Xbox Series X $399/Xbox Series S $199(Sega Series X/S in Japan), PS5 $499 and PS5 digital $399 Rumorville! :o

Imagine if the PlayStation 5 still outsells the Xbox Series X at that price.

As I said the person who claimed SSD would cost to much to be included now thinks a custom SSD that apparently is way better in the PS5 will cost the same as series X SSD.

two faced as a I said.

We dont know manufacturing costs or pricing plans of Sony or Microsoft. I'm happy to wait and see.

Same. That's the price a console should be at max, but not with that tech.

Also, unlike Sony, MS aren't just competing with Playstation (like Sony is just competing with MS), that MS need to do that. All their games also come out on the PC. Xbox isn't just about console market share any more. So why would they need to take that hit just to compete. They want you to game on any one of their consoles or the PC. It's just a hardware platform to them imo.

I think the Series X will cost $500 and the cheaper version will cost $400. If the Series X cost $400, there would be no point in having a cheaper version at all. They're just trying to get their platform out and moving.

@tdkmillsy:

I dint think ssd would be included because it was too expensive,i dont have a problem with been wrong on that,and when i made that claim the ps5 ssd and xbox having ssd were unkown so my argument was about ssd PERIOD not about this ssd been more expensive than this other.

Look how you gracefuly dudge my question.

What is the price difference between a 36cu gpu and 52CU GPU on PC since you want to argue that sony ssd is more expensive than ms ssd how much is the gap in price for those GPU.

Since you want to ignore it i give an example.

The closes i found is 5500xt vs the 5700 normal.

22CU vs 36CU a 14CU difference,the series X has 16CU more.

The price on the 5500xt is like $179 and up,the price of the 5700 is like $379 and up.

So basically 14CU units more is enought for AMD to charge close to $200 or more,16 CU cant be smaller in price so we have to assume the gap would be even more in retail,as the 5700XT with 40CU 18 more cost more than $400 in most models.

We also have faster ram which we know for fact cost more,and wide bus.

We also have extra nand flash on xbox series ssd what 256GB more?

So tell me how all of that will be simple outwieghted by just having a faster ssd.

So according to you the series X will be £$200 - $£400 more than the PS5. Now thats funny and shows how delusional you are.

I dont dodge questions I said nobody knows the manufacturing costs or pricing plans so I'm happy to wait. You ungracefully dodged my answer cos you want to carry making stupid claims.

£$400 more, I'll have fun reminding you of that one. ROFL

Don't like Sony games, get an Xbox. Many like them though.

@tdkmillsy:

No in no place i say or imply that at all,that is on you who assumed that,please quote me saying the xbox will be $200 more.

I just showed you how big the gap in price can be from a GPU that was 16CU more than another,because it is lol worthy how you and several others want to argue that the PS5 ssd is much more expensive than the xbox series X one,but refuse to see that the xbox GPU is much bigger and that on PC that translate a more expensive GPU.

I am sure that sony will pay less for their GPU than MS will pay for theirs.

Fact is.

The ssd is bigger on xbox.

Ram is more expensive on xbox.

GPU is more expensive on xbox

The bus will also be more expensive.

Even if Microsoft undercuts Sony by $100 they just don't have the games. Sony has a dozen killer exclusives where Microsoft only has the spiraling Halo franchise. I'm an xbox fanboy. Ive had xbox live since 2005. Im jumping ship- im done. They just dont have the software, boys

My worry is the games are still a long way off release apart from halo and probably forza there wont be much available at launch. Sony has Spiderman which will fly off the shelves horizon in early 2020 will keep the momentum.

So basically 14CU units more is enough for AMD to charge close to $200 or more,16 CU cant be smaller in price so we have to assume the gap would be even more in retail,as the 5700XT with 40CU 18 more cost more than $400 in most models.

$£400 more according to you. At best £$200 more and thats not including the extra cost for RAM and BUS.

