their console.
Getting off to a good start is important at a console launch. MS learnt a lot of lessons with the Xbone, one being that a $100 dearer was a bad thing. Phil said they won't be beaten out on power or price this gen. He followed up on point 1, and I don't doubt they will on point 2.

They have been better positioned financially this gen and never bothered to be aggressive with price

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

The question you need to ask is how much is Sony and Microsoft willing to lose on hardware costs. Microsoft as a whole is moving towards a services based recurring revenue business model. Lots of people think services like Game Pass and xCloud are services created because the X1 sold so poorly. That's not the case. They were created in order to move more gamers into a services based spending model. Instead of people buying an Xbox game every one or two months, Microsoft wants people paying them $___ every month for services that includes games.

Once you take that into consideration, you can see how it's likely that Microsoft will match the PS5's price and even potentially charge less than the PS5. If the PS5 is $499, I wouldn't be surprised to see the XSX come in at $450.

Or MS doesn't care as much about hardware movement as their services are available elsewhere

 

[Rightisright]

They have been better positioned financially this gen and never bothered to be aggressive with price

MS have been building up to this next gen. They have spent a ton buying up game studios, setting up new ones, investing in those game studios as well. Its all leading up to next gen. I mean there is the cost to buy a company like Playground Games, who would have cost similar to Insomniac did (229 million), they then set about doubling the size of the studio to add another dev team. Ninja Theory, Obsidan, InXile etc have all had their resources increased after purchase. None of that expense will be recouped in this current gen, it's all forward thinking.
I think MS wrote off this gen, and are going all out for the next.

 

[Rightisright]

Or MS doesn't care as much about hardware movement as their services are available elsewhere

But if you sell a XSX to someone they are stuck in your ecosystem. Sure they can sell games on PC, and even have gamepass on PC, but there is a ton of competition such as Epic Game Store, Steam and developers who self publish. They would much rather a customer buy a XSX than PC game.

 

[ethomaz]

BOM is pretty hard to discuss right now.
Components prices are all over the top due the Coronavirus.

What I believe is that both APUs are expensive due the process used and size.

If I have to guess the difference will be around $50 with Xbox being around $180.

Plus PS5 PCB is cheaper (due the 256bits bus only), RAM is cheaper (less modules), etc.

PS5 SSD is probably the only part more expensive than Xbox.

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

MS have been building up to this next gen. They have spent a ton buying up game studios, setting up new ones, investing in those game studios as well. Its all leading up to next gen. I mean there is the cost to buy a company like Playground Games, who would have cost similar to Insomniac did (229 million), they then set about doubling the size of the studio to add another dev team. Ninja Theory, Obsidan, InXile etc have all had their resources increased after purchase. None of that expense will be recouped in this current gen, it's all forward thinking.
I think MS wrote off this gen, and are going all out for the next.

Even as recently as X1X which they knew would be $100 more than Pro? Maybe you're right but I've seen nothing indicating they're willing to be aggressive. As we saw with Sony last gen some late gen sales can build momentum for the next. Why would MS not get out that discless console for $200? Or cut the X to $400 sooner?

 

[Sosokrates]

Since the cerny talk and Bloomberg article the concensis is that the PS5 will break even @ $499, they may take a loss and go $450, but in this climate they wont want to take a big loss if any loss at all

 

[Kagero]

#teamsameprice

Both systems have a lot to offer. Very cool tech in both. 499$ is my prediction and I believe that's a bargain for both.

 

[Jtibh]

$299.
Anything above that is a rip off.
And by the time it comes out pc will be way more powerful and also equal parts for pc will cost less then the new consoles.

 

[Rightisright]

Even as recently as X1X which they knew would be $100 more than Pro? Maybe you're right but I've seen nothing indicating they're willing to be aggressive. As we saw with Sony last gen some late gen sales can build momentum for the next. Why would MS not get out that discless console for $200? Or cut the X to $400 sooner?

If you compare the PS4 Pro to XOX, you have the bigger GPU, improved cooling system due to the higher clocks, HD Bluray drive to boot. The XOX was never seen as a big seller, it was seen as a sorry note to Xbox fanatics, they wanted to reclaim the power crown, and it was a dry run for the XSX.

 

[Rightisright]

Another thing I didnt add was that due to having such high clocks that could well effect Sony's yields, which offsets the XSXs bigger chip.

 

[Rightisright]

Valuable tip for all

Buy your console at Costco. Game systems are not part of the 90 day electronics return policy.

So if it breaks 3 years later, you can return it and get your money back. Just make sure you can redownload your games and cloud game saves. So a new system will require downloading shit all afternoon, but better than losing big $$$.

Of if you want, buy a new system first, figure out transferring data from drive to drive (if it's doable like 360 had a transfer cable if you bought a new MS external HDD), then refund the broken system.

So what does Costco offer for electronics warrenty vs others?

 

[Trimesh]

Even as recently as X1X which they knew would be $100 more than Pro? Maybe you're right but I've seen nothing indicating they're willing to be aggressive. As we saw with Sony last gen some late gen sales can build momentum for the next. Why would MS not get out that discless console for $200? Or cut the X to $400 sooner?

But very few people would buy a hypothetical $400 Xbox One X now and then buy another console less than a year later. It's not in the interests of either MS or Sony to discount at the moment because they would much rather people buy their next-generation products.

People on sites like this who are way more likely to be gaming enthusiasts tend to lose sight of the fact that for most people these things are simply toys, and most people have a limited budget for toys.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

So what does Costco offer for electronics warrenty vs others?

I think Canada and US is the same. Certain electronics are only 90s days like TVs, computers, and anything high value that people scam them with returns. A long tie ago, Costco used to have unlimited returns for anything, but people were fucking around returning good tvs and PCs years later and buying new stuff. Basically treating Costco like a revolving door.

For any electronics not part of their 90 day rule, it's unlimited.

If it's part of the 90 day rule, then you got 90 days to get a refund.

I'd advise all people to buy their big gear at Costco. Even TVs. They add 1 extra year making it a 2 year warranty. Most electronics makers only give 1 year warranty. So Costco gives you a free year. And for an extra $50-100 (depending on the price of the TV), you can add 3 more years of warranty making it 5 total.

Even better, their TV repair service is hands free. They come pick it up, repair it, and drop it off. I had to do that with a TV 7-8 years ago. The screen blacked out. Got hold of them and they sent a repair guy to take it away and I got the TV back a week later at home.

Their return/warranty policies make places like Best Buy look like ass. Best buy wanted $400 for extended warranties. Costco was $100.

 

[Deeper Underground]

What an obnoxious way to reply to someone.

Similarly, this:



...is not an ‘incorrect’ statement. Your position is that Sony had a good quarter, and that somehow invalidates the titanic difference between an American mega-corp with near limitless resources, and one that was hawking off parts of itself a few years ago just to survive?

1. You have a problem with how I speak to someone? Put me on ignore or stop whining.

2. You argument boils down to “American company warchest, Japanese company no money”. Allow me to stop this dialogue before it even starts. Near limitless resources LOL. I guess that’s why Nadella had to basically convince the MS board that the Xbox division was worth keeping after the mass amounts of cash they were losing, but I’m not surprised you forgot to tell that part. In any case, you failed to address the fact that Sony’s financial state is the exact opposite of what it was in 2013 and stating that Sony is not in any position to sell the PS5 for $399 is literally an incorrect statement. Just because you don’t believe it, doesn’t make it not true.

Gaming is one of Sonys only money making divisions. The profit it makes is propping up the rest of Sony. Sony doesnt have the ability to use that profit to discount their new console too much. They need that money. MS on the other hand could take that loss not a problem.

Once again, false. We already have the statistics. Day one adopters spent on average $1100 in the first year of the PS4’s lifespan. The average PS4 owner has spent $700 over its lifetime. Not to mention the money printer that Sony has in PSN with digital sales and services and is only gaining momentum into the next gen. So please tell me where Sony “needs” this money, and the gaming division is “propping up Sony”? Have you actually read a financial report? Do you not know that Sony is one of the biggest semiconductor manufacturers in the world? Did you know that Sony’s financial services are widely used around the world? Did you not know that Sony’s lenses have been used in iPhones for years and just last year could not keep up with demand? It would help if some of you actually did research before making such cocksure statements and looking foolish.

 

[sn0man]

What about the audio and I/O portions of the silicon that Sony have put into the PS5? I assume that is some of the reason the PS5 does not have the larger GPU of the XSX.

maybe it is a chiplet design and I’m overestimating but I think they’ll cost similar to each other.

 

[Bolivar687]

I hate how there's so many threads with titles suggesting analysis inside, but all you find is speculation.

The Series X has more power because their GPU die is larger. That means less chips on each wafer, and it makes the large proportion of nonfunctional dies on each wafer that much more costly. These consoles are not going to cost the same to make.

The myth that Xbox has a blank check from Microsoft was shattered last generation when they shipped a system that was both weaker and more expensive. I won't rule it out, but I would be very surprised if they eat such a huge loss to achieve price parity.