Banjo64
cumsessed
Yeah I have the DE, what I meant was I’d rather have had a disc drive edition 8tf version (with a standard NVME drive) that Sony can sell at a profit at £399 rather than the current DE which costs £389.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft takes a $100-$200 loss on all Xbox Series X|S sales
- Thread starter The_Mike
- Start date
I have no stake in MS.
John Wick
Member
Sometimes I wonder if people actually use their brains before responding?
MS would be the most stupid company if they were losing $200 on a series S console. It would be a disaster.
oldergamer
Member
Wow how incorrect could you be? Look up direct storage and its hardware decompression. I also cant believe anyone agreed with you on that
Also, no this isnt about drive storage, as any device with a modern cpu can store & decompressed files. Its about compression before, & decompression after, sent through the io to save on overall io bandwidth.
There are reasons xbox games are larger and i think it has more to do with games that can run on older xbox hardware and quick resume then what you are suggesting.
Xbox has tech to reduce game size but its not widely used yet. Sony probably enforce it knowing they have a smaller storage ssd that can fill up quick.
Note: Also I'm sure to see a reply about 0% CPU usage instead of a fraction of of a CPU being involved (which is basically a non factor when the CPU is clocked higher in one machine compared to the other). Imperceivable due to latency in other areas no doubt.
Last edited:
Both can do hardware compression/decompression indeed, but they use different compression methods. So, they are technically different and can have different output, depending of the situation. (like does game need to have xbox one support, ps4 support, use all methods or not)
Sony pays license for kraken so every dev can use it for free, but they can also not use it.
Future will show, if game sizes between systems get similar. Not a big deal.
The topic about losing 100-200 per system is kind of surprise, big numbers this far on the gen IMO.
I didn't really like xbox until this gen, now that I have series x and ps5, I think they are both nice and really close. Different GUI and controller are the biggest differences, games run similarry on both.
But I would have assumed, that MS can sell them on profit or +-0. controller is probably cheaper vs. playstation, series S should be cheaper than ps5de, series x could be bit more expensive.
But 100-200$ loss is a lot, if PS5 is already profitable.
And Series S struggles to sell (in some countries), here used systems that are basically like new go low as 100€.
So if they need to drop the price to 150-200€ to make them sell in the future, it would be huge losses unless they can make them much cheaper by then.
oldergamer
Member
I'm fully aware they use different compression formats. if i recall xbox compression can be applied to more then only textures, but nothing there was in question. My point was that he was incorrect in stating xbox didn't have hardware decompression.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
1. Both PS5 and XSX have HW decompression blocks.
2. But PS5 has 300% more powerful and effective decompression blocks when compared to XSX. The software solution comes in addition to that. And that is one of the biggest reasons why PS5 has smaller-sized files because the PS5 tech allows to unpack more and still load in the same time. That allows devs to compress the game files more, in comparison to XSX, and reduce the overall game size. This is also the reason why PS5's CPU performance is so good because it doesn't have to share the decompression workload.
Tripolygon
Banned
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Gudji
Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Ah okay, that makes sense. Have not kept up post what we knew back in the day.
Wish PCs would get on that decompression !/O in mobos.
Tripolygon
Banned
Price of accessories too.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Last edited:
drganon
Member
That or they're time travelers and it's already 2023 in India.Guess they don't celebrate holidays in India
Even though last week was Diwali.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Well, they are a few hours ahead of the US, so they can see the future ahead of the Americans, at least. /s
solidus12
Member
Do they know who won metacritic publisher of 2022?
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Why don't you link to these forum experts you are getting these numbers from?
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Youre just coming to strange conclusions based on no data or misinterpreting data. Microsoft themselves announced that the 360 was making profits a few years in, the console itself.
ReBurn
Gold Member
The Xbox website still lists Series X MSRP at RS 49,990:
Xbox Series X | Xbox
Discover the fastest, most powerful Xbox ever with the Xbox Series X.
www.xbox.com
There are no Series X consoles available at Flipkart or Amazon or even listed at that price.
Maybe it changes later?
