PS5 Reveal June 3rd?

[lynux3 2,078]

Sony turned a profit on PlayStation 3 in FY10.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

1 minute ago, lynux3 said:

Sony turned a profit on PlayStation 3 in FY10.

I thought they were in the red going into the PS4?

[lynux3 2,078]

Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

I thought they were in the red going into the PS4?

As a total throughout PS3's lifetime, yeah, as red as it gets. They did turn a profit a couple years prior to PS4 launching though and they even had small losses the first two years PS4 came out.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

4 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

As a total throughout PS3's lifetime, yeah, as red as it gets. They did turn a profit a couple years prior to PS4 launching though and they even had small losses the first two years PS4 came out.

I just read about it, they were still in the red. In 2010 the system was no longer selling at a loss i.e. the manufacturing cost of individual units no longer exceeded sale price. So they still had four years of losses to contend with plus even larger unit losses on the launch models. it was like $800 for the fat PS3's per unit so that's $200-$300 in the red for every unit. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[lynux3 2,078]

17 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Now I can see them having a $500 console this time around and I expect the same from Microsoft but I'd hedge the bet that Sony will come in at a $480 production price while Microsoft will be swinging more near the $600 range. Microsoft has a lot of software and service contingencies to eliminate that gap, hell a Lockhart console alone if priced at say $400 with a $300 production cost could theoretically eliminate losses from Anaconda. 

 

I don't see these consoles being as close as people think, I don't see Sony exceeding 10 TF and I don't see Microsoft falling below 12 TF. If push came to shove I can see Microsoft's system working off of Vega 10 XT with Navi feature sets to deliver higher performance and undercut direct Navi APU cost.

I think Sony and Microsoft's consoles aren't going to be much different this time around especially in costs.

 

I don't think Microsoft can afford a BOM of $600 and sell for $499, just doesn't make sense. They didn't do that with Xbox One X so why start now? I understand that software/services can offset the costs, but Sony can do the same thing just as easily. It just doesn't make much business sense.

 

With Lockhart I don't think Microsoft will be pricing a weaker console at $400 when you have a substantially more powerful PS5 at the same price (potentially). It would be DOA. I personally believe both consoles will be below 12TF, but both stay in the 11TF range. I have no idea about Lockhart or why Microsoft even bothers with it.

Edited May 17, 2019 by lynux3

[lynux3 2,078]

9 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I just read about it, they were still in the red. In 2010 the system was no longer selling at a loss i.e. the manufacturing cost of individual units no longer exceeded sale price. So they still had four years of losses to contend with plus even larger unit losses on the launch models. it was like $800 for the fat PS3's per unit so that's $200-$300 in the red for every unit. 

Yeah, I don't think it was because the system wasn't selling at a loss, but rather Sony was actually putting out good software during that period in addition to expanding their services (PS+) and generally generating more profit through PSN.

Edited May 17, 2019 by lynux3

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

It's hard to know what design decisions both have. It's very likely they will have different memory setups, and god knows what else differs.

 

Plus loss leader without concrete numbers is impossible to read. Is the loss 10 dollars or a 100 dollars? How does that workout into power with individual designs for each. God knows.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

2 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

I think Sony and Microsoft's consoles aren't going to be much different this time around especially in costs.

 

I don't think Microsoft can afford a BOM of $600 and sell for $499, just doesn't make sense. They didn't do that with Xbox One X so why start now? I understand that software/services can offset the costs, but Sony can do the same thing just as easily. It just doesn't make much business sense.

 

With Lockhart I don't think Microsoft will be pricing a weaker console at $400 when you have a substantially more powerful PS5 at the same price (potentially). It would be DOA. I personally believe both consoles will be below 12TF, but both stay in the 11TF range. I have no idea about Lockhart or why Microsoft even bothers with it.

We don't actually know if they took a loss on the X or not, it's hard to say but when asked if they were making any money on it Phil Spencer straight up said "No", and I doubt highly that it was in the black so it far more than not was being sold at a loss. 

 

I don't think either manufacturer can come in at $400, inflation from 2013 is already up to $440 so $500 has to be the baseline for any kind of competent system in a 2020 window. I can see Microsoft doing a lot of custom stuff again, and I can see them going Vega XT with Navi feature sets to be able to outperform Sony's Navi system by a substantive margin for a fraction of the cost of what it would be for pure Navi. 

[lynux3 2,078]

5 minutes ago, Team 2019 said:

It's hard to know what design decisions both have. It's very likely they will have different memory setups, and god knows what else differs.

 

Plus loss leader without concrete numbers is impossible to read. Is the loss 10 dollars or a 100 dollars? How does that workout into power with individual designs for each. God knows.

If there are memory differences I now believe that Sony could definitely be using HBM2 (Games) and DDR4 (OS), and Microsoft going with GDDR6. I used to make fun of DynamiteCop for even suggesting the idea, but now I'm a believer. If it ends up being that way I'll buy him a pack of Zima.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

Just now, lynux3 said:

If there are memory differences I now believe that Sony could definitely be using HBM2 (Games) and DDR4 (OS), and Microsoft going with GDDR6. I used to make fun of DynamiteCop for even suggesting the idea, but now I'm a believer. If it ends up being that way I'll buy him a pack of Zima.

Fuck I love Zima! 

 

 

[lynux3 2,078]

Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

We don't actually know if they took a loss on the X or not, it's hard to say but when asked if they were making any money on it Phil Spencer straight up said "No", and I doubt highly that it was in the black so it far more than not was being sold at a loss. 

