New Lighter PS5 Model Has Multiple Changes to the Internal Design - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 07 September 2022 / 4,060 Views
There was a report last month that an updated version of the PlayStation 5, the CFI-1200 model, has been released in Australia that makes the console lighter. The PS5 disc version at launch weighed 4.5 kg, while the latest model weighs 3.9 kg, and the PS5 Digital Edition weighed 3.9 kg, while the latest model weighs 3.4 kg.
Tech YouTuber Austin Evans has acquired the CFI-1200 model and has opened it up to discover multiple changes done to the internal design of the PS5 console.
The new PS5 model has a different motherboard that is noticeably smaller than previous models and the SSD enclosure has an improved shield. The heatsink has shrunk in size as well and is smaller than than CFI-1100 model. However, the heatsink does include a heat pipe that runs to the other side of the console. The black plastic mold has more support added to it than before.
Evans claims the CFI-1200 model uses up less power than the other models. In his test he was playing Astro’s Playroom and noted the launch PS5 model was drawing about 218 watts of electricity, while 2021's CFI-1100 model was using around 229 watts, and the new CFI-1200 model was using about 201 watts.
One negative Evans pointed out is the CMOS battery is now completely blocked by the heatsink, which would make it much harder to replace in the future if the battery were to die.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can contact the author on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
Hopefully they'll be able to make a full on PS5 Slim next year. That would be in line with when the PS3 and PS4 got Slim models.
I haven't been following the news, but I guess a node shrink should be available by that time for a slim.
I think a full on slim for 2023 is unlikely because of the engineering efforts they've been putting into these annual re-designs. There are only so many engineering resources to go around.
Meanwhile, we haven't heard/seen anything about iterative Xbox redesigns, which suggests they're putting the bulk of their engineering efforts into a major redesign.
This makes sense for both of them. Microsoft has smaller/lighter options right off the bat, so they had the luxury of putting their efforts into a major improvement that would take years to complete. Meanwhile, Sony had the larger/heavier consoles and needed to get the weight and manufacturing cost down in an iterative fashion with smaller, and more frequent, updates.
None of this guarantees that Microsoft will get "slim" consoles to market sooner, because there are variables they don't directly control (such as die size of AMD chips), but it does suggest it might happen.
This is normal for Sony.
PS4 had the 1000, 1100, 1200, all before the Slim. Each model had some internal modifications.
They're doing the same thing now with PS5, so a 6nm or 5nm Slim by next holiday wouldn't be out of the question.
Series X is already as compact as it's going to get before they start using 6nm or 5nm. Then they can shrink it down. They don't even have to though, because a PS5 slim is probably going to end up similar in overall size to the existing Series X.
Both companies will likely want to shrink to Slims as soon as possible. With inflation, it saves them money, and the cheaper they can make them, with inflation, the more money it will seem like they will be saving the consumer. I don't see the Slims being a massive price drop. $100 max at the absolute most.
Yes definitely. We saw numerous revisions to the 360 within each form factor, in addition to several form factors as well. And this is nothing new. For example, the Commodore 64 went through countless revisions as they cost-reduced its production again, and again, and again.
But just as Sony has done three major versions of the PS5 without doing a slim yet, Microsoft could have done some cost reduced and/or lighter weight Xbox Series X models by now. If they have, we haven't heard about it.
Frequent minor revisions soaks up your engineering talent's time. So my theory is that Microsoft is putting its engineering efforts into major revisions, rather than annual minor revisions. Perhaps that's a slim of the existing Series X. Perhaps it's a slim of a Series X without an optical drive. Perhaps it's a Series S with an optical drive. Who knows. :)
So PS4 Slim wasn't a major revision, or the Pro? The PS5 Slim revision or Pro won't be a major revision?
The reason MS hasn't done it isn't because they're saving up or focusing more, it's because they can't go smaller without more efficient hardware in terms of manufacturing,
The only way XB Series could go smaller now, would be to make the revisions run super hot or loud, which they don't want to do, so the only option is to wait, which means until a Slim model.
I didn't say the PS4 Slim or the Pro wasn't a major revision. Where did you get that from?
I was indicating that with the Xbox One, and now apparently the Xbox Series consoles, Microsoft seems to be putting all their engineering effort into major revisions pretty much exclusively.
I compared that to Sony that seems to be splitting their resources between a mix of minor and major revisions.
