Sony Is Struggling With PlayStation 5 Price Due to Costly Parts

Lets talk about 4k and Ray-Tracing for a bit. Why do you think consoles are now pushing for Ray-Tracing so hard, when it's clear that the technology isn't ready? Nvidia jumped the gun on Ray-Tracing and made it their main selling point of the RTX line of graphic cards, but they did this before the technology is feasible. So here we are with Sony and Microsoft promising their next generation consoles will have hardware Ray-Tracing in it, even though not a single AMD graphics card in the market has Ray-Tracing capabilities. Why push for something that is going to be expensive and taxing on the hardware? Because PC gaming has Ray-Tracing, that's why. They don't want another 5-7 years of PC gaming handing consoles their ass.

Lets be real here, the RTX cards can't do 4k Ray-Tracing. Nobody knows how AMD, Sony, and Microsoft plan to implement Ray-Tracing, but I'm pretty certain the performance hit using this feature won't be any different than Nvidia's RTX. If the PS5 and Xbox Series X can do Ray Tracing at 4k then it'll be at 30fps with low to medium settings. Most likely these consoles will implement a form of up-scaling like DLSS but worse because they'll just take a 1080p or 1440p image and stretch it to 4k.

So when you say 4k properly, you probably mean without Ray-Tracing, which most graphic cards can do today assuming you don't use Ultra settings. Ray-Tracing is a totally different situation, one that AMD, Sony, and Microsoft has zero experience at. Also this will be a trial by fire as AMD has yet to release a GPU on PC that can do Ray-Tracing.

No, because ray-tracing is going to get more popular as time goes on. Don't forget that these consoles are built not just for what works now but also for the future. It's also a good marketing bullet point to use to hype up people that don't really know that much about specs. The same applies to "current cards to can 4K", that doesn't take into account advances in game graphics, ai, physics, etc that will happen over the life of the next console generation. Also, I'd argue that previous AMD cards (at least at the power and heat requirements low enough to work in a console) would not be good enough for proper 4K for now or the next half decade, meaning Navi is the only viable option.

Just in time for companies to start pushing game streaming. Taking aways people ownership away is publishers dream come true.

Not even close to "just in time". The next generation will be long over before streaming has hit a "good enough for the masses" point. Assuming ISPs in their infinite greed and stupidity (also the game industry itself) don't royally fuck things up.
 
imo pc gaming is larger and more mainstream than it has ever been
I guess the time when you could build a $600-700 PC that was drastically better than consoles is over.

Or back in the 90's when you had a whole range of PC only titles, games like Spectre VR, Myst, Under a Killing Moon, DOOM, SimCity, all those old click-and-point adventure games, emulators, etc.

I mean, that stuff is still happening, and there are lots of cool indie games on PC only, but it's just not the same. But I guess you can say that about anything.
 
No, because ray-tracing is going to get more popular as time goes on.
I'm not saying it's not... you know.
Don't forget that these consoles are built not just for what works now but also for the future. It's also a good marketing bullet point to use to hype up people that don't really know that much about specs. The same applies to "current cards to can 4K", that doesn't take into account advances in game graphics, ai, physics, etc that will happen over the life of the next console generation. Also, I'd argue that previous AMD cards (at least at the power and heat requirements low enough to work in a console) would not be good enough for proper 4K for now or the next half decade, meaning Navi is the only viable option.
I'm lost with what you just said. So these consoles are built for the future but they probably can't do 4k with Ray-Tracing? Over time what does 1080p on Ultra will do 1080p high, then medium, and eventually on low. PC graphics evolution has been shit for a while that we're talking resolutions to describe performance, which is honestly a terrible metric. Also I'd argue a Vega 56/64 can do 4K, just not at Ultra settings, but that applies to Navi as well. Might be different with big Navi.
 
