20GB PlayStation 3, RIP: 2006 - 2007

Damn, was that ever fast? After much hemming and hawing about whether production of the 20GB PlayStation 3 would continue, Sony officially dropped the axe on it today. Apparently sales were 10 to friggin 1 between the high and low end models, so it's not like we can really bust 'em on their decision to cut the fat. Still, just goes to show that no matter how well you think you're going to do in the marketplace, there's always an x factor sure to trip you up -- we genuinely thought the 20GB PS3 would make the astronomically priced console at least a little more accessible. So, now that we've ticked that console off the list, it looks like the price differential between the Premium 360 and PS3 is a full $200 (until the Elite lands), while you're gonna pay $350 more than a Wii. We'll miss ya, 20GB PS3 -- not too much, though.

[LiQuiD_FuSioN @ Apr 11th 2007 6:05PM]

Umm.. I **almost** bought a 20GB PS3 during the whole craze. Back when the systems were scarce for a while, I saw this model on the floor and immediately ran off with it. That's until I asked if there was a 60GB model in the back at the store, so I exchanged the 20GB for that one because I totally forgot that it had more features.

Your comment "Seriously, did anyone buy these?" kinda got me miffed because, really, why does it matter who bought it? Sales will speak for themselves, but that doesn't mean it's not worth anything. Some people out there want a choice!

Same thing with others gasping with disbelief that people still own 4:3 SDTVs. Hell yeah, I'm proud of my 30" Panasonic TV! When I'm ready to upgrade and when I see that all HDTVs support the latest technology, I will take the plunge. Not everyone has thousands of dollars to waste, hundreds yes, but I'm not gonna let anyone pressure me because a few fanboys said somethin' dumb. ;)

/end vent

[Dan @ Apr 11th 2007 6:05PM]

That $200 you save buying the 360 will be spent on paying for online gaming, and more.

When you buy a PS3 the on-line functionality is "free".

Nobody EVER mentions this.

[NotNormal23224 @ Apr 11th 2007 6:18PM]

I did, I plugged it in hardwire ethernet since my router was right there on the shelf and used the extra money to buy a harddrive twice the size of the high-end model. All in all the 20GB was a better buy over the 60GB version unless you needed WiFi or didn't know that the PS3 can read memory sticks from your PSP and cards from your camera via USB.

[wobbs @ Apr 25th 2007 11:50AM]

re the 30 tv - nop shame mate why pay £1000 ( for a its not realy hd spec but you are all to stupid to relaise HD compatible - POS that displays normal TV worse than my 11 year old model - once the moron marketing peeple at Sony toshiba etc realise not everyone wants a 40" tv they may start to produce 32" FULL HD TV insted of all this HD ready bo77ocks - as in 1920 x 1080 P then there may be a better take up FFS


should be fun when the people decrying others for not jumping on the HD compatible TV bandwagon are winging as the £1000 UK Tv they bought 12 months ago wont show blu ray in ALL its glory

[Morder @ Apr 11th 2007 5:26PM]

It was 10 to 1 because they didn't produce them.

[NotNormal23224 @ Apr 11th 2007 6:11PM]

They produced some, I own one, but they didn't keep filling orders for them so of course if you ship an additional 9 orders of the 60GB to the 1 order of the 20GB you sell 10 to 1.

[kyle @ Apr 12th 2007 2:44PM]

PS3 $200 more for 60gb than the Xbox360??? Did we forget that the 360 can not play any HD content without the external HD-DVD drive? PS3 can do this out of the box without any extra $$$ being spent!!! How we lose sight... I would say cost ends up being exactly the same...

[Stephan @ Apr 11th 2007 5:26PM]

So I am waiting for the CEO to come and say "This proves that we are charging to little for our system."

Behind close doors "What the hell those cheap ass
American's were suppose to eat up the $500 version"

[ShortFuse @ Apr 11th 2007 5:28PM]

the problem was that lack of upgradability in the $500 version. If you got a $500, you couldn't get integrated Wi-Fi or multiformat media support. It's not the like xbox360's core/premium difference. Built-in WiFi vs no Built-in WiFi EVER is a big difference.