I also disagree with the certainty with which you stated that we'd see a PS5 Pro. I think that may happen, but it's not a sure thing. One of the reasons it happened with the PS4 and Xbox One was that those two systems were unusually underpowered compared to PCs of the day. The PS5 and Xbox Series X launched much closer in overall power to contemporary PCs. Also, the opportunities to cost-reduce the PS5 and Xbox Series consoles are much more limited, as die-shrinks are reducing size and/or improving yields, but are no longer saving money like they used to (sometimes actually costing MORE).
Your reasoning that Microsoft isn't doing what Sony's doing is because they can't go smaller doesn't make sense, as Sony has done so without shrinking the case themselves. The 2021 revision was a lot lighter, but the mobo wasn't any much smaller. It wasn't until the 2022 revision that the mobo shrank.
Microsoft could invest in cost reduction versions too, but I think the reason they're not is that they're splitting their resources between potential new variants, and preliminary work on eventual "slim" models. Rumour has it that they're working on a slightly more powerful Series S revision (perhaps just improved enough that it can run back-compat games with Xbox One X enhancements?), and potentially a Series X revision of some sort (perhaps a digital-only version?). It's all rumours so we don't know for sure.
You said MS isn't doing small revisions like Sony, only major ones, implying none of Sony's revisions are major,
Sony does more revisions period, minor and major, because they are a hardware company. They have plenty of professionals to do that work. MS is a software company, and doesn't have the professional manpower to do many hardware revisions.
I mentioned Pro because it's a possibility. That doesn't mean it's definitely going to be an option Sony goes with this time.
PS doesn't shrink the case until the Slim model.
The PS4 1200 series could've had a smaller case, but they didn't bother until the next big revision which was the Slim.
That's why the PS5 1200 case isn't smaller either. That's just how Sony does it.
PS5 can shrink internally fairly easily because it wasn't made super compact to begin with.
XB Series X was super compact from the start, so they can't shrink it down any further until they can use 6nm or 5nm.
I did say something like that, but in that very same message I also said this:
"But just as Sony has done three major versions of the PS5 without doing a slim yet,"
I think the "yet" suggests they WILL do major revisions too, so I disagree my message in its entirely suggests what you suggests it does. :)
To your point that Sony is a hardware company and does more revisions, I don't think that's necessary true. There were a great many revisions of the Xbox 360, for example. There were a reasonable number of Xbox One revisions too. And the engineering in the One S and the One X both got extremely good review from people doing teardowns on them, which again speaks to Microsoft having increased the robustness of their engineering, vs. the dumpster fire that was the original Xbox (way too large for what it was) and the early Xbox 360 designs (RRoD, etc.).
Similarly, Sony has done more impressive software engineering feats in recent years, including nearly matching the technical robustness of Microsoft's back-compat system.
And back to the other side of the fence, the Surface line of hardware from Microsoft also gets engineering plaudits.
So I would say Microsoft's roots are in software, and Sony's roots are in hardware, but to call either of them just or mostly a hardware (or software) company these days is overly simplistic to the point that the statement is actually inaccurate.
With regards to a Pro console, you didn't just mention a Pro as a possibility, you said:
"The PS5 Slim revision or Pro won't be a major revision?"
I would say that statement assume that both a PS5 Slim and a PS5 Pro will happen, not that they're a mere possibility. A plain reading of your statement suggests that the "or" doesn't mean it's an either/or, that the "or" means that if if the reader doesn't consider the Slim a major revision, that they could/should see the inevitable Pro as a major revision.
Fair enough if you meant something else, but I was just taking your words literally under a plain reading of them.
Agreed that the Series X|S were more compact to begin with. But specifically as regards the Series X, I have suggested a more compact Series X could be done via a version of the console that doesn't have an optical drive. That would reduce size directly (the disc drive not being there, reduced cabling) and potentially also indirectly (perhaps a smaller power supply, perhaps integrating the daughterboard into the motherboard, potentially less robust cooling required, etc.).
Sony does many revisions because it's smart. If you put all your eggs into one basket and there's a problem, like with the 360, then you're now scrambling to fix it.
If you over engineer the design at first, you're much less likely to have major problems, and can much more easily fix issues over time since you're planning on making the design more efficient year after year. PS3 is a great example of that.
XB Series so far has been reliable, which is good, but is a more risky way to bring your console to market.