 

I don't think either manufacturer can come in at $400, inflation from 2013 is already up to $440 so $500 has to be the baseline for any kind of competent system in a 2020 window. I can see Microsoft doing a lot of custom stuff again, and I can see them going Vega XT with Navi feature sets to be able to outperform Sony's Navi system by a substantive margin for a fraction of the cost of what it would be for pure Navi. 

Ah, I was under the impression that Xbox One X was making money day one.

 

I guess we'll see what happens, but I don't think Microsoft is going Vega at all, though.

[lynux3 2,078]

2 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Fuck I love Zima! 

 

 

I know.  

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

7 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

Ah, I was under the impression that Xbox One X was making money day one.

 

I guess we'll see what happens, but I don't think Microsoft is going Vega at all, though.

Vega could make sense if we're looking at the same kind of jump from Polaris to Vega, and by that I mean nothing radical in terms of architectural difference. Feature sets can be incorporated retroactively so they wouldn't have to lose out on anything Navi can do and could boost their compute ceiling for less money. They could hit let's say 12.5 TF with Navi features for the same cost a 10 TF Navi GPU would cost them, possibly more compute units, higher frequency etc but nonetheless it could be a practical route. 

 

It's kind of the same thing with the Xbox One X, they could have no doubt built it with Vega with the same performance ceiling it has now but it would have cost them more. Instead they Frankenstein'd a Polaris GPU. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[Voidler 1,675]

32 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I wholeheartedly doubt this on every front. I don't think Sony will ever loss lead again because it took the PS4 to get them out of the red with the entire PS3 generation, think about that. They didn't turn a profit that entire generation. I'm sure they're quite convinced at this point that power is but isn't that important to their brand and while they're doing fine now if they mess up it could cause irreparable damage to the entire company, that's not a handicap Microsoft shares with Sony. 

 

Now I can see them having a $500 console this time around and I expect the same from Microsoft but I'd hedge the bet that Sony will come in at a $480 production price while Microsoft will be swinging more near the $600 range. Microsoft has a lot of software and service contingencies to eliminate that gap, hell a Lockhart console alone if priced at say $400 with a $300 production cost could theoretically eliminate losses from Anaconda. 

 

I don't see these consoles being as close as people think, I don't see Sony exceeding 10 TF and I don't see Microsoft falling below 12 TF. If push came to shove I can see Microsoft's system working off of Vega 10 XT with Navi feature sets to deliver higher performance and undercut direct Navi APU cost.

 

 

While I don’t think they will, the loss leader model would be Moreno viable than ever before

 

The majority of profits on a console these days will be from services, subscriptions and royalties. Taking a loss  on hardware to maintain the biggest revenue from these services is more viable than the days where it was just royalties and hardware profits

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

Well the DDR4/HBM2 rumour clearly said less power draw and heat than GDDR6 that would go into the GPU.

 

If true Sony out engineered MS because the other guys had to make two scalable systems at once.

 

Upping clocks won't exactly be an easy task either since it could require cooling reenginewring.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

1 minute ago, Team 2019 said:

Well the DDR4/HBM2 rumour clearly said less power draw and heat than GDDR6 that would go into the GPU.

 

If true Sony out engineered MS because the other guys had to make two scalable systems at once.

 

Upping clocks won't exactly be an easy task either since it could require cooling reenginewring.

Yeah but HBM2 is on die so it needs a more effective cooling method regardless because you're cooling not only the memory but the GPU in an extremely isolated space. GDDR6 are normal ramdacs, and while they might be hotter they can be spread out. 

[lynux3 2,078]

Just now, Team 2019 said:

Well the DDR4/HBM2 rumour clearly said less power draw and heat than GDDR6 that would go into the GPU.

 

If true Sony out engineered MS because the other guys had to make two scalable systems at once.

 

Upping clocks won't exactly be an easy task either since it could require cooling reenginewring.

Possibly. I think at the end of the day it depends on the tooling and balance between all of the components. Regarding tooling, last we heard about tooling (Digital Foundry) developers expressed that PS4's SDK was quite a bit better than XDK. I think that is mostly due to Microsoft having to satisfy with two different systems (Xbox One / S, Xbox One X), so naturally resources are split.

 

If there's one thing Microsoft has learned from Xbox One X, it's how to pony up and implement a more substantial cooling solution. While not original, it worked very well.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

1 minute ago, lynux3 said:

Possibly. I think at the end of the day it depends on the tooling and balance between all of the components. Regarding tooling, last we heard about tooling (Digital Foundry) developers expressed that PS4's SDK was quite a bit better than XDK. I think that is mostly due to Microsoft having to satisfy with two different systems (Xbox One / S, Xbox One X), so naturally resources are split.

 

If there's one thing Microsoft has learned from Xbox One X, it's how to pony up and implement a more substantial cooling solution. While not original, it worked very well.

Yeah, even with RDR2 it doesn't get loud, it might spin up the fan for 10 seconds or so but it's very infrequent and it doesn't ever get what I would consider loud. The Pro though with that blower fan gets about as loud as my Vega 64 lol. 

[lynux3 2,078]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Yeah but HBM2 is on die so it needs a more effective cooling method regardless because you're cooling not only the memory but the GPU in an extremely isolated space. GDDR6 are normal ramdacs, and while they might be hotter they can be spread out. 

Which is where the interesting theory came in that the HBM2 memory will be sitting on top of the IO die instead of the APU... assuming that is how it'll be organized.

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

MS will up the clocks to at least to match it costs a few bucks guaranteed. The question is if they will invest into an alternative cooling solution if needs, if it costs them like 40 bucks them might as well say fuck it and take the performance loss, not worth it.

 

It won't affect XBox, but it's still be a PR loss for Anaconda specifically.