16 November 2006
Ferry

PS3 loses up to $306 per unit, Xbox 360 profits $76 per sale

We’ve heard it all by now, delivery delays, technological blu-ray hurdles, missed production targets, high price tags, and recently cancelled pre-orders, we’ve all read the bad news regarding Sony’s new PS3.

But how about some good news? iSuppli’s dissection (check their details schematics) reveals the PS3 is an engineering masterpiece that sets a new high mark for computing price/performance, even when considering it is more expensive than its nearest rival, Microsoft’s Xbox 360.

Sony is taking a considerable loss on each PlayStation 3 sold. Materials and manufacturing costs for the 20Gbyte model exceed the suggested retail price of $499 by a total of $306.85, iSuppli’s Teardown Analysis service estimates. For the 60Gbyte version, costs exceed the $599 price by $241.35.

In contrast, the HDD-equipped Xbox 360 has a manufacturing and materials total of $323.30, based on an updated estimate using costs in the fourth quarter of 2006. This total is $75.70 less than the $399 suggested retail price of the Xbox 360.

The conclusion is that the PS3 is not so expensive after all.

Even when compared to the competition, the console provides more processing power and capability than any consumer electronics device in history. Because of this, the PS3 is a great bargain, well worth its $599 price.

There you have it then, too bad you won’t be able to easily buy one due to massive shortages the rest of the year.

16 November 2006 20:24
Anon

You can buy a whole computer for that price. Why buy a box that can’t do anything except games? I don’t get why consoles are still so popular except that they’re easy to use.

16 November 2006 20:36
Marcus Feonix

blue ray movies cost $40, why the hell would you want to pay that much for a hd movie? HD-DVD cost about half that, the processor is just a little more powerful than the 360’s when you look at the numbers, but the graphics processor is far more superior on the 360, sony sux!!!

16 November 2006 21:51
blackninja17

Marcus Feonix - try getting the numbers game outta your head and look @ the real facts check out..

http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?cpage=1

you have not read/understood it i guess.

16 November 2006 21:52
blackninja17

ohh please dont take no offense to the post, just clear the high number marketing junk from microsoft and sony outta your head b4 reading the facts

17 November 2006 02:10
brandon

This is real wreckless to say its not expensive. The, “Even when compared to the competition, the console provides more processing power and capability than any consumer electronics device in history. Because of this, the PS3 is a great bargain, well worth its $599 price.” comment is bull. Just because it costs more to produce doesn’t mean its better. MS just was smarter in utilizing widespread, proven silicon fab processes and dependable tech. Check post 3’s link. It is all there, the PS3 lacks in many areas compared to the 360, especially graphics rendering.

17 November 2006 02:57
Yo d

You see the problem with people is they say “it’s well worth the price because of “.
Economic theorists would laugh at you. Why? Well in this case because you totally miss why someone would buy a console.
In fact evidence shows in history a more advance system will fall to second place and usually fail.
Dreamcast
PSP
N64
SNES
XBox
Jaguar
etc…
In fact considering history, one could say holy crap Sony released the most powerful system! I better not buy it because of that.

17 November 2006 03:49
hunted

The AntiCampaign is on the move! Maybe M$ is involved.

Shit should be spread with the ass not the mouth!

17 November 2006 04:19
supadupagama

Hunted, why bother commenting when you don’t even read the news? How is Microsoft involved here? I posted this news because they are facts lined up. All its saying is that the PS3 costs up to $306 more to make than what they charge customers, and that after a year of losses the Xbox 360 finally got its costs below the asking price. No one’s saying the games are better on either one of them and every gamer knows that that’s all that will matter in the end.

17 November 2006 04:34
xy

Soya kon tu

17 November 2006 06:08
Simon

So if Sony shift a conservative figure of 2 millon units, they stand to loose $613,700,000? Good job Sony.

Although I would question the figures, as Sony will probably have a better deal with the component suppilers than the off the self price that seem to be the basis of the analysis. But I would expect a maxium of 30% price reduction for the number of unit we’re talking about here. So that would mean a rough cost of $564 for the cheap versions and a lose of only $65. So at 2 millon units that a lose of $13,000,000.