Sony reduces the production cost of the PS3 by 35%
Yesterday we relayed the news that Sony’s Playstation 3 sales for the holiday period were lower than expected, yet Sony was remaining optimistic. Apparently, some good news on the production front sheds some light on how the company can manage to keep its chin up amidst some pretty terrible sales performance. iSuppli has broken down the production cost of Sony’s latest PlayStation 3 and Sony has reportedly shaved 35% off the cost of the original PS3 unit. Through changes to various components and integration, Sony has cut the price of manufacturing the PS3 console from $690.23 to $448.73. By integrating components into the core silicon of the PS3, Sony has also reduced the number of parts used from 4,048 in the previous-generation 60GB model to a modest 2,820 in the current model. With further changes and improvements, iSuppli estimates that Sony could soon be breaking even – perhaps just in time for that much anticipated price cut we’ve all been waiting for.
ouch two years in and still not breaking even? Do they have data to support that people are buying enough games that there’s still a net profit for Sony?
Well, the system rocks, it’s just the games have been meh? But I’m glad I switched from xbox to PS3 this go around, even though some of those 360 games look pretty awesome.
In the other PS3 related post, I was going back and forth about the benefits of a PS3. Im not a PS3 fanboy nor a Microsoft hater, but in my opinion I feel as if the PS3 is a much better overall package and in a way future proof. Whereas the 360 is going to have to adapt to future methods of storage thus tipping the financial balances to a more even keel.
PS3 who?+whats dat?=GARBAGE
Seems like something doesn’t click between Sony and consumers. Sony has two superior products on the market – PSP and PS3. Both, however, lose by a shocking margin to 360 and DS in sales. I don’t really understand the psychology of the consumer in this case: by getting a PS3 you obtain a great (the best, some would say) gaming console, a blue-ray player and an entertainment center. All for just $100 more than the cheapest 360. If you spending that money anyway, why not add just a little more and get a lot more in return?
Meh, They also removed backward compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games in the new units. That was one of the most important things about the system to begin with, the built in library of PS1/2 games already available that would look and play so much better on this state of the art machine. Dumb move Sony!
@StormChaser, ..that’s why I hunted down a 60 gb model. Hardware backwards comparability ftw!
Posted from BGR Mobile (iPhone) in: Latitude: 34.043701, Longitude: -118.467941
You always have to wonder at what are the pundits who compare a base X360 to a base PS3 looking? Okay, granted, the base X360 is cheaper, duh, but tally up the cost of all the things that have to be purchased to bring it to an even level with a base PS3 and you’ve spent MORE money on X360. The consumer is obviously too stupid to see this and that is what MS has brilliantly captured and Sony so desperately missed, but you’d think the pundits and blogs would at least get SOME of it right.
It’s all about the games people..and xbox has got em’.
The PS3 fanboy I work with made my point for me. What was more fun GTA san an or GTAIV? The only reason he wants me to get a PS3 is for the grafics but he will admit that San An is alot more fun. I don’t see how xbox is going to have to get a new storage device when it is the PS3 games that take 5gb storage just to play them?? If you want to win a race maybe you should go for the best selling blueray player because when it is all said an done that is all it will be good for.
Its all do to the economy. You can get virtually the same graphics from a 360 than a ps3 for a fraction of the cost. The only difference is blu ray. Most people don’t own a 1080p hdtv that can take advantage of the hd. So why spend more?
@ John
The xbox 360 doesn’t need gb of storage to play games like the ps3 does. Its just used to save games and other types of media. Bioshock took a painful 10 mins to load on a ps3 while you just pop the game in and play on the 360.
This should help give Sony a better position in the console wars. And all this talk about gbs of Storage to play games and what not makes no sense. None of the systems need that to play anything. Bioshock didn’t take no load time when I played it. My PS3 has built in wifi, I don’t have to buy an adapter…it came with 60gb, no need for a storage upgrade…it came with backwards compatibility….it has an internet browser, with fullscreen HD viewing now….it has a FREE online community…it has a blu ray player (the only next-gen format left standing)…factor in all of this and compare that to the 360 and you get my point…just the monthly subscription to XBOX Live, annually, makes it more expensive than the PS3.
Freakin’ FINALLY.
Now let’s see some sales figures hahaha.
$50 annually does not make it worth it. Nor does the blu ray which most people can’t use bc they don’t have 1080p hdtv. Hate to break it to you, but sony is far behind in this war. The new consoles will be out before sony begins to make a profit.
Hey Ed, one doesn’t need to spend money on a 1080p TV to see the advantages of Blu-ray. The difference is astounding on my 720p set, anyone who CAN’T discern a difference is either sitting inapproriately too far away from their set, or they need to visit an optometrist.
All this talk about sales and the technology inside the consoles is mind numbing. What about the games? PS3 is only good for the Blu-Ray player? I can’t believe you sheep are STILL saying that. It’s been 2 years. BOTH consoles have a great lineup of games. Anyone still saying PS3 has no games to play is not a gamer or enjoys playing follow the leader too much. Everyone just loves to kick dirt on someone just because everyone else is doing it.
Consumer mindset. I can get a 360 arcade for <$200 so its a great buy until you discover all it can’t do that the higher prices versions can so you sell it off and get the elite since you have already invested in 360 software. Typical bait and switch, but it works!
I have both systems and I love playing my 360, but the PS3 is a better console. It’s the marketing and the Games. 360’s got the top tier games, that’s what I mainly play. As a media center the 360 kinda sucks compared to the capability of the PS3. Bottom line it’s the Games that matter. MS has said this openly. They went right for having the top games and it’s paid off. Sony has a very long way to go to catch up, but I hope they do for our sake. We’ll be nickel and dimed into paying $800 for the next console we want. And it won’t do anything we don’t pay for.