[NotNormal23224 @ Apr 11th 2007 6:13PM]

I didn't need WiFi or the memory card reader (wich you can add via USB by the way) my router was on the shelf with my consoles and with the latest update of 1.6 I can use Remote Play feature of the PS3 with my PSP. Oh I used the extra $100 I saved to install a 120GB drive. So for folks like me the 20GB was a smarter buy.

[LongshotX @ Apr 11th 2007 9:50PM]

WiFi for gaming sucks and you know it.

[BrandonLehman @ Apr 11th 2007 5:30PM]

So instead of say... dropping to the price to help sales they destroy it completely. I'm sure it made sense for them.

$100 is hardly enough to justify the hardware difference. Had they dropped it another $100 I bet things would have been a little different. Additionally I would probably own a PS3 had that been the case.

[Chris a poo poo @ Apr 11th 2007 5:32PM]

does this mean......a loweer price for the high end model!!!
haha. i doubt it

[NomBomB @ Apr 11th 2007 5:39PM]

i was waiting for the low selling 20gig to see a price cut. i probably would have picked up a 20gig for $400, but a 60gig for $600... probably never.

[Yayaja @ Apr 11th 2007 5:40PM]

Yes! In your face Gorgak!

[Pro Kid @ Apr 11th 2007 5:50PM]

Lets not forget that SONY was taking an even bigger loss on selling those 20GB models.

[kingofwale @ Apr 11th 2007 5:53PM]

I wonder why nobody's buying those 20GB model, it makes no sense, I mean, xbox is still selling their core system WITHOUT a harddrive.

I think Sony's doing it so they can justify a price cut at the end of this year. make it 100 dollars. because there's no way they want to sell a 20GB version at 399.

[NotNormal23224 @ Apr 11th 2007 6:15PM]

No ones buying the 20GB model because practically since November no one could get anymore of them.

[Michael From The Future ! @ Apr 11th 2007 6:03PM]

I am a huge douchebag spammer: [e-mail]

[LJKelley @ Apr 11th 2007 6:22PM]

What people like you forget is that the Xbox Live system is unified and you do get what you pay for. With the PS3 there is no unified structure or friends list, each game can charge for access if they so choose.

I think this is another stupid decission from Sony. Hard core fans and those really paying attention will realize that benifits of the "Premium" model. They are always the ones that pick up a new console first with the regular consumer waiting for a while. $600 is way to high and $500 might have picked up a consumer or two that might now instead choose to buy the 360.

[Jon @ Apr 11th 2007 6:27PM]

Because your not getting an equal level of service to make an apples to apples comparison. The PS3 online options suck compared to the 360's. You don't get hardly any of the options and developers still aren't even producing many Online games for the PS3.

That's like saying My friend bought cotton candy at the fair for $2...but I can get petrified crap on a stick for FREE at the swap meet! Which would you rather have?

[Andrew Fong @ Apr 11th 2007 6:28PM]

What are you talking about? Free online functionality is brought up all the time, and the response is the same -- the 360's online functionality is superior to the PS3 and for some people at least, that's worth paying for.

[Brad @ Apr 12th 2007 8:28AM]

Nothing on planet Sony is ever free for very long. They have every intention to nickle and dime their customers to death once sales are up, just wait and see.

[ryanworrell @ Apr 12th 2007 9:30PM]

I would rather pay for online gaming actually. At least when I am paying for X-Box Live, they have an expectation to meet and there can be official administration. I played PS2 online, and honestly it was crap.

Xbox Live FTW...

[Thomas @ Apr 13th 2007 4:58AM]

Because it is lame. period.

[danman75 @ May 4th 2007 3:51AM]

"That $200 you save buying the 360 will be spent on paying for online gaming, and more.

When you buy a PS3 the on-line functionality is "free".

Nobody EVER mentions this."

No one ever mentions the free PS3 online because it is a joke. You are right however, I will eventually spend the $200 I saved on XBox Live..... In a mere 48 months the whole $200 will be all gone.