Challenge detected! Here is your Windows 10 Pro license key for $3.50. This unit will cost you $540. Assembly is required.
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 2600 3.4 GHz 6-Core Processor ($119.99 @ B&H)
Motherboard: ASRock B450M-HDV R4.0 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($69.98 @ Amazon)
Memory: OLOy 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory ($57.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Sony Optiarc 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($53.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 580 8 GB GTS XXX ED Video Card ($159.99 @ B&H)
Case: HEC HX210 MicroATX Mini Tower Case ($34.98 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: EVGA BR 450 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($39.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $536.91
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-02-19 14:48 EST-0500

That gpu is weaker than what ps5 will have though. The cpu is also a generation older.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Casual gamers are already being conditioned to love stream gaming. Real-time rendering is unecessary and ever so inelegant. In 20 years I wouldn't be surprised to see simple streaming boxes (Sony and MS branded of course) take the place of consoles.

Then Nintendo will seize the opportunity to introduce some weird offline cartridge system.

NVME based cartridges!
 
I guess the time when you could build a $600-700 PC that was drastically better than consoles is over.

Or back in the 90's when you had a whole range of PC only titles, games like Spectre VR, Myst, Under a Killing Moon, DOOM, SimCity, all those old click-and-point adventure games, emulators, etc.

I mean, that stuff is still happening, and there are lots of cool indie games on PC only, but it's just not the same. But I guess you can say that about anything.
Admittedly the PS5 and Xbox Series X are pushing the envelope in what a console can do. That doesn't mean that you still can't build a $600-$700 PC that'll be better, you just can't do that right now. Remember the Radeon HD 7850, which is the nearest in specs to the PS4 was $250 in late 2012, while the PS4 was released a year later in November 2013. The R9 290 was also released at that time for $400.

So far AMD has released nothing like the hardware in the PS5 to PC gamers, and only Big Navi is going to be based on RDNA 2.0 with Ray-Tracing. I do have a lot of doubts of the rumored specs of the consoles, but Nvidia isn't sleeping on the job and does plan to release massively powerful GPU's this year, at least according to rumors. There is Intel, though I doubt they'll make something that powerful. If Nvidia releases the RTX 3000 series then AMD has to respond, and I doubt AMD is ready for it, so expect prices to come down rapidly for AMD cards at some point this year. By the time the PS5 and Xbox X are released this year, then cards would have came out with better performance and pricing. Assuming Sony and Microsoft don't delay the release of the consoles, because that could very well happen.
 
That gpu is weaker than what ps5 will have though. The cpu is also a generation older.
Thank you from last week. Yes the GPU is weaker but it wasn't meant to compete with the PS5, just to show you can build a competent PC for $500. The CPU is a generation behind but not slower, as the rumors suggest that Sony or Microsoft are going to either remove the L3 cache or remove some of it. Missing L3 cache means lower IPC, and therefore the generation of the CPU won't matter at that point. No official released specs and pricing of these consoles so its entirely speculation.
 
Thank you from last week. Yes the GPU is weaker but it wasn't meant to compete with the PS5, just to show you can build a competent PC for $500. The CPU is a generation behind but not slower, as the rumors suggest that Sony or Microsoft are going to either remove the L3 cache or remove some of it. Missing L3 cache means lower IPC, and therefore the generation of the CPU won't matter at that point. No official released specs and pricing of these consoles so its entirely speculation.

Right, turning Zen 1.0 into Raven Ridge dropped IPC around 10%.

perfrel_cpu.png

Zen 2 APU will have the exact same amount of L2 cache-per-core as Zen 1.0 APU, so we will have to see how much moving the memory controller back on-die helps remove the additional bump of AMD doubling the L3 of Zen 2 . I doubt they will customize any part of the CPU portion (way too easy to just use Renoir 8-core to build -on that massive custom GPU and GDDR6 interface).

And we already known they will be running it at a lower base clock than anything currently shipping (guesstimates would be around 3.0-3.2 ghz). That gives them lower cost on first release, and room to grow (when the Pro model ships). That drops performance another 10-20%, putting it in-line with a 3600, or 2700x.

And in another 8 months (console release date,) I expect Zen 3 to be widely available, and prices of the 3600 to be the same as the 2600x currently. That means you can build an equivalent system starting with a $100 CPU. The Nvidia Ampere should also have reduced the price of RTX, making it even easier to build a RTX 2060 Super performance-level system (around $550-600 for full system)
 
Last edited:
I guess the time when you could build a $600-700 PC that was drastically better than consoles is over.

