Print 66 comment(s) - last by XtremeM3.. on Nov 21 at 8:12 AM

Sony's $89 Cell processor
iSuppli calls the PlayStation 3 an "engineering masterpiece"

While Merrill Lynch may be one of the few firms projecting a win for the Xbox 360 by 2011, a new cost analysis for the PlayStation 3 puts a few more things into perspective with regards to the next generation console battle.

It looks as though Ken Kutaragi was right when he stated that the PS3, which will be priced at $499 and $599 respectively in the United States, is probably "too cheap." According to a new cost analysis by iSuppli, Sony will lose $307 for every 20GB PS3 it sells and $241 for each 60GB version. "With Sony taking a smaller loss on the higher-end model, it's not a surprise the company is steering customers to the 60Gbyte version," said iSuppli. For the United States, 20GB PS3s will account for 20% of the sales mix while the 60GB versions will take the remaining 80%.

Although its initial losses with the PS3 will be large, Sony co-chief operating officer Jack Tretton points out that the original PS and the PS2 became "incredibly" profitable after taking massive losses at launch.

iSuppli summed up it results by stating “While many fret over the high cost and price of the PlayStation 3 compared to the competition, iSuppli believes the console provides more processing power and capability than any consumer electronics device in history. Because of this, the PlayStation 3 is a great bargain, well worth its $599 price and $840.35 cost, iSuppli believes."

Microsoft, which was once seeing red to the tune of $153 per unit sold, is now making a profit of $75.70 on each console before marketing and distribution costs a year after launch.

Nintendo has already stated that it will make a profit on every Wii that it sells. Given that CompUSA lists its cost for the Wii at $237.50, Nintendo's actual costs are likely closer to the $200 mark. That shouldn't be too surprising given that Microsoft's Richard Teversham likened the Wii to a Gamecube with a DVD drive (someone should tell Tevesham that the Wii doesn't actually play DVDs…for now).

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: That Almost Makes Me Want to Buy One.
By Playto on 11/17/2006 8:43:51 AM , Rating: 3
$840 to produce sounds way too high though. You could build a nice PC for that, that would kick the PS3's electronic butt.

Somebody needs to educate this guy on computers. The Cell processor for starters, a brand new 8 core one of a kind CPU if compared to current market would easily sell for $800+ if you look at the current cost of the new quad-cores that have just now hit the market quad being only 4. Yes I do realize they are not the same style of CPU but you get the point. Next your blue-ray drive so far looks like $600-$650 which almost covers the entire $840 cost alone. Then you still have to include a graphics processor, HDMI ports, and Hard Drive. When you release your spreadsheet of the PC that beats the specs of the PS3 while staying under the $840 price barrier post it please.

By marvdmartian on 11/17/2006 9:37:03 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe he meant he could build something that could play current games better than the PS3?? Comparing the cpu's is a waste of time, if the PS3 doesn't use a computer-style cpu. The blue-ray drive is going to be good for future-proofing the system, but isn't really necessary at this point in time, is it? Honestly, how many games are available on blue-ray, versus dvd?? With new graphics cards coming out all the time, "yesterdays" video cards, while still kicking some serious butt, are dropping in price pretty quickly (as always). Hard drive prices have dropped in the past year too.

Really, the only place where it could potentially hurt you by building a similar performing pc would be in buying the ram, which went up pretty high in price in recent months. And by the time you need blue-ray drives, the price of those should drop pretty considerably (or the technology will have been bypassed by something newer/better).

So if you compare the performance, versus the technology, the OP is probably close to the truth. Doesn't matter anyways, as once Sony builds more of these things, the price will start to plummet for them, and their profit margin will go "into the black" for the remainder of this game system's life cycle.

By BladeVenom on 11/17/2006 11:50:16 AM , Rating: 2
You're embarrassing yourself. Trying to compare a bunch of mostly useless cells to a mainstream multicore processor. You obviously haven't even read what's been written by Anandtech. You're just spouting a bunch of fanboy nonsense.

" of a kind CPU..." -Playto

The first thing you have to keep in mind is that Cell’s architecture is nothing revolutionary, it’s been done before. -Anand

The Cell processor doesn't get off the hook just because it only uses a single one of these horribly slow cores; the SPE array ends up being fairly useless in the majority of situations, making it little more than a waste of die space.

I can't wait to see how well it runs most Linux programs.

By kamel5547 on 11/17/2006 4:18:27 PM , Rating: 2
... ok if you want us to pay retail cost for the BLue-Ray then add $799 to the cost of the PS3 as Sony's stand alone player retails for $999 on Amazon... not only are they losing money on the console, but they aren't making money that they could have. So I guess taking that into consideration the price of the PS3 to Sony is somewhere in teh area of say $1500. The teardown value for the PS3 only values the Blue-Ray at $200....

"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher
Related Articles

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki