[techradar] AMD on the PS4: We gave it the hardware Nvidia couldn't

[Rollo]

288 million if they sell only 5 million cpu for consols this year

Source? And $288m revenue or profit?

[zalbard]

What's more unclear is why "xtreme system" users care what's in consoles as consoles are the opposite of "xtreme systems". Consoles are more like "feeble systems".

Because it largely determines what kind of graphics we get in PC games in the next 5-8 years or more.

[ZenEffect]

288 million isnt that much money in the big scheme of things. they need to pull that in 2 quarters... and if they did and smartly re-invested it within themselves.... things would get really interesting.

[Ace123]

If you actually believe those graphs and charts and ex employee stories you fell for it. A company can make numbers say whatever they want. A company I worked for for one week at the end of the year transferred 100 employees into the stock room so on paper it looked like half as many people did twice as much work and they could report a much higher business health to the parent company. There is absolutely no way an electronics company like Sony is going to build any piece of plastic and circuit board that's going to cost THEM 500 bucks. Think of the computer you could build for 500 bucks if you could get all the parts at expertly negotiated prices straight from the oem in large numbers. Think about how much retail edge members get processors for, and intel still isn't losing there

[ilkkahy]

Source? And $288m revenue or profit?

I believe its just revenue. If you think about it this kind of technology company has to cover all the needed R&D and other costs before they are making profit. They would be shooting themselves in the leg if they just think about manufacturing cost and selling price.

[phantomferrari]

No company would ever sale any product at a loss. That's bs. You make a 100,000 of the same board with the same processor and the same power supply, and tell me you can't make it for less than a couple hundred bucks a console. This is the same marketing hype that AT&T uses when they roll you into a brand new upgraded iPhone 5 for 200 bucks and a 2 year agreement. The damn phone didn't even cost them 200 bucks.

Companies sell products for a lost more often than you think. A recent example would be the kindle. Granted it isnt much of a lost but a lost none the less. They do it knowing full well theyll make up for it with sales of apps, etc. Sony for a while sold the ps3 fora pretty big lost in the beginning. That was mostly because blu ray drives back then were stupidly expensive

[LordEC911]

I believe its just revenue. If you think about it this kind of technology company has to cover all the needed R&D and other costs before they are making profit. They would be shooting themselves in the leg if they just think about manufacturing cost and selling price.

Well too bad that's not how these contracts work...

[Tenknics]

Ace I'm sorry but you're just wrong.

It's pretty common knowledge that Sony sold PS3's for a loss. Add up the component costs of what THEY paid and it was greater than what THEY sold it for at retail. When you PAY more for something than what you SELL it for, that equals a LOSS.

Countless tech and gaming websites/media have reported on it and even Sony themselves have openly admitted to it.

But no, because you say so it didnt happen. Gotcha

[yojimbo197]

Companies sell products for a lost more often than you think. A recent example would be the kindle. Granted it isnt much of a lost but a lost none the less. They do it knowing full well theyll make up for it with sales of apps, etc. Sony for a while sold the ps3 fora pretty big lost in the beginning. That was mostly because blu ray drives back then were stupidly expensive

Seeing as Sony is/was one of the patent holders and part of the consortium for Blu-Ray, I doubt they lost as much as you think. Even if they did, I have absolutely no sympathy for them, as they have extracted exorbitant fees for players, readers, and blu-ray media, as well as pressing BR titles, besides the patent litigation and squeezing HD-DVD out of the market.

[Olivon]

288 million if they sell only 5 million cpu for consols this year

Wow ! Near 60$ profit per CPU

I'm not even sure AMD will sell 8-core Jaguar this price

[tajoh111]

288 million if they sell only 5 million cpu for consols this year

Something tells me that the profit margins aren't that high. Consoles makers are less willing to take a big loss this generation which makers margins thinner. Neither sony nor microsoft are expecting a PS2 like success to recoup costs.

The stock price would also be alot higher if they were adding this much net profit to their financial statements. Having the wii and xbox 360 in their pocket never made them this much net profit. And the CEO of AMD already said they want to turn AMD into a profitable company while generating only 1.2 billion a quarter in revenue in the future, the last quarterly report. 288 million dollars net profit from the console deal, means gigantically higher revenue from the console deal. That would mean that 1.2 billion number would have mean the rest of the company would be crazy downsizing.