Or back in the 90's when you had a whole range of PC only titles, games like Spectre VR, Myst, Under a Killing Moon, DOOM, SimCity, all those old click-and-point adventure games, emulators, etc.

I mean, that stuff is still happening, and there are lots of cool indie games on PC only, but it's just not the same. But I guess you can say that about anything.

It's been over for a bit of time (since the ps3/xbox 360 that both used pretty high end processors/gpus ibm xenos and cell and r500 and a variant of the 7800gtx)

Once the system launches you can likely build a system similar in specs and as time goes on you'll be able to build a significantly better system.
 
Don't you love how phone manufacturer are just eating up components for their pointless yearly refreshes that bring nothing. Landfills are just filled with perfectly fine components cause people need the latest and greatest every year.
AFAICT, most people do not replace their phone every year. Everyone I know (from lower middle income to millionaires) hold onto their phones for years. There are exceptions, but there always were. 15 years ago, I can remember people on the SDA forums replacing phones every few months (which was nuts to me), but most don't do that and even when they do, the old phones get resold.
 
If sony can introduce their new generation of consoles with a differentiation between a 4k console and a HD/1440p console and have pricing for each set up correctly I think they would do quite well.

While 4k tv's are cheap they still are not the majority of the market.
We don't have numbers yet, but it was estimated that 50% of homes would have 4k tvs by the end of last year (we were at ~35% in 2018). It doesn't make a lot of sense to make a non 4k console, when most homes will have 4K by the time it's released and the vast majority will before the PS6 is released.
 
I don't want another PS4/XBO generation that's a stripped down, noisy, middle-of-the-road console that we have to suffer with for 6 years. I seriously hope Sony and MS don't skimp on things just to hit a $399 price point.
Is that all XBO, or just the older ones? Asking, because I can't hear my Xbone X (aside from start up).
 
And we already known they will be running it at a lower base clock than anything currently shipping (guesstimates would be around 3.0-3.2 ghz). That gives them lower cost on first release, and room to grow (when the Pro model ships). That drops performance another 10-20%, putting it in-line with a 3600, or 2700x.
Rumors are all over the place. Last I heard the CPU's will be 3.6Ghz and 3.7Ghz. Is that true? I dunno.
And in another 8 months (console release date,) I expect Zen 3 to be widely available, and prices of the 3600 to be the same as the 2600x currently. That means you can build an equivalent system starting with a $100 CPU. The Nvidia Ampere should also have reduced the price of RTX, making it even easier to build a RTX 2060 Super performance-level system (around $550-600 for full system)
I'm assuming that Nvidia's RTX 3050 will be the equivalent of a RTX 2060 but with better Ray-Tracing performance. Hopefully not at crazy prices like the current RTX line. But yea, you could build an equivalent to the PS5 for $550-$600. I'm hoping to see if Nvidia has a RTX 3070 that's $350 and is a massive boost in performance, because that's what Nvidia should be doing. AMD has no plans to release Ray-Tracing capable hardware beyond Big Navi, and that's going to be a big problem for them.
 
The console vs PC build price comparison is mostly meaningless. You have to buy a new console as a whole, while most already own a PC and just need to upgrade. More often than not, just the GPU, as many CPUs and memory configurations from the past half a decade are good enough. Hence, consoles will hardly ever be more affordable for the same performance, just more convenient and game exclusive.
 
The console vs PC build price comparison is mostly meaningless. You have to buy a new console as a whole, while most already own a PC and just need to upgrade. More often than not, just the GPU, as many CPUs and memory configurations from the past half a decade are good enough. Hence, consoles will hardly ever be more affordable for the same performance, just more convenient and game exclusive.

That assumes those people aren't running dual-core CPUs and terrible PSUs that are common with pre-builts.
 
everythings price is going up these days from food to video games to gpu/cpu. don't see why consoles cant do the same. people these days will bitch reguardless.
 
Lets talk about 4k and Ray-Tracing for a bit. Why do you think consoles are now pushing for Ray-Tracing so hard, when it's clear that the technology isn't ready? Nvidia jumped the gun on Ray-Tracing and made it their main selling point of the RTX line of graphic cards, but they did this before the technology is feasible. So here we are with Sony and Microsoft promising their next generation consoles will have hardware Ray-Tracing in it, even though not a single AMD graphics card in the market has Ray-Tracing capabilities. Why push for something that is going to be expensive and taxing on the hardware? Because PC gaming has Ray-Tracing, that's why. They don't want another 5-7 years of PC gaming handing consoles their ass.