Please reply so I can remind you again, it makes me laugh out loud each time.

As far as $400 price for the XSX, I think it's entirely possible. If the PS5 launches at 500 and 400 for the diskless version, I think everyone will just buy the diskless version and save 100. Cows on this forum will argue that the consoles cost the same, 400 vs 400 who cares about the blu-ray drive?

The Xbox series of consoles will have the $400 price point on lockdown with all features intact and 12 teraflops of power and you don't have to worry about bs overclocks or CPU/GPU throttling, the best of the best you pay $400. For those on a tight budget, $200 gets you amazing 1080p gaming and with gamepass it's more than you need and ridiculous value. They have all bases covered.

The Playstation 5 is just covering the base of needing to charge $500 for the PS5 but playing around by releasing a diskless version for 400 and making you pay 500 if you really want a disk drive. They will still be happy to sell you their PS4 and PS4 pro. Maybe they'll be nice and drop the PS4 pro price to 200 and PS4 to 150 who knows? Even though you know it won't run any next gen exclusives, you are welcome to buy it. Have fun with that.

He is either really delusional, ignorant or very dishonest. He calculates the difference between 36 CUs and 52 CUs by comparing unrelated retail products.

52 CUs is about 30% more CUs and you can roughly add 30% to the silicone costs for the 30% increase in size. He is claiming the XSX GPU is $200 more expensive at minimum? Well, how much is the cost of the PS5 GPU? Can we estimate it?

For the 30% percent increase in size to equal a $200 increase in cost, the PS5's GPU would have to cost $475 to manufacture vs the XSX GPU's $678(30% increase). That would make the Xbox GPU costs $203 more than the PS5 GPU. The Xbox costs $200 more in GPU manufacturing costs over the PS5 only if you believe the PS5's GPU costs $475 to make.

@Xplode_games:

Still dumb. They are not gonna lose $200 a console. Both Sony and MS need to make money by the end console cycle. If money wasn't a problem for MS mixer would not have shutdown 6 months into the service launching.

Oh what a laugh this thread is. I will be sure to quote it when they release the actual pricing.

Can't see the x-series being any lower than £499 the Lockhart could come in at £299 it will be interesting to see which sells better when it launches. The pricing could be key to getting the casuals back on board with the platform.

X Series X will be 600 $ and X Series S 400$

Even if the Series X is $399, Sony could easily match it and take the hit.

Of course they'd have to make up the money elsewhere like more PC ports, but I don't believe Sony would be as stubborn as Microsoft 2013 when it comes to pricing competitively.

They proved that with the PS3.

I just can't see a $400 series X the hit would be more than $100 probably per unit,not only that if the machine was $400 there would not be a need for lockheart in the first place as $399 is a well accepted price right now in the industry.

I think sony will go $399 digital and $449 with blu-ray drive,i just can't see them having a $100 gap between models just for disc drive,unless they are making back what they may loss on the digital version.

While I don't think it will happen either, Microsoft has built a foundation on which they could afford to take a $100+ hit on console for a couple of years because they have broadened their revenue streams.

From PC ports, live service games, and especially game pass. I think people misunderstand what it means for companies to "take a loss" these days.

No company just eats the loss, it's about shifting or offsetting cost in other areas.

Like i said earlier, Sony has a history of selling at or below cost because their first party games more than made up for it.

We are in different times now with the human malware and economic downturn, every one is looking to save

It is in Sony and Microsoft's best interests to price as low as possible.....hence the PS5 all digital and Series S

If Sony prices at 399 MS will follow suit and vice versa. The Series S is the wild card......if it exists.

In guessing that is what MS was counting on

They don't care about selling the most boxes, they just want you accessing game pass by any means necessary, whether that's on pc, Series x or the series s

I suspect because of that we will see more Sony games on PC

I can see them pricing the Series X at $400 but only because the goal would be to get as many people subscribed into the Xbox ecosystem. If their marketing is good, maybe people will realize and learn that they can play Xbox games through the PC and mobile.

