Sony PS5 buyers and owners

Edwin-S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,492
I think it is kind of bizarre to go with an odd ball internal storage of 825GB. How hard would it have been to just put in a 1TB SSD?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hildegard

Edwin-S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,492
I really enjoyed the presentation by Mark Cerny, thanks @Sam Posten for sharing.

I have heard rumors that they are struggling with the thermal load of the PS5 in its current form factor, though Cerny apparently refuted that. I think the fact they've gone constant frequency instead of constant power speaks to a thermal challenge. I hope i'm wrong.

Microsoft was extremely wise in adopting a mini-ITX form factor for the XBox One X
In the article, linked to by Sam Posten, Cerny states the exact opposite of what you stated. He said they were going to run at essentially constant power and vary the frequency based on CPU and GPU load.
 

Dave Upton

Audiophile
Owner
Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
3,733
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
Dave Upton
In the article, linked to by Sam Posten, Cerny states the exact opposite of what you stated. He said they were going to run at essentially constant power and vary the frequency based on CPU and GPU load.
I managed to get my response mixed up, you're right. The other portion of my response however holds true, doing something like this is very atypical in the world of computing, as normally to engage boosted clocks you would be able to spike power slightly. The fact that they don't/ won't do that tells me they are thermally limited and cannot increase voltage.
 

Edwin-S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,492
I managed to get my response mixed up, you're right. The other portion of my response however holds true, doing something like this is very atypical in the world of computing, as normally to engage boosted clocks you would be able to spike power slightly. The fact that they don't/ won't do that tells me they are thermally limited and cannot increase voltage.
That makes sense. Like you state, boosting clock speed by increasing voltage is normally how it is done, so dropping frequency based on intensity of the task being done does seem unusual. It may point out a thermal load limitation. On the other hand, dropping frequency on less intensive tasks might be thinking out of the box. Why boost clock speed with its disadvantages of increased thermal load and wear and tear on the processors if it isn't required. You drop the frequency so the machine runs cooler most of the time and only go up to the maximum for the most intensive tasks.
 

Dave Upton

Audiophile
Owner
Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
3,733
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
Dave Upton
What's unusual here is that lowering voltage dynamically is very typical behavior for any processor. If you look at the V-Core on any CPU or GPU, it goes down as the frequency does ultimately saving power and lowering thermal load. I think that the Sony team is creatively trying to explain away some sort of engineering limitation, because this must be related to stability of one of the components - That's the only reason I can think of to keep voltage elevated even when clocks are reduced.
 

Edwin-S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,492
The big issue I see with XBox One X is the form factor is awkward and ugly. The thing looks huge. It sure wouldn't fit vertically in any of my racks I know it can be laid down horizontally, but the design looks like its optimal position is vertical . Did I mention that it is f'ing ugly? ;)
 

Dave Upton

Audiophile
Owner
Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
3,733
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
Dave Upton
The big issue I see with XBox One X is the form factor is awkward and ugly. The thing looks huge. It sure wouldn't fit vertically in any of my racks I know it can be laid down horizontally, but the design looks like its optimal position is vertical . Did I mention that it is f'ing ugly? ;)
Microsoft could have taken a note out of the broader PC market and build something like the Sentry 2.0 form factor, but the cube's mini ITX layout will be more thermally efficient. I think Microsoft is just finally trying to get RROD/thermal failures behind them once and for all. The vast majority of consumers do not have a rack like us so they are probably going to be just fine setting the Xbox on top of a cabinet or shelf
 

Sam Posten

Moderator
Premium
HW Reviewer
Joined
Oct 30, 1997
Messages
29,290
Location
Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
Real Name
Sam Posten
The big issue I see with XBox One X is the form factor is awkward and ugly. The thing looks huge. It sure wouldn't fit vertically in any of my racks I know it can be laid down horizontally, but the design looks like its optimal position is vertical . Did I mention that it is f'ing ugly? ;)
Personally i think it looks awesome, but honestly nobody really cares what it looks like. All that matters are the games, the services, and where your friends are.
 

Edwin-S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,492
Personally i think it looks awesome, but honestly nobody really cares what it looks like. All that matters are the games, the services, and where your friends are.
True enough. That is why I think that the PS5 will dominate regardless of the final specs of each machine. Sony's PlayStation just has a better and deeper catalog of games than the XBOX, especially the most recent generation. I bought an XBOX One and I cannot even remember the last time I turned it on. There has been nothing on the XBOX system that I have particularly wanted to play. I only bought it because, at the time, the first new Tomb Raider game was an exclusive.