Imtjnotu
Member
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/325504-sony-finally-turns-a-profit-on-499-ps5
its back to being sold dead even as of this august i think
PaintTinJr
Member
It is an "over" estimation, in a decision maths problem you'd graph out the upper and lower limits to provide an area in which the working answer exists. I don't need upper limits because everything is in Xbox's favour to paint a better picture than reality. So you don't need the $50 linked, and just need to accept the extra $1b they could have spent on first party games this gen instead of a fake subsidy that never goes away is under the real figure.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
In the Apple vs Epic case they stated in court that they've never made money on hardware.
oldergamer
Member
Stop with the needless antagonism and discuss like the adult you supposedly are.
First i dont know why you are posting this. Are you trying to dick wave and answer questions i have no interest in. Or do you usually answer questions not asked? Cool i guess?
Second games made for ps5 have separate installs from ps4 versions which also allows them to be smaller. Xbox has games installs that work for both consoles. Much harder to use new features that effect size when having universal installs. Note: Id gladly trade drive space for quick resume as a feature any day but that is my opinion
I dont know where you are going with that 300% nonsense in an xbox thread, but go ahead and claim differences you cant back up with any real world comparison. For games being smaller they sure dont load all that much faster (which was the original point on ssd hardware before people chimed in with unnecessary info)
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
It is a bit of stretch to say they both have this tech, when the check-in time of assets on PS5 is x5 less IIRC from the 20x versus 4x improvement with directStiorage (which is the same tech, but cut down Nvidia RTX IO, their PCIe add-on decompression card that like Series needs CPU cores to assist the transfer, which increases latency and also means the feature (at the headline speeds) is only for use with the GPU (10GBs of GDDR6). The SSD is also a budget cache-less model.
The PS5's far more advanced IO complex with custom co-processors and expensive esram - that hides data latency from the 6 SSD modules to act as a shared drive cache - can decompress for either CPU or GPU with the equivalent workload of 7x(IIRC) Zen2 mobile cores without touching the CPU, because IO Complex can DMA from its esram straight to unified GDDR6.
All this difference, and improvement while still breaking even on costs just shows how big a loss Xbox's $200 on XsX is IMO.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Lmao. You and
DeepEnigma
were literally talking about HW decompression blocks -- and both got certain things wrong. I came in and shared the correct information.Source?
Guess all the developers, Mark Cerny, and experts are wrong. Oldergamer on GAF knows what's actually up.
Here you go:
PS5:
XSX:
Summary: PS5's HW decompression blocks do the CPU word of 9 Zen 2 cores. XSX's performs up to 3 Zen 2 cores. That's a 300% difference.
I'll wait for the apology.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Microsoft making profits on 36t0's doesn't mean they were "in the green" it means they were no longer taking losses on it.
You based your theory on guesstimate data based on dubious sources, and said you decided to make your own estimates form that, and all I'm asking is a link to what you saw which lead you to your conclusion, so I can see where you got your numbers from. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
oldergamer
Member
So I got a warning for in appropriate behavior. You know what' fuck this forum. don't warn the people that are posting off topic nonsense... ok mods. It's pretty obvious you don't want anyone posting anything that riles sony fans, but to get a warning for something so basic is beyond BS.
No it's not a stretch to say what they have? Again you are throwing around numbers randomly. But this is ok if its sony related. literally I can count you claiming 4 or 5 things above that you have literally no idea and no way to back it up.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Ms clearly the good guys offering such advanced hardware and taking a loss....
...Once the true next gen begins we will see the series consoles dominate. Once the secret sauce is unlocked.
Seriously though I can't see how the BOM is that different between these consoles and wasn't it calculated that they would be pretty close at launch?
...Once the true next gen begins we will see the series consoles dominate. Once the secret sauce is unlocked.
Seriously though I can't see how the BOM is that different between these consoles and wasn't it calculated that they would be pretty close at launch?
MasterCornholio
Member
Yep. Sony managed to decrease their costs through redesigns though. It might be harder for Microsoft to do the same. Just a thought.
