• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PlayStation 5 Showcase on Wednesday 16 Sept

Audiophile

Gold Member
Jun 25, 2015
641
2,117
610
England, UK
XSX is $499 and has 52CUs with a 320-bit bus on the APU, PS5 has an APU with 36CUs and a 256-Bit bus. Smaller wafers will be much cheaper, higher peak clock requirements will reduce relative yield, but based on what we know of RDNA2, I expect this to fare very well still (and don't forget Sony will be forecast to purchase far more silicon, further reducing per unit cost).

Both systems have the same mount of RAM (albeit with a slightly different density/layout, but ~same mem chip clocks). Sony have more chips in their on-board SSD (albeit with lower overall capacity), but the individual chips should actually be clocked a good bit slower than the ones in the XSX, negating a little of the cost. The real special sauce is in the I/O, layout and presumably, software stack.

The APU, RAM & to some degree, SSD, will be by far the most expensive components in each box and primary indicators of the bom. Sony are also the market leaders with a very high attach rate and enormous revenues in network services. They can take a loss on their consoles, in fact I'd argue that they're in a better position than they've ever been to do so. I wouldn't expect PS2 levels of up front hardware losses (>$150) or god forbid, PS3 levels (~$250)...

But, I'd guess something like this:

PS5 Standard Edition / End to End Cost = ~$550 / RRP = $449 / Loss per Unit = ~$100

PS5 Digital Edition / End to End Cost = ~$530 (no optical drive) / RRP = $399 / Loss per Unit = ~$130 (additional small loss due to eco system lock in; and to hit magic "$399")

People often say "in this financial climate": Sony can't afford to take losses like this [upfront]. Evidently, they can, they have enormous revenue from this sector and people are still throwing plenty of money at them, albeit in smaller, more frequent chunks. What people are actually resistant too is large singular purchases (such as a new flagship console) because they see the giant chunk of money leaving their hands in one go. Subsequently, releasing a cheaper console is more conducive to this fact; and Sony wouldn't do it because they being charitable but because it improves sentiment around the brand, will increase sales, brings more people into the eco system and further increases that stream of smaller but more reliable income that people are all too happy to hand over.

Now the bom / end to end cost may very well be higher and/or Sony may just price it higher and take the money and run because they feel they can. But the idea that because stuff and things, they're no longer in a position to make losses on hardware upfront just seems so ill thought it. Even if they chose not to, they're absolutely in a better position to do so than ever.

Edit: As mentioned before, I also think $399 / $449 is the Goldilocks zone between the XSS and XSX. An extra 33% vs MS' digital console for 150% more power, 60% more ram, 60% more storage etc. While also undercutting MS' big boy by $50 negating the 20% raw compute advantage, offering faster I/O and arguably a far stronger lineup.

In addition, you get one console in at that magic $399 price point, while also having another at $449 which offers more value and acts to gently get people used to the idea of PlayStations in the $400-$500 range in the future (Pro variations, PS6 etc.); as it is arguably getting more and more expensive to achieve this sort of performace with tech limitations and inflation; and price increases will ultimately be inevitable over time.
 
Last edited:
Sep 7, 2015
690
387
410
XSX is $499 and has 52CUs with a 320-bit bus on the APU, PS5 has an APU with 36CUs and a 256-Bit bus. Smaller wafers will be much cheaper, higher peak clock requirements will reduce relative yield, but based on what we know of RDNA2, I expect this to fare very well still (and don't forget Sony will be forecast to purchase far more silicon, further reducing per unit cost).

Both systems have the same mount of RAM (albeit with a slightly different density/layout, but ~same mem chip clocks). Sony have more chips in their on-board SSD (albeit with lower overall capacity), but the individual chips should actually be clocked a good bit slower than the ones in the XSX, negating a little of the cost. The real special sauce is in the I/O, layout and presumably, software stack.

The APU, RAM & to some degree, SSD, will be by far the most expensive components in each box and primary indicators of the bom. Sony are also the market leaders with a very high attach rate and enormous revenues in network services. They can take a loss on their consoles, in fact I'd argue that they're in a better position than they've ever been to do so. I wouldn't expect PS2 levels of up front hardware losses (>$150) or god forbid, PS3 levels (~$250)...