[Colours @ Apr 21st 2007 10:47PM]

well said.. I took the plunge to the 46inch Sony grand Wega... Its nice having the widescreen for some games, even though i am still in the ps2/xbox era...and its doesnt support full HD (1080p) which everyone seems to be on about these days.

No doubt the ps3 and xbox360 are the rave of the future and I cant wait to get into them.. just cant seem to justify the prices for the consoles, yet I seem to be willing to pay that and more to supe up my computer for those kickass games :P

[NeoteriX @ Apr 11th 2007 6:08PM]

It's clear that the PS3s in general are priced too high for the average consumer. The 60 GB unit is priced where the given amount of early-adopters will jump on. However, the 20GB is ostensibly priced too high for the more typical consumer Sony was hoping to lure, and there isn't enough of a difference between the two units for the early adopter to bother with the cheaper model.

[ggraves82 @ Apr 12th 2007 11:31AM]

@NeoteriX:

That was the most logical comment I've seen on Engadget in a while. My hat is off to you, sir.

I agree with your assessment. The early adopters (and the speculators) with the scratch to buy one wanted the 60GB, and the rest of us sitting on the sidelines didn't see a benefit to paying for either.

Even as a die-hard Xbox360 fan, this is bad news. Competition keeps everyone on their toes, and I certainly hope the PS3 eventually succeeds.

[KC @ Apr 11th 2007 6:12PM]

Perhaps they are going to release an even higher end PS3 with re-writable BD and more system memory?

[Ondra Soukup @ Apr 15th 2007 9:48AM]

Yup, making it more like PC business...upgrading and paying for completely new console every year or so :P

[Totalfixation @ Apr 11th 2007 6:13PM]

I am kinda surprise myself since i would assume that the elite is going to be in the same range as 20gb that they would at least keep it around to compete. But from a executive stand point i think it was a wise decision, simply because, if the elite came out. a lot of consumers may look at the hard drive factor, a 20gb PS3 for $500 vs a 120gb xbox 360 for $480, please dont bring up "but its got blu-ray". A lot of consumers are probably not familiar with it. So the Hard drive space maybe a big factor. Another factor is the sales if its 10 to 1, its better to just drop the 20GB completely and focus on 60GB. since it has a better appeal over the xbox 360 even though its a $120 more then the Xbox 360 Elite. But Sony could argue it includes a wifi, smart card reader, and i guess blu ray if it matters. That's just my opinion.

[js @ Apr 11th 2007 6:16PM]

But the PS3 has a Blu-Ray disc drive.

[August @ Apr 12th 2007 12:45AM]

Please try very hard never to post on Engadget ever again.

[Jon @ Apr 11th 2007 6:19PM]

Wow!!! I think this is the first time in the history of consoles that a manufacturer raised the price of the console after launch!

Sony is full of it. They didn't supply 20Gb versions (think Europe) so of course there were none to be bought. Of course there were only 10% of sales.

[PeterB @ Apr 11th 2007 6:20PM]

"That $200 you save buying the 360 will be spent on paying for online gaming, and more.

When you buy a PS3 the on-line functionality is "free".

Nobody EVER mentions this. "

Dog crap is free too, and you would have a hard time finding any takers.

XBLive is well worth the $50 a year. Do you honestly think if Sony ever gets its online act together they wont start charging for it?

[Pete @ Apr 11th 2007 6:35PM]

Jesus, a $600 only option is what they think they will win this console war with? The 20GB PS3 was NOT a tard pack like the Core 360. The only things it was missing was wi-fi and card readers...two things people might not even care about. The smaller HDD could easily be upgraded. Sony just made the 360 Elite a viable option...well played.

[FrankTheCrank @ Apr 11th 2007 6:38PM]

I'm glad I got mine!!!

PS3 for $499, 10 days after launch!!

YES!!!

[Anonymous @ Apr 11th 2007 6:44PM]

This fall the $500 Playstation 3 will be the same exact 60GB model and the $550 Playstation 3 package will have the new 80GB hard drive.