Yet, if you don't have a ton of hardware people to pull from like Sony has, then you don't have much choice but to try your best and get it close enough the first time, or over engineer it and eat the losses over the years until your smaller team can slim it down.
XB 360 was a pretty bad design to begin with, which had significant problems, so the redesigns were due to poor engineering and not good engineering with efficiency follow ups.
XB One had no revisions other than the S and X from what I've seen. The XB One was fine to begin with, but was just way to big and ugly. MS put very little engineering into the case design. One S and X were big improvements to the case and size since new manufacturing was available for more efficient hardware.
PS has been much improving it's software, while MS has been much improving their hardware, I agree.
"Or Pro", meant if they make a Pro. Since a Slim is very likely, while a Pro this gen is more of a toss up.
Removing the disc drive wouldn't allow MS to make the Series X much smaller. The drive isn't huge and barely runs, so it doesn't create much heat.
The power supply along with the disc drive would allow for a worthy slim down, but then you're likely going to have a really big power brick.
The internal power supply is rather small, because it's got higher end parts and is quite efficient, so it doesn't give off a ton of heat, but that makes the power supply much more expensive.
Once it's outside the case, in a brick form, there's little reason not to use cheaper less efficient parts, which saves a bunch of money, but leaves you with a bigger hotter XB 360 size power supply.
I don't think MS wants to do that because it's seen as taking the easy way out and poorer console engineering. It's certainly not as sleek if you can't easily hide the brick either.
Again, Microsoft's engineering core isn't what it was in the 360 days. They do mice, and keyboards, and Surface computers, and headsets, and, and, and...
And similarly, Sony has a robust software team that rolls out more upgrades, and faster, than they did in the PS3 days.
So I think your argument is more a statement of historical fact, less a statement of the present, and I think the fact that many of your examples date back to the 360 and PS3 is evidence of that.
I think your assessment of the Xbox One is exactly accurate, but I don't take that as proof that Microsoft has fewer engineers since they did major revisions throughout the Xbox One lifecycle.
And on the other side of the fence, Microsoft's advantage in frequency and robustness of upgrades to the system software isn't what it used to be.
Both of them have staffed up to address their past deficiencies.
Are we talking PS vs XB or Sony vs MS? PS has plenty of manpower to use itself, though could draw from Sony if it really needed. XB isn't as robust overall, but can pull from MS to cover that.
The difference being PS employees are more specialized and dedicated to console, while MS employees are much more PC oriented.
This is another reason why PS spends more time revising it's consoles so often, where as XB doesn't as often.
PS is much more important to Sony vs how XB is to MS.
I'm not aware of any engineering sharing between Microsoft's PC and Xbox engineers on the hardware side. I'm not saying there isn't, but I don't recall it coming up in any of the many interviews on this subject that I've read, for what it's worth.
I am aware of significant engineering sharing between PC and Xbox on the software side though, ironically.
You're right about PS being more important to Sony, than Xbox is to Microsoft, though. It'll be interesting to see if that changes after the Acti-Blizz purchase, actually. After you spend $70+ billion ($69 billion + legal fees and other acquisition costs), it's going to be a big deal. Yes there will be other distribution channels, but it nonetheless might increase the perceived importance of Xbox as Activision is more console-focused than, say, Bethesda.
Well you're the one who mentioned MS engineers and the 360 and how they do mice and keyboards, headsets, surface, etc. If they're not sharing resources, why would non console engineering matter at all?
I would assume MS takes things more seriously with XB now after the AB purchase, but it seemed like they were pretty serious about the XB One initially, yet they ended up taking a very different path afterwards. Only time will tell with Game Pass as to whether or not MS shifts again, succeeds, or stops subsidizing XB and lets things play out however they might.
I didn't say "MS engineers" in the context of the 360, at least not in my first post. I neither specified Microsoft engineers nor Xbox engineers in that particular comment, actually, I left it open-ended. :)
My main point was that each company had limited resources (true), and that Microsoft was focused on fewer/more significant revisions (true), and that Sony is doing smaller/more frequent revisions (also true).
Sony will come out with a slim at some point, and it will arguably be less of a departure than Microsoft's first revision (for example, Sony has already significantly shrunk the mobo for this third version of the PS5, for example!