My PS4 is the most used box when it comes to games. There was just more on that platform that interested me. However, it is not like I have any brand loyalty. I generally end up eventually buying all of these game systems if something exclusive to each system appeals to me.
 

LeoA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
3,108
Location
North Country
Real Name
Leo
I'm surprised to hear someone say that. To me, the Xbox One and Playstation 4 libraries are incredibly similar. The 3rd party libraries especially are almost 1:1 and look and perform very similarly.

The variances mostly come in the 1st and 2nd party releases that represent just a fraction of each console's lineup. And even there, I feel like they're both in sold shape although their strengths rest in different areas.

The one big difference in my eyes has been the limited backwards compatibility that the Xbox One saw introduced. While almost non-existent with original Xbox games, it did lead to many great Xbox 360 releases joining the XB1 family.
 

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,373
I imagine a lot of the PS5 design is focused on trying to optimize the things that will make the next-gen feel great (instant loading, massive game worlds that aren't designed to hide technical limits, streaming services) while keeping the price down (825 GB drive, the power/CPU frequency stuff). While 4K and HDR adoption is more widespread right now, I think most consumers will be happy when Spider-man 2 has no loading screens but won't even notice if a game is being rendered slightly under 4K resolution or only 30 fps.

Microsoft is going the other way, pushing the technology in the box but probably at a higher price point. However, they've done a better job at marketing Game Pass (PS Now is a great deal but they don't market it enough) and the rumors of an Xbox Series S suggest that MS sees it as a mid-tier Game Pass box. I'm really curious if each company is going to have multiple SKUs this fall and what the end result will look like on each platform. My main concern (well, "concern") is that 3rd party developers will limit their games based on the weakest platform, so the PS5 will probably have faster loading times but the Xbox Series X can push more pixels but what would games look like on both?

The Xbox brand has never really been that strong compared to Sony or Nintendo (ignoring the Wii U, of course). The 360 did really well against the PS3 because it had Call of Duty 4 exclusively for a year and launched a year before the PS3, but the PS3 ended up selling more units overall. This gen has been pretty bad for Xbox, but MS made a ton of money because of Game Pass. I actually worry a bit that the studios MS is buying up will end up kind of withering on the vine because they're stuck with the Xbox platform. Look at the reception and sales of a given Rare or Lionhead game compared to Uncharted or Spider-man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hildegard

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,373
Console - unit sales - software attach rate
Xbox - 24 m - 6.88
Xbox 360 - 84 m - 7.5
Xbox One - 47 m - 6.55

PlayStation - 103 m - 9.43
PlayStation 2 - 155 m - 9.81
PlayStation 3 -87 m - 8.92
PlayStation 4 - 109 m - 8.76
PSP - 82 m - 3.88
PS Vita - 13 m - 10

Nintendo GameCube - 22 m - 9.59
Nintendo Wii - 102 m - 9.05
Nintendo Wii U - 14 m - 7.52
Nintendo Switch - 53 m - 3.88
Nintendo DS - 154 m - 6.16
Nintendo 3DS - 76 m - 5.03

(Not all numbers are 100% accurate, they're from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_game_consoles and https://vgsales.fandom.com/wiki/Software_tie_ratio)

Nintendo's history is all over the place but they're basically the only ones doing handheld stuff seriously so they're constantly afloat from that and their brand is really strong. Sony generally does well everywhere and their biggest console failure was the PS3, which still outsold the Xbox 360, which was Microsoft's strongest console. And again, the 360 sold so well because the PS3 came out a year later and the 360 had Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare exclusive content for long time.

Further, the attach rate for MS consoles is lower than the competition, generally. This could be due to exclusive content from 3rd party games that Sony buys or it could be that one console or another has more exclusives that sell well. For instance, Spider-man on PS4 sold incredibly well and I don't know if many MS franchises could match that.

So maybe the Xbox brand isn't weak but it's definitely not as strong as it's competition. It's also basically dead in Japan.
 

LeoA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
3,108
Location
North Country
Real Name
Leo
I do not agree with laying the success of the Xbox 360 on launching in the fall of 2005 instead of 2006. And I most definitely do not agree that a 2 or 3 week period of exclusivity for some trivial map packs played any role whatsoever.

As any Xbox 360 fan that was there back in 2006/2007 knows, a disaster happened. Systems were starting to break after just a few months of use. This was a huge mess for Microsoft, generated a lot of negative publicity, and surely pushed a lot of people that hadn't jumped in at launch to wait for the PS3.

