Support NeoGAF

[Magic Carpet]

Would it be crazy to have a sku that doesn’t include a controller? The old xbone controller works with series x. Then sell separately controllers. Choice of old used, new or elite. Those of us who already have xbone controllers can spend extra on that ssd card, batteries, games.

Did PS4 controllers also work with PS5?

 

[yurinka]

Even at $500 both MS and Sony would be losing money.
These consoles likely have BOM's around $530 - $600.
Fast GDDR6, fast SSD's and 7NM enhanced processes are expensive.
Only question is whether Sony and MS are willing to sell at $500.

I 100% agree. I don't understand why people even consider $400, or that Sony would be a $100 cheaper console. They both have Zen 2 CPU, RDNA 2 GPU (more CUs in Series X), 16 GB of fast DDR6 RAM, a very fast SSD (twice faster in PS5), an expensive pad, and exotic cooling system, extra custom chips, and many hardware customizations and optimizations to get great bandwith and solve bottlenecks.

This won't be cheap at all. Both will sell it at -at least- $500 and very likely at a loss. To sell them at $400 would be a very risky and probably suicide move.

Would it be crazy to have a sku that doesn’t include a controller? The old xbone controller works with series x. Then sell separately controllers. Choice of old used, new or elite. Those of us who already have xbone controllers can spend extra on that ssd card, batteries, games.

Did PS4 controllers also work with PS5?

I think it should be mandatory to include a controller with the console because you must have one to use them. Next gen pads feature new stuff that you won't be able to use on last gen pads.

So it's very likely that they allow you to use current pads in both next gen consoles but maybe limited to last gen games, or maybe even to games that doesn't use next gen features. Or who knows, maybe they they implement button combinations in current pads to do the same than new buttons (like Share in Series X) and only require next gen pads for games where next gen features are important (I'm thinking about a PS5 horror game with heavy usage of adaptative triggers, bio feedback, 3D audio and next gen rumble).

 

[Airbus Jr]

Im betting PS5 gona be $100 cheaper and that will cause DynamiteCop, rightisright and longdi screaming cos they just lost the price batle again

 

[darkinstinct]

Im betting PS5 gona be $100 cheaper and that will cause DynamiteCop, rightisright and longdi screaming cos they just lost the price batle again

So you are expecting PS5 at 399 and XSX at 499? Tell you what: The difference in performance is less than 25 %. So you won't see a difference in price that is as high as 25 %. It's simple math, they aren't stupid. But actually everything points to the XSX being a 399 console designed for a 2020 launch, while the PS5 is a 399 console for a 2019 launch that underwent last minute panic changes.

 

[michaelius]

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.

First
Microsoft uses 10+6 GB of ram setup with 320bit vs Sony using 16 on 256bit's.

I can't find if 320 bit is for all memory or for just for the fast part but 320 bit would fit perfectly to 10x1GB die of fast ram + unknown bus for slow one or some really exotic setup - compared to that Sony comes with traditional 256bit which is either 8x2 or 16x1 on both sides of pcb - any way Sony ram is much simpler and will likely result in slightly less complicated mainboard.

Second Sony SSD solution is hard to estimate since they use less flash chips than Microsoft. There's also huge question mark on the cost of controller.

Third the only source of PS5 gpu needing more power is your imigination.
Higher clocked smaller gpu consumes more power than bigger slower clocked one is true IF both gpus have same performance.
They don't.

If both were clocked similarly as in rumours about 9,2 TF PS5 then ps5 gpu would consume proportionally less power. Overclocking it by 10% is unlikely to cause 30+ % increase in power consumption.

It's pretty much impossible to estimate real costs but everything points out to ps5 being designed to be simpler cheaper in production machine.

 

[darkinstinct]

First
Microsoft uses 10+6 GB of ram setup with 320bit vs Sony using 16 on 256bit's.

I can't find if 320 bit is for all memory or for just for the fast part but 320 bit would fit perfectly to 10x1GB die of fast ram + unknown bus for slow one or some really exotic setup - compared to that Sony comes with traditional 256bit which is either 8x2 or 16x1 on both sides of pcb - any way Sony ram is much simpler and will likely result in slightly less complicated mainboard.

Second Sony SSD solution is hard to estimate since they use less flash chips than Microsoft. There's also huge question mark on the cost of controller.

Third the only source of PS5 gpu needing more power is your imigination.
Higher clocked smaller gpu consumes more power than bigger slower clocked one is true IF both gpus have same performance.
They don't.

If both were clocked similarly as in rumours about 9,2 TF PS5 then ps5 gpu would consume proportionally less power. Overclocking it by 10% is unlikely to cause 30+ % increase in power consumption.

It's pretty much impossible to estimate real costs but everything points out to ps5 being designed to be simpler cheaper in production machine.

We don't know how many NAND chips Microsoft uses, could be 8 or 4. We do know that Sony uses 12, so IDK where your assumption that Sony is using less chips comes from. Did you just think 825 GB is less than 1.000? Not how it works. And you might want to check RDNA efficiencies again, because a 10 % increase in frequency creates a 30 % rise in power consumption. The sweet spot for RDNA is 1.7 to 1.8 GHz. Below that you lose loads of performance per watt, above that you have to pay loads more watt per performance.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Even though PS5's SSD should cost more, I still think SeX will be around $100 more.

Only way they are parity priced is if MS is willing to really eat costs and subsidize gamers.

 

[TheGreatYosh]

Yes. That's exactly why I have been saying it will not be a hundred dollars cheaper.

StreetsofBeige I think you have that backwards. Sony is going to have to eat costs to come in a hundred dollars cheaper. The only real difference is APU, SSD, and cooling. The PS5 has 2 parts more expensive to 1.

 

[yurinka]

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.

Then why the PC SDDs -with worse specs- are so expensive? And why the laptop manufacturers didn't do the same than Sony years before?

And why if PC GPUs more or less similar specs than the one included in PS5 already costs $300-$400 the console is supposed to cost $400? Even if cheaper, with a Zen 2, an expensive pad, that SSD and the rest of the stuff this console manufacturing cost won't be cheap at all.

 

[Tripolygon]

Then why the PC SDDs -with worse specs- are so expensive? And why the laptop manufacturers didn't do the same than Sony years before?

Price fixing and High margins. 6 years ago 128GB SSD cost $120 today 1TB SSD cost $100. And they do, they buy parts and package them together but they also buy complete packages from other vendors as well.

And why if PC GPUs more or less similar specs than the one included in PS5 already costs $300-$400 the console is supposed to cost $400? Even if cheaper, with a Zen 2, an expensive pad, that SSD and the rest of the stuff this console manufacturing cost won't be cheap at all.

Sony or Microsoft do not buy Ryzen CPU packages from Amazon. They buy wafers of chips which were specifically designed for them and manufactured for them. One of those might cost something like 10,000$ divided by how many functioning chips on each wafer would end up costing 100$ to 130$. That's CPU and GPU combined. If you buy similar packaged chips from AMD it'll cost you at least 500$ like you said.

In the case of SSD, Microsoft seems to have licensed a Phison controller and are having Seagate put together the package for them. Sony took it upon themselves to just make their own controller because nothing on the market matched the specification they wanted. They only have to pay for manufacturing which is cheaper than licensing complete packages from someone else. The up front cost is in the time spent on research and development, making them is cheap.