[MadMan @ Apr 11th 2007 7:07PM]

PLEASE .... when you compare the pricing structure of the PS3 against the 360 .... BE FAIR ... compare "apples against apples", i.e. ADD Wi-Fi to the 360 $100, HD DVD $200, not to mention the PS3's larger HD, Sony's free on-line services vs. Microsoft's "pay for play" services, though not up to Microsoft's but getting better all the time.
I think the PS3 is a bargain that will prove itself to be over time.

[Jon @ Apr 11th 2007 7:42PM]

You PS3 users obviously don't get to play online much as anyone that does knows that Gaming over wireless adds lag and is totally undesirable compared to online gaming via ethernet.

So who cares if MS is charging $100 or $1000 for the wireless adapter...I don't want Wifi on my 360. And even if I did it is by no means a killer feature.

But please enjoy your WiFi PS3 that has horrible online play, a handful of quality titles, and less options for HD (Blu-Ray the only one). With Xbox 360 you get HD-DVD and Marketplace videos and soon IPTV...or you can opt out of all of that and just enjoy the Xbox for it's primary purpose....Gaming.

Any PS3 owner should be very upset at this news. This defacto price increase will only mean slower PS3 adoption...which leads to slower 3rd party developer support for the platform and further loss of key exclusives.

[Eric Pham @ Apr 11th 2007 7:09PM]

I think the guy who mentioned this move could justify a price cut before the christmas holiday season had a good point. Lets high five that guy if it happens.

[Grant @ Apr 11th 2007 7:17PM]

I don't think the case was that they weren't selling, i think the stores wouldn't stock them to be able to sell them.
Everywhere(or at least major electronics stores like bestbuy/cc) that was ordering them would order the 60 and 20Gb at a 6:1 ratio.

Simply put, you can't buy what they're not selling.

anyone think sony would offer a smaller profit margin on these to retailers, so they order less, and to make consumers think they have choice, but then pull them for "not selling"?

[h0mi @ Apr 11th 2007 7:58PM]

I agree. They didnt sell them because they were _nowhere_ to be found. Why do people think those 60gb units were on shelves by the truck load?

So MS is the first console maker to introduce a revised console with additional features after 18 months (regardless of how trivial the new feature actually was) and Sony is the first to discontinue a model after 6 months.

[Peter @ Apr 11th 2007 7:24PM]

I call bullshit. I was keeping my eye out for 20GB model. I NEVER, EVER saw one. The reason they sold 10:1 is because that is what sony produced. No way will I buy the 60GB is just too expensive.

This is really about profit/loss margin. Sony loses more money on the 20GB model. I can't say I blame them, but they guarantee perpetual last place with only an ultra expensive console. They are screwed.

[klew @ Apr 11th 2007 7:26PM]

If Sony were to remove the hard drive and anything related to game-playing, could the former 20GB console turn into a $300-400 Blu-Ray player?

[infinitespecter @ Apr 11th 2007 7:39PM]

The 20GB PS3 was impossible to find. Some stores in my area NEVER got one. Not because they didn't order them, but because Sony never sent them. I am just glad that I got mine while I had the chance. Wifi really isn't a massive concern, as it can be added later via an external wireless bridge if necessary (like people did in the last generation), the HD is upgradeable, and the memory card slots can be replicated with my $4 USB card reader. I am just shocked that Sony killed off their cheapest (by a good margin) BluRay player.

[fermitthekrog @ Apr 11th 2007 7:58PM]

The real news here is that they sold at least 10 60GB units and 1 20GB

[August @ Apr 12th 2007 1:03AM]

That is, in all honesty, the funniest thing I have ever read on Engadget.

I was beginning to almost write off the posters here as jackass fanboys, middle schoolers, and pseudo-intellectuals, but you have restored my faith, even though it may just be temporary.

Bravo.

[Giltronic @ Apr 11th 2007 8:17PM]

this is horrible. microsoft is adding more counsoles to their lineup while sony makes people only choose one.

this is the demise of sony, they just can't keep up this console round war...