Lets be real here, the RTX cards can't do 4k Ray-Tracing. Nobody knows how AMD, Sony, and Microsoft plan to implement Ray-Tracing, but I'm pretty certain the performance hit using this feature won't be any different than Nvidia's RTX. If the PS5 and Xbox Series X can do Ray Tracing at 4k then it'll be at 30fps with low to medium settings. Most likely these consoles will implement a form of up-scaling like DLSS but worse because they'll just take a 1080p or 1440p image and stretch it to 4k.

So when you say 4k properly, you probably mean without Ray-Tracing, which most graphic cards can do today assuming you don't use Ultra settings. Ray-Tracing is a totally different situation, one that AMD, Sony, and Microsoft has zero experience at. Also this will be a trial by fire as AMD has yet to release a GPU on PC that can do Ray-Tracing.
AMD appears to have a slightly more flexible implementation based on the patents, where the hardware for RT can also be used for other purposes, to a point. But as we have not seen that yet, it's very hard to tell how effective it may be.
 
Once you start playing games on PlayStation 5 or Xbox Series X, you’ll probably hate going back to older consoles


https://bgr.com/2020/02/23/ps5-vs-xbox-series-x-performance-gains-compared-to-ps4-and-xbox-one/amp/
The target in question is apparently 12 teraflops, which is double that of the Xbox One X and nearly triple that of the PS4 Pro. If the two consoles really are going to be that powerful, it explains why retail prices of up to $499 have been rumored for each of them.

https://bgr.com/2020/02/21/ps5-release-date-xbox-series-x-leak-specs-teraflops-graphics/
 
Well if PS5 really can play all previous Playstation games, then that would be a good reason to include the drive, no?

Unless you just give people access to a free DL if they enter the serial number on their disk. You'd think it would be pretty simple to do, but it probably won't happen.

Also, does anyone really want to go back and play PS1 / PS2 games at this point? All the good ones have HD remakes on newer machines that you can buy for pennies.
 
Unless you just give people access to a free DL if they enter the serial number on their disk. You'd think it would be pretty simple to do, but it probably won't happen.

Also, does anyone really want to go back and play PS1 / PS2 games at this point? All the good ones have HD remakes on newer machines that you can buy for pennies.

For me personally, 3d games don't survive the test of time very well. It always sounds like such a good idea but the truth is I dont think most people play old games for long or will spend money on it. I mean if one really wants to play the ps1 or ps2 games so bad, dont you just grab a system off ebay to play it? While I have been advocating for the blu ray drive, I also think it needs to be for the right reasons. Development shouldnt be hindered by trying to cater to the small percent that want to play their old games.
 
Is that all XBO, or just the older ones? Asking, because I can't hear my Xbone X (aside from start up).
My XBO is fairly old, from before the refresh, but is actually one of the quieter ones, which isn't really quiet. The heatsink fan is really low quality and makes a rattling/vibrating sound, which only gets worse when gaming. My PS4 Pro is ridiculously loud when gaming.
 
The target in question is apparently 12 teraflops

Confirmed, now that Xbox GPU will have 12 teraflops

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1554...n-2-rdna-2-12-tflops-gpu-hdmi-21-a-custom-ssd
While the company doesn’t break this down into clockspeed versus compute units, this is none the less twice the GPU performance of the Xbox One X. Or for a more generational comparison, more than 9x the GPU performance of the original Xbox One.