I'm willing to bet that Microsofts end game is to have a constant revenue stream from subscriptions to Game Pass. I think they would be willing to take the hit on the hardware for that.

@tormentos: "The logic in this freaking place as always is totally moronic"

Pretty what everyone says every time they read one of your posts. That and "does this guy understand what he reads?"

@faponte13: The money is made from software not hardware sales. This has always been true. If they want to lose money at the start of the gen by selling consoles at a loss they will more than make up for it with PSN/LIVE and game sales.

@kingtito: I know that but there is a time limit. They still have to make money back before the end of the console cycle. Psn/live/gamepass/psnow arent pure profit either. I would be really surprised if Microsoft is making money off of gamepass. Since they are giving away there first party games day one and all those $1 a month promotions they have been giving away.

@faponte13: And what better time to take a hit with each console than at the start of the gen? It's what was typically done at the start of every gen up until the last one.

Who said services were pure profit? They're still going to make most of their money off software be it with game sales or PSN/LIVE services. The $1 charge for gamepass is promotional and won't last forever.

You're trying to say they won't take a hit with hardware because they need to make money. Well, considering most of the revenue is generated from software and services I'd say your assertion is wrong. They can and most likely will considering not many are going to pay $600 for a console and both companies leaned that by now.

Both can surely take a hit specially in this times,digital sales are much higher than they were 10 years ago,those games have higher profits margin for both companies,not only that losses mostly last 8 months 1 years,unless an extreme case like the PS3,after that they break even.

But with live PSN+ and higher margin on digital games they could very well afford it,but i still don't think they will go super cheap.

You can't read for SHIT.

Or worse you can't and play stupid.

The 5700XT and 5500XT are PC GPU not console ones.

Theres is close to $200 gap between the 5500XT and the 5700,if we compare it to the 5700XT which cost MORE than $400 the gap is even wider,that doesn't mean the gap is $400 buffoon,that mean the gap is more than $200 because the 5700XT cost more than $400 while the 5500XT cost $200.

So again you are completely clewless or playing stupid pick one.

Now QUOTE ME OPENLY SAYING THE XBOX SERIES X WILL COST 400 MORE OR 200 MORE.😎

Oh please man you are the one making shit about sony,then pretending to be mother threresa of Calcutta.🤣

No the xbox one was making money for MS hardware wise from day 1,and sony was breaking even and making money as well,as of now both companies are making money on hardware and software.

But the more hardware you sell the bigger your shot at selling more services and games business 101.

Well you are as stupid if not stupider than he is so there is no surprice there.

First things first,i never claimed the xbox would cost $400 more or $200 more,i pointed out what the gap in price is on PC between those GPU to make a point there is not way around MS paying more for their SOC than sony,they buy from the same company one has a 52CU GPU and the other 36CU one is not even close,were are not talking xbox one PS4 here in CU that the gap in hardware was 6CU.

So saying the xbox has 30% more CU so it should add 30% more to the silicon cost is stupid.

In fact the PS4 SOC on 2013 was $100 that is a 20CU GPU with 2 disable CU and 8 core cheap jaguar.

And be surprise the xbox one SOC cost $110,and you may think that this is some kind of point in your favor but no it isn't,the xbox SOC cost more while having 6 CU less active because MS invested in ESRAM,more move engines and allot of crap that blew that SOC to over 5 billion transistors.

So as you can see it was bigger than the PS4 one while having less power,but the key thing that increased price was size,even with cheap components.

And that is not the only thing,the series X faster ram chips which cost more,wide bus which cost more and bigger ssd which cost more.

But even with all that i would not dare say the xbox will cost $200 more that is moronic,i was making a point because people actually think that the xbox can be cheaper out of thin air.

@kingtito: im trying to say they aren't gonna take a $200 hit on consoles. If Lockhart cost $200 its gonna be a huge hit. I hope I'm wrong. I wouldn't mind a $400 next gen console but its just not gonna happen.