I'm confident any advantage Microsoft gained by that lead start was quickly more than negated by the lack of reliability in that first version of the Xbox 360 hardware. Microsoft did so well because they eventually ended up handling the system well and were able to move past the RROD debacle.

Multiplatform releases were regularly superior on the 360, Microsoft routinely topped Sony in North America throughout that generation, Microsoft had solid exclusives, Xbox Live was a huge success, and Microsoft was able to keep their system viable right into the early months of the XB1's life, years after the Wii was viewed as dead and buried by most.

Sony allegedly eventually topped the 360, but it was a late dethroning and the margin was small (The last MS sales data was from early in the XB1's lifespan, where as Sony kept supplying numbers for years afterwards as sales wound down; So nobody in the general public actually even knows if Sony "won" against the 360 in the end).

If Sony won, it was thanks to the 360 standing no chance in Japan and the preference in PAL countries for Sony's hardware. The PS3 never won the race here in North America. Microsoft's Xbox 360 remained front and center throughout.

And where software sales are concerned after the launch of this current generation that's preparing to close, at least here in North America, the 360 has won that race handily. Thanks in part to backwards compatibility, one can walk into any Target or Walmart pre-pandemic and see a dozen different 360 games to select from thanks to publishers routinely reprinting games since demand remains.

If there's any PS3 content left, it's a mere game or two.
 
Last edited:

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,373
The PS3 sold more consoles and more units of software worldwide per console than the 360 did, despite the 360 having a 1 year head start, a lower price, and 3rd-party timed exclusive content (and no, it wasn't exclusive maps for a few weeks, it was more like exclusive third party games or modes for 6-12 months). The fact that the PS3 overcame a 12-month deficit to sell more than the 360 before the PS4/XBO released is actually really impressive. If you compare the monthly sales of each console starting from their individual launches, the PS3 sold higher numbers overall than the 360 for pretty much it's entire lifespan.

Granted that Xbox is not popular at all in Japan, it's often overstated how big of a market Japan really is. It's a huge cultural piece of gaming but the Wii, which was a massive success, sold under 13 million units in Japan. Xbox 360 sold 1.6M units in Japan and 25.4M units in the US. The PS3 sold 6.3M units in Japan and 22.9M units in the US. (Numbers from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_sales and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3 which are 6-7 years old). It really looks like most of the margin between the two consoles was made up by Europe, where the PS3 sold about 12M+ units more than the 360.

I'm not sure there was a lot of third parties re-printing 360 games to try and take advantage of Xbox One BC. I'd imagine it's more likely that those were leftover unsold units. And you could still find PS3 games on store shelves, too.
 

Sam Posten

Moderator
Premium
HW Reviewer
Joined
Oct 30, 1997
Messages
29,290
Location
Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
Real Name
Sam Posten
Seriously you are saying a console line that has sold ~200 million units has a bad brand. Did PS sell more? Absolutely. But does that make it a tarnished brand? F no. Saying that says more about you than it does any failure on the Xbox line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hildegard and LeoA

LeoA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
3,108
Location
North Country
Real Name
Leo
3rd-party timed exclusive content (and no, it wasn't exclusive maps for a few weeks, it was more like exclusive third party games or modes for 6-12 months).
Then it wasn't Call of Duty 4 like you said earlier. That wasn't exclusive to the 360 for 12 months. It saw a simultaneous PS3 release. All that was exclusive was map packs for 2-3 weeks.

The PS3 sold more consoles
Microsoft stopped reporting sales figures after June 2014. At that time the Xbox 360 officially stood at 84 million.

The closest official sales data from Sony in that time frame was 80 million units as of November 2013. They then next updated it in April 2015 when the PS3 was announced as having sold 87 million units.

Nobody outside of Microsoft knows exactly how many units the 360 moved after June 2014. Sony very well may have "won", but it has never been confirmed. And if they did beat the 360's install base, it happened only at the 11th hour, months after the release of their successors.

And no matter who the victor was in the end, it was a slim victory over the other. I would not be shocked to learn that they lost or won by less than 1 million units if MS ever releases final sales figures someday.

At the end of the day, MS did well with the 360. So let's not rewrite history.

I'm not sure there was a lot of third parties re-printing 360 games to try and take advantage of Xbox One BC. I'd imagine it's more likely that those were leftover unsold units.
As one that has been paying attention to these and often picking them up, I can safely state that you'd be wrong. :)

These are clearly reissues and typically advertise right on the case insert that they're backwards compatible (Not a sticker applied after the fact to the shrinkwrap). Some even have been reissued in Xbox One style cases to drive home the point.