PaintTinJr
Member
They have never made a profit on hardware is Microsoft's claim in court. Nothing to do with money back from subs or games, purely a statement that all their hardware has been subsidized, inline with the title of this thread where they are taking respective loses of 100 and 200 on the XsS and XsX - although that's just common sense without an established source, you argue in such bad faith you would twist it that they are taking a $200 loss on XsS if it would fit your argument. yes?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-with-playstation-5-price-due-to-costly-parts
It is paywalled article I can't reach, but this was the source of the next-gen thread discussion for the PS5's BOM, but here is the open of the article
"Scarce components have pushed the manufacturing costs for Sony Corp.’s next PlayStation to around $450 per unit, forcing a difficult price-setting decision in its battle with Microsoft Corp., according to people with knowledge of the matter.
The Japanese conglomerate is preparing to gradually replace the six-year-old PS4 console, releasing its PlayStation 5 the same holiday season its archrival debuts the upcoming Xbox Series X. Sony typically finalizes a console’s price in February of the release year, followed by mass production in the spring. With the PS5, the company is taking a wait-and-see approach, said the people, asking not to be named because the details are private."
And here is engadget giving their take on the article :
https://www.engadget.com/2020-02-14-bloomberg-ps5-price-cost-rumors.html
The headline of this thread confirms the engadget take on the XsX being aggressively priced, and Sony being able to get to cost and profit with minor SKU revisions further backs up that they weren't eating much more than the shipping costs to retailers, which for the people giving knowledge commentary on that in the next-gen thread will have known those trend costs for years because they are largely the same as PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4, just adjusted for inflation.
At the most expensive, Sony used air freight for shipping which ranges from $2.50 - $5.0 per Kg. The PS5 boxed weight is 6.7Kg according to the internet. so, assuming all PS5's shipped at the most expensive rate the shipping is going to be less than $35 per console - but more likely $18 dollars - the logistics costs are less than shipping, so even adding another ridiculously high $18 per console more that gives something close to $50 per console in shipping and logistics on top of the Bloomberg calculated BOM.
https://www.freightmatch.com.au/pallet-freight-cost/#:~:text=Typical air freight
"Air Freight Pallet Costs
Transporting your pallet via air is the most time-efficient but expensive mode of transportation. This is due to airlines always being on schedule with reliable departure and arrival times. Typical air freight pallet costs are calculated on the type of cargo being shipped. Air freight can range from $2.50-$5.00 per kilogram. Because aircraft are so expensive to operate and fuel prices are always up and down, it is the most costly way to ship your pallets. Especially when your pallets are being internationally transported. However, it’s the safest way to ship your freight because of less handling of goods during transit, as well as cargo safety rules being enforced at the airport. This lowers the possibility of damage or theft. "
I'm sure you'll find a way to ignore the reality that PS5 is being sold at a profit, already without a slim SKU change on a lower lithography to continue your arguing in bad faith, but hopefully not, and this brings an end to you questioning a very generous - to xbox - estimated cost figure for the PS5 to compare to the $200 loss Xbox makes on the XsX, even now.
GenericUser
Member
They are rich as fuck anyway, might as well gifted me my xbox. Greedy assholes.
PaintTinJr
Member
I'm happy to discuss those 4 or 5 things you take issue with - if you are? - as I much prefer a modest effort response than such a low effort nothing statement like the one you have provided.
I've discussed these aspects with far more technical people than you - here on gaf since launch- and the cacheless SSD comment is from a Linus tech tips video of cacheless ssds. Other than under quoting the number of mobile Zen2 cores the IO complex represents I'm happy with my comment, so feel free to change my opinion on those 4-5 points.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You can't just ignore a post that said something different than you thought because you want to keep arguing something pointless. The 360 was announced profitable by Microsoft a few years in, fact. System making profit does NOT mean they are IN THE GREEN, fact. Stop mixing the two up. Microsoft was saying they were never n the green, not that an individual machine never became profitable, if they are still in the red profitable just means they aren't losing money anymore and gaining on those systems. Same with the PS3 around 2011.
Of course.
PaintTinJr
Member
What a surprise, continuing in bad faith, eh, this is about the amount lost on the hardware alone, not whether live/gamepass, spare controller and a few games per customer made that initial sale a ROI.
It would be perjury if the Microsoft employee claiming they've subsidies all their hardware - every generation - for the argument of why consoles are different to PlayStore and AppStore in the case against Apple was false.