What do you mean, subsidizing Xbox? I don't think it's an accurate statement that Microsoft has been subsidizing the Xbox product line. I think Xbox is cashflow positive.
Interestingly, it's actually impossible to know exactly how profitable Xbox is as it's lumped in with some other consumer-facing items (such as Surface) in Microsoft's financial statement. Unless you have additional information in support of your statement?
damn, the mother board is way smaller.
That's great, cause smaller is indicator of less power consumption, and that means less heat, and that means better and less expensive (to produce) hardware. Good stuff here.
The article indicates that Austin Evans' testing showed less power consumption for the new model in a head-to-head test running the same game, so it seems highly likely.
Yeah, less expensive, yet you're being charged more to buy a PS5 in nearly the entire world.......this doesn't make much sense to me imo. A lot of people are most likely going to be pretty pissed about this lol. Sony bragging last year they were no longer selling the disc based PS5 at a loss. Now they've consolidated it to where they're saving themselves money in manufacturing and they're charging more for it? All while Microsoft and especially Nintendo, with no conglomerate company backing them, won't up the prices of their consoles???
The only positive spin I can make of this is hoping that Sony is able to manufacture more PS5's from these changes.
Nintendo benefits from the lack of competition in the handheld/convertible space, so they can charge almost whatever they want. Easy for Nintendo to not raise the price to adjust for currency conversion when they're making money in every market. Microsoft not doing so, despite them probably not making money on the Series X, would be surprising.... except that they see the PR benefits to not doing so.
If I had to guess, I would say Sony has most likely worked it out so that the price increase to PS5, along with the savings on materials and shipping, should keep them in the same ballpark as they are now as to profits, or losses I guess you could say.
If inflation keeps going up, this would make sense.
I very much doubt by this time next year, that Sony will be showing far greater hardware profits vs this year. More likely to be similar.
They may have higher profits due to software and subs though, depending on how that goes.
Inflation isn't a linear thing. Not everything goes up. Food and energy are going up more. Most other things are going up less. GPU prices on the PC side of thing are going down in price, for example, so the same thing might be happening for console GPUs as factory capacity starts opening up and the supply chain normalizes. We don't know that, but it's a reasonable supposition.
I think the PS5 price increase had very little to do with inflation, and a lot to do with currency fluctuation. That's the reason why they didn't increase it in the U.S., as their currency has gone up. I don't think it has anything to do with competing with Xbox, as they also increased the price in Canada, Australia, and the UK, which are all markets the Xbox does very well in.
like I mentioned before I feel it is an opportunistic decision by Sony.
Taking exchange rates , companies usually adjust their pricing when it comes to exchange rates individually per country and the reason is because exchange rates are variable and don't rise or fall in uniform manner .
I remember when the Australian dollar was above parity with the US$ and Sony's console and game prices came down in Australia to represent the Australian dollars value at that time though not completely or as fast as when it's the other way round but the weak US$ didn't see a price increase there, so the uniform nature of this increase shows that they are using the current climate that has been described by most analyst as being short term as an opportunity to maximise profit while they can since they have stated that they no longer lose money on PS5 hardware.
I totally agree with you. It's a good decision by Sony in the short-term, since they're supply constrained.
But the PS4 didn't sell 25 million units, it's estimated to have sold 117 million (and still counting). I think they're making good short-term decisions, but bad long-term decisions. You don't get from 25 million to 117+ million by taking "L" after "L" after "L" on the public relations front, you know?
The implications of the rise are simple Sony will have an upside from an increased margin on a product that sells out and the high demand means the price rise won't have any slowdown effect, sure a small section may either further delay or even forgo a purchase but the aforementioned demand means they have no relevancy and even if they did a later price drop when stock normalises would pick most of them back up.
On the long term knowing that the decision is economically sound and not another one of Ryan's mistakes doesn't mean it wont add to the negatives surrounding his leadership especially because those decisions like the $70.00 retail pricing are specific to Sony and have come on his watch.
While I do worry about Jim's leadership the brand is strong enough that my concern isn't that we won't see a successful PS5 but that under his leadership the potential for building on the success of the PS4 will be squandered and the PS5 while being successful in it's own right will fall short of fully building on and maximising the success of the PS4
This would make some sense if we find out inflation flattens out or reverses soon. If it keeps increasing, especially for years, then Sony no doubt made the right move.
What are they supposed to do, lose out for an entire generation? Both they and MS said they weren't going to do that anymore at the start of last gen.