And at least one, Doom 3 BFG Edition, even came with a brand new extra (A poster) that wasn't included with the original printing.
 
Last edited:

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,373
The Xbox brand has sold a lot of consoles and made a lot of money...over the course of 20ish years. It also took MS nearly a decade to turn a profit on the entire enterprise. Compared to the strength of Nintendo and Sony, the Xbox brand is much weaker. I do think that the strength of Game Pass and the implication that all future Xbox consoles will support all past Xbox games are very good for them but the brand is absolutely the weakest going into the next gen in the fall.

MS sold about 150-160M consoles in the same period of time that it took Sony to sell about 350M and Nintendo to sell about 190M (this is excluding handheld consoles; Nintendo sold over 230M handhelds in that time). But I think the biggest sign of strength for Sony/Nintendo is the software attach rate being much higher than Xbox.

Leo is right that MS doesn't advertise the number of consoles they have sold anymore and hasn't announced updated 360 numbers in years. Why is that? Because they were selling less than their competitors. The fact that Sony sold more PS3s than MS sold 360s despite the 360 being on the market for an entire additional year is bad for MS. The 360 dropped it's price when the PS3 came out (and remember it was like $600 at launch) and the PS3 STILL sold more units over it's lifetime with a higher software attach rate.

As for the reissues of BC 360 games for Xbox One, looking at the specific example of Doom 3 BFG Edition...that wasn't a reissue. It was a port: https://www.windowscentral.com/doom-doom-ii-and-doom-3-launch-xbox-one Unless you're referring to a specific different version. If it comes in an Xbox One disc case then it's an Xbox One game.

Call of Duty 4 released in November 2007. It sold 1.5M copies on 360 and about 450k on PS3 in the first month. Yes it had maps exclusive to the 360 for only 3 weeks but the deal of "content on 360 first" lasted for years for the franchise. And those maps sold for millions of dollars on the 360 before they were available on the PS3. Remember that this was back when the CoD franchise was HUGE and having exclusive content for any period of time was a huge boon for the platform. The 360 had a large sales lead over the PS3 at that time due to having launched an entire year earlier.

The fact that the Xbox One has sold so few units, relatively, while the PS4 was been such a big success and the Switch is taking off tells me that MS' brand is really weak.
 

LeoA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
3,108
Location
North Country
Real Name
Leo
Leo is right that MS doesn't advertise the number of consoles they have sold anymore and hasn't announced updated 360 numbers in years. Why is that?

Because they were selling less than their competitors. The fact that Sony sold more PS3s than MS sold 360s despite the 360 being on the market for an entire additional year is bad for MS.
Microsoft stopped publishing sales figures after the summer of 2014 not because the 360 wasn't selling well, but because the Xbox One was selling poorly.

I think we all know the story of how Microsoft fumbled the ball in the months leading up to and immediately after the release of the Xbox One, so I won't go there.

But after coming to their senses, I will say they've done a nice job of trying to attract gamers to return. Heck, I even now own a Xbox One. If you had asked me back about June 2013 or so if I'd ever buy this system, I'd of been 100% confident that I wouldn't.

In particular, their attempt to kill physical media didn't go over well with me. But with their fan friendly backwards compatibility initiative, I've forgiven them.

As for the reissues of BC 360 games for Xbox One, looking at the specific example of Doom 3 BFG Edition...that wasn't a reissue. It was a port:
No, you're confused. I was discussing reprintings of games that had already appeared on the 360 earlier in life.

Doom.jpg


This was a 2017 reissue of a 2012 Xbox 360 game. A lot of backwards compatible titles such as this have seen physical reissues on the 360, often advertising that they're XB1 compatible.

PS3 on the other hand has seen very little in this area the past five years.

Call of Duty 4 released in November 2007. It sold 1.5M copies on 360 and about 450k on PS3 in the first month. Yes it had maps exclusive to the 360 for only 3 weeks but the deal of "content on 360 first" lasted for years for the franchise. And those maps sold for millions of dollars on the 360 before they were available on the PS3. Remember that this was back when the CoD franchise was HUGE and having exclusive content for any period of time was a huge boon for the platform.
Yeah, but earlier one of your big reasons for why the 360 did so well early on was "because it had Call of Duty 4 exclusively for a year". So I wanted to correct that misconception.
 
Last edited:

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
345,480
Messages
4,742,969
Members
141,462
Latest member
Niloc