By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mummelmann on 31 January 2013
Edit Thread
Cyborg13B said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
Cyborg13B said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
oni-link said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
yea it would be stupid to cut the price when ninty isn't making any money on them.


I know but with 2GB of RAM, a new ppc750 with GX and PWR7 hybrid, and e6760 I doubt that Nintendo is losing much; esp with the Deluxe model.


i also think they would sale enough software to cover it anyway.

You're both wrong.  Nintendo has been selling Wii U at over $100+ profit since launch, as given by these numbers:

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/18785-rumor-wii-u-parts-cost-around-180-will-retail-for-no-less-than-300/

The same applies for 3DS of course. 

Nintendo said theey make profit when a system is sold with a game, so i'm not wrong.

But they were lying.  I believe those rumoured specifications - they look realistic.  No way Wii U costs $300+ to make, when the Playstation 3 costs $220 or so, and has far more expensive parts, including a hard-drive (which Wii U doesn't have).  Wii U only looks about as powerful as Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 - which is not powerful at all - but in a different zone.  A triple-core PowerPC 750 - dirt cheap.  2 GB of RAM clocked at 17 GB/s - dirt cheap.  Not a particularly powerful system.  32 MB of EDRAM - very cheap as well - basically just regular DRAM in price.  

 

 

 


The main cost for the PS3 at launch was Blu-ray related parts and the Cell. The PS3's processor, RAM and GPU are basically free now and harddrives are dirt cheap, internal storage regular spin discs in particular.

The Wii U's processor is more expensive and even if the RAM is cheap, there's more of it and its a tad more advanced, same goes for the GPU. The tablet is pricy to produce and likely makes up around 1/3 of the total production cost and SSD drives, which the Wii U uses, are really, really expensive compared to regular drives, even with smaller storage space. Where did you hear that the Wii U doesn't have a harddrive anyway? That is blatantly false. The cheapest SSD I can buy here costs about 73$ and has 30GB of storage while, for the same price I can easily get a 500GB Seagate Barracuda drive.

To claim that a system with specs from 2005-2006 has "far more expensive parts" than a console released two months ago seems strange. The PS3 and 360 are really cheap to produce now, the initial cost of producing the Cell processor went down a whole lot since launch and they cost very little to manufacture now, same goes for Blu-ray parts, they're practically free compared to 2005.

And, why on earth would Nintendo lie about production cost? Yeah, they're just gonna claim losses for shits and giggles, its not like investors, press and consumers will care about that. I'm afraid that's not how business works. The tablet controller was a massive mistake on Nintendo's part and their use of SSD drives is negated by horrible software optimization (the massive speed advantage is the very reason they sell SSD drives at this point) and, presumably, poor buses and transfer cabling, causing yet another needless high cost.