But, I'd guess something like this:

PS5 Standard Edition / End to End Cost = ~$550 / RRP = $449 / Loss per Unit = ~$100

PS5 Digital Edition / End to End Cost = ~$530 (no optical drive) / RRP = $399 / Loss per Unit = ~$130 (additional small loss due to eco system lock in; and to hit magic "$399")

People often say "in this financial climate": Sony can't afford to take losses like this [upfront]. Evidently, they can, they have enormous revenue from this sector and people are still throwing plenty of money at them, albeit in smaller, more frequent chunks. What people are actually resistant too is large singular purchases (such as a new flagship console) because they see the giant chunk of money leaving their hands in one go. Subsequently, releasing a cheaper console is more conducive to this fact; and Sony wouldn't do it because they being charitable but because it improves sentiment around the brand, will increase sales, brings more people into the eco system and further increases that stream of smaller but more reliable income that people are all too happy to hand over.

Now the bom / end to end cost may very well be higher and/or Sony may just price it higher and take the money and run because they feel they can. But the idea that because stuff and things, they're no longer in a position to make losses on hardware upfront just seems so ill thought it. Even if they chose not to, they're absolutely in a better position to do so than ever.
If they sell 10 million consoles in the first year, would be taking a $1 billion loss. I don't know what their current profits are but that's a pretty large chunk of cash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo_game

G-Bus

Member
Aug 20, 2007
3,005
534
1,255
Canada
If they don't then it is going to be expensive. If they are matching or under cutting they will be screaming that from high above...but if they don't mention price/release date on Wednesday I suspect it is because it is very expensive.
Agree with this. No reason to not reveal the price unless they know theirs going to be backlash.
 

93xfan

Member
Feb 23, 2013
2,547
1,288
650
Easiest launch for Sony, their competition have no games at launch, so all Sony have to do is show 1 min intro, 35 mins of real next gen gameplay, the ui for 2 mins and a 2 min price plug at the end, mic drop.
Absolutely. Remember how Killzone Shadow Fall and Flower carried the PS4 launch, rather than Call of Duty, Madden, FIFA, Assassin’s Creed and Battlefield 4?

Average Joe: I like that game, but is it exclusive to PS4? I need to know before I buy it
 
Last edited:

jaysius

Member
Oct 3, 2019
872
843
340
XSX is $499 and has 52CUs with a 320-bit bus on the APU, PS5 has an APU with 36CUs and a 256-Bit bus. Smaller wafers will be much cheaper, higher peak clock requirements will reduce relative yield, but based on what we know of RDNA2, I expect this to fare very well still (and don't forget Sony will be forecast to purchase far more silicon, further reducing per unit cost).

Both systems have the same mount of RAM (albeit with a slightly different density/layout, but ~same mem chip clocks). Sony have more chips in their on-board SSD (albeit with lower overall capacity), but the individual chips should actually be clocked a good bit slower than the ones in the XSX, negating a little of the cost. The real special sauce is in the I/O, layout and presumably, software stack.

The APU, RAM & to some degree, SSD, will be by far the most expensive components in each box and primary indicators of the bom. Sony are also the market leaders with a very high attach rate and enormous revenues in network services. They can take a loss on their consoles, in fact I'd argue that they're in a better position than they've ever been to do so. I wouldn't expect PS2 levels of up front hardware losses (>$150) or god forbid, PS3 levels (~$250)...

But, I'd guess something like this:

PS5 Standard Edition / End to End Cost = ~$550 / RRP = $449 / Loss per Unit = ~$100

PS5 Digital Edition / End to End Cost = ~$530 (no optical drive) / RRP = $399 / Loss per Unit = ~$130 (additional small loss due to eco system lock in; and to hit magic "$399")

People often say "in this financial climate": Sony can't afford to take losses like this [upfront]. Evidently, they can, they have enormous revenue from this sector and people are still throwing plenty of money at them, albeit in smaller, more frequent chunks. What people are actually resistant too is large singular purchases (such as a new flagship console) because they see the giant chunk of money leaving their hands in one go. Subsequently, releasing a cheaper console is more conducive to this fact; and Sony wouldn't do it because they being charitable but because it improves sentiment around the brand, will increase sales, brings more people into the eco system and further increases that stream of smaller but more reliable income that people are all too happy to hand over.