So, to reiterate, going with a generous underestimation of the amount directly lost on Series console hardware, compared to the generous over estimation of the initial losses on the first 15m PS5's, PlayStation could have funded 2-4 AAA PS5 games at the same spend.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You seem to have gotten lost somehow, we were talking about the 360, ignoring my posts isn't arguing in good faith.
What are you even talking about?
You still don't get what profit means in the context of overall profit vs. increasing revenues.
The 360 a few years after launch was reported profitable, that doesn't mean Microsoft lied that none of their consoles made overall profits. Profitable in that sense, for the third time, only means that the 360 was no longer losing money and was making money, that doesn't mean the 360 overall was in the black or in the green. It's like the PS3, it didn't remove all the losses when Sony said it was profitable much later on, it only means it was gaining instead of continuing to be a loss.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
You were talking about the $50 loss on PS5 you wanted linked, But you were just trying to find any angle to avoid acknowledging you had no valid point.
And again are currently trying to move the goalpost to talk about profitability when the thread title is about hardware subsidy as were my points in terms of losses, that - if not losses - could have been used elsewhere.
The PS3 hardware (BOM, shipping/logistics) went from a massive loss (subsidy) to a decent profit with the super slim and slim. Microsoft have told a court that all their hardware is sold at a loss(subsidies) so my point about them losing at least $15b on Xbox hardware is still valid, because the 360 is the most advanced hardware they've ever competed with, especially after Epic convinced them to double the ram to 512MB at the last minute from their initial 256MB design, at further subsidized cost, for the full generation - as they always lose on hardware because they aren't an electronics company.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You seem to be confused about what part of the conversation you are on and making up your own.
How am I moving the goalposts if you are the one who brought it up?
^
PaintTinJr
Member
Stop playing dumb about the context which the thread title and my comment - I made that comment in, provides.
The hardware by itself is subsidized and doesn't make money, that is Microsoft's supplied fact and the fact I was using.
Even if you were sincere and took it the wrong way at the time, in your most recent response you know exactly what it means in context and my point is still correct and you are still acting like it is wrong and continuing to argue in bad faith.
Let me state it one more time and see if you agree with the statement.
Microsoft have subsidized Xbox hardware by at least $15b(losses) directly on the console hardware sales over the two decades they've been in the console market. Do you agree?
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
I never argued that Microsoft didn't subsidize Xbox hardware, I'm saying you previously mixed up profits as in, not losing money on hardware, with profits as in, the hardware itself overall was in the green. I never denied that Microsoft lost money on hardware OVERALL.
PaintTinJr
Member
That isn't the context of the thread topic and nor was it the intention or context of any of my posts. Quote what I actually said that matches that accusation, then. The previous comment you quoted from me doesn't insinuate that at all which we've already covered and doesn't contain the word "profits" you keep pushing.
I would say you are confused, but you've changed tact 3 times, so it all feels deliberate just to bury the valid point I made, that Xbox shouldn't be wasting such money on hardware they can't afford to eventually sell at a profit, that all comes at the expensive of them investing less in producing actual games - which is the whole point of being a platform holder, beyond making money,
Microsoft's senseless Xbox finances only make sense when you factor that they have accumulated 95% of PC gaming to Windows according to the CMA's phase1 investigation, and the hardware losses of DirectXbox to push gaming on Windows is peanuts versus their return on Window's licensing, etc.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
I have never seen anyone dodge their own chain of comments like you when called out to address them, I even tried to break it down so you can address each part one at a time but you don't. You backpedal and then completely dodge what was asked or addressed.
Nothing is being buried, you don't have a point, you are putting words in my mouth or brining up gibberish that has nothing to do with the question.
One more time, this is you
this is me
and you still haven't addressed this.
Then you have the other issue of you making up other random numbers from anonymous sources that are "in the industry" based on a "thread" of "experts" that are just forum users. Which you still haven't linked to.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I'm still shocked that MS is losing this much money on each console.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
And they are still doing deals on the series s and x over the holidays.
Xbox is the hero we don't deserve...
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Expecting your love letter to PS3 that was losing like $300 per unit at launch
?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
They da real MPVs this holiday season.
John Wick
Member
Let's put it this way enough to bankrupt Sega about 20 times.......
Similar threads
- Locked