Even at just 2x the performance of the Xbox One X, this is by all objective measures quite a bit of GPU horsepower. To put things in perspective, AMD’s current fastest RDNA-based video card, the Radeon RX 5700 XT, only offers 10 TFLOPs of GPU performance. So the Xbox Series X, a device with an integrated GPU, is slated to offer more graphics performance than AMD’s current flagship video card
 
Once you start playing games on PlayStation 5 or Xbox Series X, you’ll probably hate going back to older consoles


https://bgr.com/2020/02/23/ps5-vs-xbox-series-x-performance-gains-compared-to-ps4-and-xbox-one/amp/
The target in question is apparently 12 teraflops, which is double that of the Xbox One X and nearly triple that of the PS4 Pro. If the two consoles really are going to be that powerful, it explains why retail prices of up to $499 have been rumored for each of them.

https://bgr.com/2020/02/21/ps5-release-date-xbox-series-x-leak-specs-teraflops-graphics/
It's never about hardware power.


december-2019-sales-4-1.png


EIONdSwX0AIL5Zo?format=jpg&name=large.jpg
 
And we already known they will be running it at a lower base clock than anything currently shipping (guesstimates would be around 3.0-3.2 ghz).
Who says that?
You know the 3700x is 65W eh? Leaving more than enough power budget for graphics..
 
For me personally, 3d games don't survive the test of time very well. It always sounds like such a good idea but the truth is I dont think most people play old games for long or will spend money on it. I mean if one really wants to play the ps1 or ps2 games so bad, dont you just grab a system off ebay to play it? While I have been advocating for the blu ray drive, I also think it needs to be for the right reasons. Development shouldnt be hindered by trying to cater to the small percent that want to play their old games.

I agree with you but I think it really comes down to the generation. I can still pick up a game like HL2 and Crysis and enjoy myself, but anything on the 64/PS1/PS2/Xbox/GC really hasn't held up well at all.
 
I agree with you but I think it really comes down to the generation. I can still pick up a game like HL2 and Crysis and enjoy myself, but anything on the 64/PS1/PS2/Xbox/GC really hasn't held up well at all.

That is fair. not long ago I was super excited to sit down and play some mario kart 64 again, but after playing the switch version a few times, I was not able to enjoy it as much. I miss the controls and play style for sure, but the graphics needed some love. Goldeneye was best left to my memories lol.
 
That is fair. not long ago I was super excited to sit down and play some mario kart 64 again, but after playing the switch version a few times, I was not able to enjoy it as much. I miss the controls and play style for sure, but the graphics needed some love. Goldeneye was best left to my memories lol.
I just finally finished HL2 ep1 and 2 and the graphics were fine... they've aged pretty well.
 
The console vs PC build price comparison is mostly meaningless. You have to buy a new console as a whole, while most already own a PC and just need to upgrade. More often than not, just the GPU, as many CPUs and memory configurations from the past half a decade are good enough. Hence, consoles will hardly ever be more affordable for the same performance, just more convenient and game exclusive.

Yea lets just ignore the fact that an GPU costs as much as a console if not more.
 
Unless you just give people access to a free DL if they enter the serial number on their disk. You'd think it would be pretty simple to do, but it probably won't happen.

Also, does anyone really want to go back and play PS1 / PS2 games at this point? All the good ones have HD remakes on newer machines that you can buy for pennies.
Hell, yes, I'd love to play some classics without needing to break out the older console. A lot of classics like Fatal Frame and the original Silent Hill do not have any version that run on modern consoles. Honestly, though, almost everything from the sixth console generation and older I just emulate on my PC these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
We don't have numbers yet, but it was estimated that 50% of homes would have 4k tvs by the end of last year (we were at ~35% in 2018). It doesn't make a lot of sense to make a non 4k console, when most homes will have 4K by the time it's released and the vast majority will before the PS6 is released.

That is surprising to me. I feel no need to go 4k as of yet. I've toyed with it but the wife is against it as well. Sigh...
 
And that GPU trashes that console. What's your point?

You said the price comparison is meaningless because you can piece mail upgrade your PC where you can't your console. Yea that's fine if you have money falling out of your butt to buy new PC parts every year. (I umm... I guess I'm guilty.) But for those on a budget the console is still a better device for them.
 
You said the price comparison is meaningless because you can piece mail upgrade your PC where you can't your console. Yea that's fine if you have money falling out of your butt to buy new PC parts every year. (I umm... I guess I'm guilty.) But for those on a budget the console is still a better device for them.
1. You don't have to upgrade every year, just every console cycle to keep ahead of them.
2. You don't have to buy a card at the price of a console to get the same performance.
 
Back
Top