Now the bom / end to end cost may very well be higher and/or Sony may just price it higher and take the money and run because they feel they can. But the idea that because stuff and things, they're no longer in a position to make losses on hardware upfront just seems so ill thought it. Even if they chose not to, they're absolutely in a better position to do so than ever.

Edit: As mentioned before, I also think $399 / $449 is the Goldilocks zone between the XSS and XSX. An extra 33% vs MS' digital console for 150% more power, 60% more ram, 60% more storage etc. While also undercutting MS' big boy by $50 negating the 20% raw compute advantage, offering faster I/O and arguably a far stronger lineup.

In addition, you get one console in at that magic $399 price point, while also having another at $449 which offers more value and acts to gently get people used to the idea of PlayStations in the $400-$500 range in the future (Pro variations, PS6 etc.); as it is arguably getting more and more expensive to achieve this sort of performace with tech limitations and inflation; and price increases will ultimately be inevitable over time.
Overall I agree MS‘ series S isn’t about delivering a good product, but flooding the market to make Xbox the default choice this gen. The only counter to this is to make the PS5 cost less. You have to keep in mind that the fanboi arguments here are just from a minority in the gaming market in 2020, the majority of said market don‘t understand/care about technical limitations. Do you know how fast a dumb parent is going to jump at the cheapest next gen console?

The top assburgers we have here aren’t the target market like we used to be, haven’t been for years now. The quicker you swallow this pill the quicker you can stop your anxieties about which machine is better and just play fucking games. This stopped being about the product and turned into a milking sim for rich fucks ages ago.

A great thespian(the T in LBGT I believe) once said “YOU GOTTA PUMP THOSE NUMBERS UP”.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Jtibh

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Mar 22, 2017
14,312
21,897
1,035
I'm really hoping they announce more launch games, because currently there is no games for me at launch.
 

Gamerguy84

Member
Mar 25, 2019
1,194
2,182
380
Pretty sure were getting games, UI, price, and release date.

Read the PSBLOG, user clutch_sam007 answers a lot of questions.

For me 4PM EST, cant believe all that info is coming. Next stop is having a PS5.

 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Isa

Yoboman

Member
Sep 17, 2005
18,117
7,082
1,840
If they sell 10 million consoles in the first year, would be taking a $1 billion loss. I don't know what their current profits are but that's a pretty large chunk of cash.
But for every unit they sell, they make more back in royalties and digital revenue

I expect even in a launch year they will be profitable
 

Kagey K

Member
Dec 18, 2013
8,344
10,879
915
Thank fucking god.

Hopefully after this one and its fallout we can get back to some sort of semblance around here.

I’ve never seen as much stupid as I have in the last 3 months. Would be nice to see the end in sight.
 

angrod14

Member
Jun 18, 2020
61
157
220
Please don't put my hopes up for it only to be crushed into pieces...

SILENT HILL 2 NEXT GEN REMAKE AND PT EXCLUSIVE BY KOJIMA STUDIOS LET'S FUCKING GO BABY!
Now that would be incredible. I would prefer if Sony reunited Team Silent again and Kurosawa for that remake, just to make it as epic as it can possibly be. But KojiPro would also be a good substitute nevertheless.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: darkangel-212559

Mobile Suit Gooch

Grundle: The Awakening
Oct 5, 2013
6,878
1,540
925
South Eastern part of the U.S.
Pretty sure were getting games, UI, price, and release date.

Read the PSBLOG, user clutch_sam007 answers a lot of questions.

For me 4PM EST, cant believe all that info is coming. Next stop is having a PS5.

I see that he said that PS5 is only BC with PS4 games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamerguy84

onQ123

Member
May 1, 2010
16,749
7,071
1,310
XSX is $499 and has 52CUs with a 320-bit bus on the APU, PS5 has an APU with 36CUs and a 256-Bit bus. Smaller wafers will be much cheaper, higher peak clock requirements will reduce relative yield, but based on what we know of RDNA2, I expect this to fare very well still (and don't forget Sony will be forecast to purchase far more silicon, further reducing per unit cost).

Both systems have the same mount of RAM (albeit with a slightly different density/layout, but ~same mem chip clocks). Sony have more chips in their on-board SSD (albeit with lower overall capacity), but the individual chips should actually be clocked a good bit slower than the ones in the XSX, negating a little of the cost. The real special sauce is in the I/O, layout and presumably, software stack.