I'm guessing series x $500 - $550.

Series s $350ish just to undercut PS5.

I'm not saying they're going to take a hit of $200 just that it's possible. I believe the PS3 took a hit at least that much but I'm not sure about the 360.

The trend these days seems to be selling for at least what the manufacturing cost is. We'll just have to wait and see.

@tormentos: How does what you said refute what I've been saying? Everyone knows, except you, they make most of their money from software. So sell more hardware and make more in software since THAT is where the bulk of the revenue comes from. It's been that way since day 1. Good job at NOT adding anything to the conversation.

The recent trend might be to sell them at the cost or a slightly more but maybe that's because when these consoles launch they're no longer top of the line like in generations past. When new consoles launch they're already beat by mid level PCs and that wasn't case in the past.

Point being Sony, MS and Nintendo are going to make a bulk of their money off the software sales and services. If they wanted they could easily take a hit on the console during the initial launch.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080515/economics-gaming-consoles.asp#:~:text=The%20Economics%20Behind%20Video%2DGame%20Console%20Sales&text=(MSFT)%20Xbox%20360%20and%20Nintendo%20Wii.&text=In%202006%2C%20at%20the%20time,when%20it%20launched%20in%202005.

Neither Sony or Microsoft are new to launching consoles at a loss.

It would not be surprising if they did it again.

@kingtito:

Maybe you forget your own argument.

""The money is made from software not hardware sales.""

Thats not true and is different to what you are claiming now.

Maybe you failed to, once again, understand what you read. I said most of the money is from software sales. I never said 100% of it but most and since in previous gens they did sell at a loss all of their money was made from software and services. How many gens did Sony or MS sell their console at a loss at the start?

Seriously, learn how to understand what you read. Shouldn't have to explain every single sentence or post. You really do have a comprehension issue.

In what part do you see the word MOSTLY there ^^.

Pretty clear the money is made from software not hardware which is not even close to be true and for more than just 1 reason,not only profits on the console it self,but controllers and peripherals are also hardware.

So no i didn't fail you word it wrongly.

@tormentos: Oh that's right it takes actual intelligence and comprehension to understand context. Something you've repeatedly showed you lack. When I say they make their money from software I don't mean 100% you clown. Either company can and has taken losses on hardware sales at the start of a gen in order to build the base because they know where the real money is made.

It's common sense to know hardware sales are going to contribute to total revenue but a majority is going to come from selling software and services. It's implied clown and really shouldn't have to be explained but you're you and you once again prove almost everyone that's ever had a conversation with you that you lack reading comprehension skills.

You really are the clown of SWs and it's actually disappointing to see that you haven't changed.

Is it really easier to make all this drivel than saying my bad i chose a wrong wording.¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@tormentos: Unfortunately you just can't comprehend anything you read so it has to explained as if you're a 5 year old. I know it sucks for anyone trying to converse with you. Perhaps you should try harder and these conversations wouldn't be warranted.

@Sevenizz: Um Sony is a rich company too, who are you to say what they can and can't afford fanboy? They took a 300 dollar loss on PS3, a 100 dollar loss when software sales can be made up digitally won't hurt. Get out with that narrative.

@Xplode_games: By your logic, why didn't MS just sell Xbox One at 400 dollars at launch? What about the One X? Lems need to understand its about money at the end of the day, not making sure fanboys can sleep at night.

Well this thread didn't age well for some here alto it didn't have much time to age.

But but but $199 and $399...

Specially for a lemming who think 36CU and 52CU cost the same.

@tormentos: Kind of like your thread claiming the PS5 was going to be more powerful then the Series X.😂🤣

@Pedro: it's more efficient

@Sagemode87: It's actually worth getting.

No its not. Only fools like you believe that shit.

Can someone post the TL;DR of the TL;DR?

Where you at OP?