*** The Official Playstation 4 (PS4) Thread ***
- Thread starter djkav
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
i very much doubt it will be £600 as i have said before, they price it so because official pricing has not been revealed and a lot of these places offer a price promise, meaning they will either charge you the price on pre-order or the price at the time of shipping, whatever is the cheapest.
therefore if they put it up for pre-order at £400 and sony tell everyone at their proper reveal that it will retail for £450, then the retailer would be forced to deliver them for £400 and all orders after the reveal would be taken at the new price of £450.
it's basically to cover their backs so they overprice it to stop them from making a loss on them.
by them putting it up for £600 it definitely means it will be lower than that.
therefore if they put it up for pre-order at £400 and sony tell everyone at their proper reveal that it will retail for £450, then the retailer would be forced to deliver them for £400 and all orders after the reveal would be taken at the new price of £450.
it's basically to cover their backs so they overprice it to stop them from making a loss on them.
by them putting it up for £600 it definitely means it will be lower than that.
$699?
Comes with a free copy of Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidge Raaaaaaaaaaaceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer.
Fixed.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 5,798
There is no reason these systems shouldn't be £280 - £350.
Blu-ray is much much cheaper than it was and there using off the shelf parts now to a certain extent.
Blu-ray is much much cheaper than it was and there using off the shelf parts now to a certain extent.
£349 is and would ensure PS4 would shift very well as £349 for a next gen games console is 'very' good value.
If its £349 then I'm buying a PS4 without much more thought, even if xbox one sells twice as many, £349 for a PS4 that'll still get many great exclusives so not much thought required on that one : - )
If its £349 then I'm buying a PS4 without much more thought, even if xbox one sells twice as many, £349 for a PS4 that'll still get many great exclusives so not much thought required on that one : - )
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 9,691
- Location
- North
Still some pricy components in it - £280 - £350 looks a bit low. £350-£400 seems more like it.
CPU / GPU
8GB GDDR5
BluRay x8
PSU
Casing
WiFi N
Controller
Custom Chips / Bacjground downloading chips / Compression chips etc
R&D
Software / OS
PS Eye
Head Set
Cables
Heck a 7870 2GB is £160ish alone retail. PS3 they were losing hunderds of $ per console sale, they may just break even or turn a small profit this time around. No subsidizing as they have stated (or selling at a loss)
£350 is the sweet point i feel, will sell fast at that price point. £400 is acceptable.
Last edited:
Just trying to work out what a 7970M for a Alienware costs.. As bascially this is what the PS4 is based around, the AMD GCN used in mobile chipsets.
DDR5 and Wireless N is also very good spec. But then Sony will have got a great deal from AMD and suppliers to get these components, £349 even if not lose leading and just breaking even, Sony will still make a mint on game and PSN sales, as well as AMD making a small fortune from this.
AMD have made a major coup with MS and Sony, well all of this up and coming gen.
DDR5 and Wireless N is also very good spec. But then Sony will have got a great deal from AMD and suppliers to get these components, £349 even if not lose leading and just breaking even, Sony will still make a mint on game and PSN sales, as well as AMD making a small fortune from this.
AMD have made a major coup with MS and Sony, well all of this up and coming gen.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 9,691
- Location
- North
Not to mention how that will translate to the PC side, tying up the console market can only be beneficial for their PC market. Pretty much all games will come standard optimised for AMD tech.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
Sony is taking a big loss on each PlayStation 3 console it sells but end users are benefitting from "supercomputing performance" at the price of a cheap PC, according to research company iSuppli, which dismantled the console to analyze the parts inside.
Console makers often sell their hardware at a loss with the hope of profiting from the games that run on them. But Sony's loss on each PlayStation 3 will be unusually deep, according to iSuppli estimates released today.
Loss per Unit Is 'Remarkable'
The combined materials and manufacturing costs for each device come to about $806 for the model with a 20GB hard drive, excluding the cost of the controller, cables, and packaging, iSuppli said.
With a suggested retail price of $499, that would mean Sony is taking a loss of about $307 on each console it sells. The differential for the 60GB model is less, with the cost exceeding the price tag by $241.
By comparison, the materials and manufacturing costs for the hard-drive version of Microsoft's rival device, the Xbox 360 are $323, iSuppli estimated. That's less than the suggested retail price of $399.
"It's common for video-game console makers to lose money on hardware, and make up for the loss via video game-title sales. Still, the size of Sony's loss per unit is remarkable, even for the video-game console business," iSuppli said.