And 10 million, even 20 million chips could be sold in a year when combining both consoles. So over a billion dollars in net profit? I highly doubt that.

[Manicdan]

has any article looked at the released hardware specs of the PS4 to do a calculated estimated cost?
i think they could keep costs just under $300, and sell for $300-400.

[Caparroz]

You must take into acount boxing, shipping, deals with retailers, marketing... well, you get the picture. That's LOTS of money, specially marketing. It's not like every costumer go to a Foxconn assembly line or wherever, pay $500 for a console and drive home to play it.

[phantomferrari]

Seeing as Sony is/was one of the patent holders and part of the consortium for Blu-Ray, I doubt they lost as much as you think. Even if they did, I have absolutely no sympathy for them, as they have extracted exorbitant fees for players, readers, and blu-ray media, as well as pressing BR titles, besides the patent litigation and squeezing HD-DVD out of the market.

the reason they lost so much money making the first playstations was the manufacturing of the blu ray laser. and as for them extracting money from players, readers, etc. tell me one company that doesnt capitalize on a technology of theirs if its successful. most companies just want profit and will do next to anything to get it. its the way of the world

[Piledriver]

What's more unclear is why "xtreme system" users care what's in consoles as consoles are the opposite of "xtreme systems". Consoles are more like "feeble systems".

It's also pretty clear that NVIDIA PR will say that whatever AMD is doing is the wrong path, and AMD PR will say whatever NVIDIA is doing is the wrong path. Fans of both will echo these sentiments.

What's pretty clear, its who is not on the wrong path, the one that got the contracts. Pretty pretty clear.

[Andrew LB]

Seeing as Sony is/was one of the patent holders and part of the consortium for Blu-Ray, I doubt they lost as much as you think. Even if they did, I have absolutely no sympathy for them, as they have extracted exorbitant fees for players, readers, and blu-ray media, as well as pressing BR titles, besides the patent litigation and squeezing HD-DVD out of the market.

The manufacture of each PS3 60gb cost Sony $840 and as we all know, the system sold for $599 for quite a long time. That's a loss of $240 on EACH console. Ouch.

[Aberration]

Yeah its called price shifting. They may take a loss on the PS3, only because they have calculated an even profit on licenses and such.

[G.Foyle]

I thought "the console loss" was due to enormous R&D costs, not per unit manufacturing cost. It's extremely unbelievable that manufacturing anything like PS3 would cost 840$ if you don't count fabrication ramp up, software and hardware R&D and such things.

[Aberration]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multime..._Analysis.html

[kromosto]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multime..._Analysis.html

isn't this shows us why they choose this level components for ps4...

[Manicdan]

66$ for a blue ray drive? are they joking.
the COST should be like 20-30$

and the biggest thing i dont see mentioned is the currency conversions. the yen vs dollar has been all over the place in the last decade.

[Aberration]

I think the numbers are inflated, but since people were discussing them...

[tajoh111]

Estimated APU price $40.47

http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/ad...e-it-121836/2/

Adds significants amounts to AMD's revenue but I wonder about net profit. Very low margins at this price point.

This is the first figure I have read on how much these APU's cost.

If AMD is selling them for $40.47 that's simply dirt cheap. I want a HTPC chip that cheap from AMD lol. Screw the Ouya. $40 bucks get me a midrange GPU and a low end CPU. If that was the price, no wonder Nvidia didn't want to do business with the console makers. They are selling tegra 3 for 20-25 bucks, this console APU seems like a much better thing to put into a console for 40 bucks.

[behrouz]

For console sales volume I use the historical sales figures for Xbox 360 and Playstation3 of 75.9 and 77 million, respectively. This works out to an average sales rate of about 10 million units/year for each platform, and then I assume that sales of the next generation consoles will do at least as well. With an average APU selling price of $40, this could contribute about $800 million a year in revenue. Given a projected further decline in PC sales, this could add as much as 30% to AMD's Computing Solutions revenues.

More on Link

tajoh111 , Given this hypothetical revenue, it's a good move to get more resource and plays an important role in game console(despite low margins).

[paulbagz]

+1 tajoh111

Gives me hope for future desktop APUs lol, desperately want to build a mini LAN rig with new gear.

-PB