Just because XB screwed up big and lost out by a lot to PS4, MS has changed their minds and decided to heavily subsidize many things to make up for it with XB Series.
Sony is just sticking to their guns now because they made up for their PS3 mistakes already with PS4.
Even now it is showing signs of flattening but even if it does linger on for years my posts were never about it being a right or wrong move, lust that the fact $50. 00 hike in select countries is more about using the current climate to increase price than it is them trying to counter inflation or exchange rates , like @scrapking mentioned inflation isn't linear ,electronic components have come down in price and the PS5 manufacturing costs have actually decreased ,the decision is one of it's just to good an opportunity to pass up and I'm not saying the rise itself is wrong just that their implementation doesn't mesh with the reasons given for doing so.
For things like GPU's, they haven't dropped in price because they are widely available. They've gotten much closer to meeting demand with new GPU's, along with the used market being chalk full of GPU's. This is partially due to the crypto market cooling off, leaving many new and old cards up for grabs. That silicon isn't useful for consoles. Only PC's and mining rigs.
Nvidia also has their silicon chips made at Samsung and not TSMC, which is where the PS5 and XB Series AMD silicon chips are made. Different manufacturing and different prices.
This doesn't make it seem like Sony is just taking advantage of the situation, but following the markets as any business does.
If the situation at launch was the way it is now, do we really think both MS and Sony would've only charged $500 and not $550 or $600?
"If the situation at launch was the way it is now, do we really think both MS and Sony would've only charged $500 and not $550 or $600?"
Potentially yes, actually. Traditionally, console pricing is about hitting magic numbers for marketing. Whether they're breaking even, or losing money, is almost beside the point. They have to hit those psychological targets for mass market adoption.
And yes, I know Nvidia and AMD are different, and I know the console and PC markets are different, but a general cooling off of demand may lead to industry-wide change. Over time if not immediately.
Not quite midway into the gen for PS4 and XB One, both consoles had price hikes in many regions. I think they stayed the same price in the US like they usually do though.
XB One didn't quite hike the price as much as PS4. so they could to try and hit a more typical price instead of something more odd, which also kept the price a bit below the PS4.
$500 was the magic number to hit this gen, only because of the economics of the time. With inflation like we've had, if that was there at launch instead, $550 wouldn't have seemed too much based on everything else being so much more expensive.
The PS4 launched in late 2013, and by late 2015 had received its first official price cut. So if they received price adjustments in some reasons "Not quite midway into the gen", that would presumably be late-2016, give or take, as it was a 7 year-gen? If so, they were after the first official price cut, unlike this.
The PS4 did get a price increase in Canada in 2014, but that was due to a massive drop in the Canadian dollar leading up to that. So I agree with you that currency exchange adjustments are not without precedent. But the scope of this price adjustment is massive, almost every country but the U.S. So this is something new and unfamiliar, I've not seen anything like it, so early in a gen, and so broad in scope.
How many other countries had considerable economic changes during PS4?
If Sony only changed pricing where it made economic sense, then that's just business as usual.
All it shows is Sony makes adjustments more often based on each economy within the worldwide economy. That's not to say they don't give some places a small break while asking a little extra from others.
Which isn't surprising because XB can easily eat any losses on anything through MS, while PS can't within Sony without really upsetting shareholders since PS is such an important chunk of the pie.
Everything you say makes perfect sense. My point, however, is that this particular move (so many countries, and around the same time as a new and presumably cheaper to manufacture model comes out, and after announcing the PS5 was already being sold at a profit) understandably got a lot of bad PR. Like, really bad PR. So they have gained more profit in the short-term since they're supply constrained, but in the long-term it might hurt the gaming unit's profitability and make it harder for them to scale from 25 million units to 117+ million units.
So in this case, I think everything you say is true, and everything I'm saying is also true. :)
I wouldn't say the inflation hike PR was that bad.
Fortnite was much worse PR, and that didn't hurt PS4 all that much.
This could hurt PS5 sales a bit, but with the shortages continuing, just getting a console is still going to overshadow a slight cost difference for most.
Cheaper to make but more expensive to buy.
Does smaller mean better though? Haha
Does smaller mean better though? Haha
well changes to the internal design, reduce of heatsink, less consumption, etc are obvious for a revision that reduced weight.
Essay Pro