PlayStation 3 an 'Engineering Masterpiece'
Most of the cost comes from the PlayStation 3 console's processing power. The multicore Cell processor alone, which was co-designed by Sony, Toshiba, and IBM, and is the gaming device's main processing engine, accounts for about 10 percent of the cost of each machine, iSuppli said.
The research company also highlighted Sony's use of dual graphics chips from Nvidia and Toshiba, and its use of four 512-megabit DRAM chips from Samsung Electronics. Sony's motherboard probably costs the company $500 in total, compared to $204 for the Xbox 360, iSuppli said.
This is all good news for customers, who get all that computing power for a relative bargain. iSuppli called the PlayStation 3 an "engineering masterpiece," with a motherboard that looks more like that of an enterprise server or network switch than a games console.
The console provides "more processing power and capability than any consumer electronics device in history," iSuppli said.
Console makers often sell their hardware at a loss with the hope of profiting from the games that run on them. But Sony's loss on each PlayStation 3 will be unusually deep, according to iSuppli estimates released today.
Loss per Unit Is 'Remarkable'
The combined materials and manufacturing costs for each device come to about $806 for the model with a 20GB hard drive, excluding the cost of the controller, cables, and packaging, iSuppli said.
With a suggested retail price of $499, that would mean Sony is taking a loss of about $307 on each console it sells. The differential for the 60GB model is less, with the cost exceeding the price tag by $241.
By comparison, the materials and manufacturing costs for the hard-drive version of Microsoft's rival device, the Xbox 360 are $323, iSuppli estimated. That's less than the suggested retail price of $399.
"It's common for video-game console makers to lose money on hardware, and make up for the loss via video game-title sales. Still, the size of Sony's loss per unit is remarkable, even for the video-game console business," iSuppli said.
PlayStation 3 an 'Engineering Masterpiece'
Most of the cost comes from the PlayStation 3 console's processing power. The multicore Cell processor alone, which was co-designed by Sony, Toshiba, and IBM, and is the gaming device's main processing engine, accounts for about 10 percent of the cost of each machine, iSuppli said.
The research company also highlighted Sony's use of dual graphics chips from Nvidia and Toshiba, and its use of four 512-megabit DRAM chips from Samsung Electronics. Sony's motherboard probably costs the company $500 in total, compared to $204 for the Xbox 360, iSuppli said.
This is all good news for customers, who get all that computing power for a relative bargain. iSuppli called the PlayStation 3 an "engineering masterpiece," with a motherboard that looks more like that of an enterprise server or network switch than a games console.
The console provides "more processing power and capability than any consumer electronics device in history," iSuppli said.
Interesting.
I looked a little more into this and apparently the initial losses per console are countered by an expected software attach rate. Both Sony and MS have been running at an average of 8-9 units sold per console - a quick Google of software attach rates suggested that anything over 4-5 units is healthy but obviously that depends on what you're losing against what your making - which is believed to be more than enough to pay for the hardware loss. Incidentally, I also read an early attach rate summary which suggested that the Wii-U was running at 1.2 units per console by the end of December. It's probabaly healthier than that now and I don't know if Nintendo produce their consoles at a loss.
But anyway, I always knew that the PS3 was a lovely bit of kit for the money.
I looked a little more into this and apparently the initial losses per console are countered by an expected software attach rate. Both Sony and MS have been running at an average of 8-9 units sold per console - a quick Google of software attach rates suggested that anything over 4-5 units is healthy but obviously that depends on what you're losing against what your making - which is believed to be more than enough to pay for the hardware loss. Incidentally, I also read an early attach rate summary which suggested that the Wii-U was running at 1.2 units per console by the end of December. It's probabaly healthier than that now and I don't know if Nintendo produce their consoles at a loss.
But anyway, I always knew that the PS3 was a lovely bit of kit for the money.
Average of 8-9? I don't know why but I kind of find that surprising? But I guess it is the average and that my game collection is "monolithic" sooo 
Also I've finally gone and pre-ordered a PS4, there's enough games already that I want to warrant a purchase imo
Also I've finally gone and pre-ordered a PS4, there's enough games already that I want to warrant a purchase imo
Last edited:
I'm about 'this' far from placing a pre order for PS4 as I know I'll enjoy the games already lined up, and they'll be more to follow, and naughty dog have just said they'd be using the same engine for PS4 and the PS3 which in a way means they have something lined up for PS4 and I simply cannot let a naughty dog game slip by me.. lol
Am I sad that I would be more than happy to pay for the whole Uncharted trilogy to be revamped for PS4?
ps3ud0
Erm no. No worse then some of the other HD trilogy revamps we've had recently.
It is just a shame that PS4 will be the first Playstation to not have a wipeout game..!! Now that is sad.