The APU, RAM & to some degree, SSD, will be by far the most expensive components in each box and primary indicators of the bom. Sony are also the market leaders with a very high attach rate and enormous revenues in network services. They can take a loss on their consoles, in fact I'd argue that they're in a better position than they've ever been to do so. I wouldn't expect PS2 levels of up front hardware losses (>$150) or god forbid, PS3 levels (~$250)...

But, I'd guess something like this:

PS5 Standard Edition / End to End Cost = ~$550 / RRP = $449 / Loss per Unit = ~$100

PS5 Digital Edition / End to End Cost = ~$530 (no optical drive) / RRP = $399 / Loss per Unit = ~$130 (additional small loss due to eco system lock in; and to hit magic "$399")

People often say "in this financial climate": Sony can't afford to take losses like this [upfront]. Evidently, they can, they have enormous revenue from this sector and people are still throwing plenty of money at them, albeit in smaller, more frequent chunks. What people are actually resistant too is large singular purchases (such as a new flagship console) because they see the giant chunk of money leaving their hands in one go. Subsequently, releasing a cheaper console is more conducive to this fact; and Sony wouldn't do it because they being charitable but because it improves sentiment around the brand, will increase sales, brings more people into the eco system and further increases that stream of smaller but more reliable income that people are all too happy to hand over.

Now the bom / end to end cost may very well be higher and/or Sony may just price it higher and take the money and run because they feel they can. But the idea that because stuff and things, they're no longer in a position to make losses on hardware upfront just seems so ill thought it. Even if they chose not to, they're absolutely in a better position to do so than ever.

Edit: As mentioned before, I also think $399 / $449 is the Goldilocks zone between the XSS and XSX. An extra 33% vs MS' digital console for 150% more power, 60% more ram, 60% more storage etc. While also undercutting MS' big boy by $50 negating the 20% raw compute advantage, offering faster I/O and arguably a far stronger lineup.

In addition, you get one console in at that magic $399 price point, while also having another at $449 which offers more value and acts to gently get people used to the idea of PlayStations in the $400-$500 range in the future (Pro variations, PS6 etc.); as it is arguably getting more and more expensive to achieve this sort of performace with tech limitations and inflation; and price increases will ultimately be inevitable over time.

I don't think Sony chip will be smaller because they also have the I/O subsystem with on board SRAM
 

Ar¢tos

Gold Member
Oct 24, 2017
4,269
6,430
710
Krynn
They can show only games and in the last minute show price, release date and pre-order date. Then in the days after the show release videos on ps blog for the UI + features, console connection ports + breakdown, BC and dev interviews.
That way they keep media focus on them all week instead of a single day.
 
Last edited:

J____Av

Member
Jun 12, 2020
178
254
250
So Dusk Golem is right again? "PS5 Event first half of September"

Silent Hill, God of War Please! And more Exclusive Games.....
I wouldn't get you hopes that high. They have all the momentum and are a lock to sell out for a while. They have no need to show off too much. They will likely save GOW till when its needed
 

FeiRR

Banned
May 22, 2013
3,533
6,380
820
Poland
I really don't get people who predict a *50 price difference. What incentive is it to drop cheap, used games and the possibility to play 4k BD films? I don't think even 200 would convince me but for majority a 100 would probably do.

Also, price announcement and date doesn't steal time from the show. It's one slide at the end or one minute of Jim Ryan saying it and closing the show.

Both my controllers are malfunctioning, my headset is worn off and my Pro is a vacuum cleaner. I really need a new console so make it happen! 500/400 and 150 for the headset. My credit line isn't ready but to hell with that.

*) Prices in EUR and USD. Your excitement may vary.
 

Boswollocks

Gold Member
Apr 19, 2019
7,938
12,759
780
Mars
I'm really excited to see what they have in store. Surely - we'll get pricing a formal pricing announcement here, right?
If we don't see pricing at this event but we do see big megaton announcements, then that means the price will be high!
 

turtlepowa

Member
Mar 27, 2020
1,419
2,014
375
I'm curios how many of the first 10 million PS5 will be DE. If i was Sony i would simply go for 8 million DE. People will buy it anyways and Sony can make a shitload of money with the digital games.
 
Last edited: