Amazon PS3 160gb $469.99 FSS

People are still better off trying to find a used 60gb w/ PS2 BC (if you can find one) and then upgrading the HDD IMHO. Of course, if someone wants to by spend $469 for a PS3 and $100 for a PS2, well, my guess is some folks are...
 
I would steer clear of 60gb because it's not as reliable and has older chips. I think those purchasing a 160gb PS3 likely already have a PS2.
 
Aren't the older PS3s getting that yellow light? As much as I'd love to have b/c (no PS2), I think it's worth it to invest in the new hardware.
 
Not a bad deal at all. thanks OP. I might have to break the bank on this deal.
pixel.gif
 
[quote name='J7.']I would steer clear of 60gb because it's not as reliable and has older chips. I think those purchasing a 160gb PS3 likely already have a PS2.[/quote]


Yeah so thats terrible information and completely incorrect...
 
[quote name='J7.']I would steer clear of 60gb because it's not as reliable and has older chips. I think those purchasing a 160gb PS3 likely already have a PS2.[/quote]

I've had a 60GB since launch, and it runs like a champ. Most of my friends have the same, and haven't had any issues, either.

U sure you're not thinking of, well, all models of the 360?
 
[quote name='J7.']I would steer clear of 60gb because it's not as reliable and has older chips. I think those purchasing a 160gb PS3 likely already have a PS2.[/quote]
I do believe you're confusing the PS3 with the 360. Even someone like myself, who will not buy a PS3 for a good long time, can say that that's a load of crap, as the PS3 is built to be very reliable.
 
Have there really been any wide-spread issues with the PS3? I honestly think this is the one time Sony actually had a launch generation that didn't break down. I know my 60GB is running fine. Certainly can't say the same for my PS1 or PS2 consoles.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']Have there really been any wide-spread issues with the PS3? I honestly think this is the one time Sony actually had a launch generation that didn't break down. I know my 60GB is running fine. Certainly can't say the same for my PS1 or PS2 consoles.[/quote]
The only ones I recall were problems with how PS2 titles were presented with the PS3 and that some games weren't supported due to problems. That is, until a patch was released to fix all of that.
 
my 6o gb launch date ps3 no problems at all on the other hand i own 5 xbox 360's then sold my broken one so 4 left (more than one tv in the house) and my recent 2 360 elites one re bundle one regular elite are the only ones that never have died yet.
 
Is the "60 gb" version one with the hardware or software backward comptibility? And is Sony still updating it? I still don't get why anyone would subject him/herself to this half-assed bs. Just get a PS2.
 
[quote name='s2k']my 6o gb launch date ps3 no problems at all on the other hand i own 5 xbox 360's then sold my broken one so 4 left (more than one tv in the house) and my recent 2 360 elites one re bundle one regular elite are the only ones that never have died yet.[/QUOTE]

Baller! Do you have one hooked up in the bathroom?
 
IIRC, the initial launch 60gb had BC on a chipset. And, I don't recall reading about any problems with the launch PS3's. I still have my original PS1, PS2, and PS3, and never experienced problems with any.
 
Same, no problems at all with my 60 gb. Haven't really heard of many problems overall with it, so don't know what all this fuss is about! :p
 
You guys have never heard of the YLoD ? (yellow light of death). It means a hardware failure and the usual victims are the 60 gb PS3s. It is nowhere near as common as the RRoD, but it occurs most often with the old 60 gb launch models.
 
[quote name='Lord Darkstorn']Aren't the older PS3s getting that yellow light? .[/quote]
That's what I was referring to. I never said it was a huge problem or as bad as 360. If some of the 60 gb do have more problems than the newer models, which have the smaller cooler chips then it might be worth it to get a brand new PS3 than a used 60 gb. I still think most people interested in a 160 gb PS3 own a PS2.
 
My ps2 just broke, they better put in BC pretty soon, because I won't buy another ps2, and my xbox 360 is on it's last leg.
I don't want to pull out my Dreamcast, but I will.
 
[quote name='unclenebber']My ps2 just broke, they better put in BC pretty soon, because I won't buy another ps2, and my xbox 360 is on it's last leg.
I don't want to pull out my Dreamcast, but I will.[/QUOTE]

They have removed BC from the latter releases of the PS3, and the good guess is that its not returning.
 
Ya, if it returned it would be through software, or hardware but not until very late in PS3's lifetime.
 
"older chips"? What does that even mean?

60 gig is the way to go. The only thing you might want to do is get yourself a new hard drive, depending on how well the previous owner treated it.
 
Older chips, older design, larger, generate more heat, use more energy, etc. Used 60gb for as much or more money than a brand new PS3? When you already own a PS2?
 
[quote name='J7.']Older chips, older design, larger, generate more heat, use more energy, etc. Used 60gb for as much or more money than a brand new PS3? When you already own a PS2?[/QUOTE]

All I'm sayin is, unlike my 360, where I did get a newer model, there's no way I'm trading up to a newer chipset PS3 and lose PS2 BC.
 
[quote name='bsesb2003']All I'm sayin is, unlike my 360, where I did get a newer model, there's no way I'm trading up to a newer chipset PS3 and lose PS2 BC.[/quote]
I wouldn't either if I already had a new 60gb with no problems.
 
I don't doubt for a minute that the 20GB and 60GB PS3 models have the highest failure rate out of all the PS3 models. The earliest models of any electronic tend to have the highest failure rate, because as the process goes along, the company will hopefully (nearly) perfect its assembly. When newer models have the higher failure rate, it's either because of a massive error in their mass assembly, or the model was drastically changed, to the point that it's only the newer model in name only.

Anyway, that being said, even the oldest PS3 models have, what would appear to be, a fairly acceptable rate of failure. There was never an outcry over them dying quickly, and it's been two and a half years since their release, so they are mostly all still kicking.

As far as heat and chipsets go, I really don't think there is much about the oldest models that should make anyone worry. I think these have been become buzzwords in the video game community, thanks to the horrific job Microsoft did in putting the 360 together. Everyone has to remember, though, that computer components can withstand extremely high temperatures. My CPU, for instance, is currently at 40C/104F. GPUs can easily deal with even higher temps.
 
On top of the ylod problems, there have been reports of the earlier blu-ray drives failing as well. Apparently, they use a different assembly now that works better than the old one.

That being said, it's a completely fair statement to say a BC PS3 is more likely to fail than a new one. They generate more heat and have older drive mechanisms.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']As far as heat and chipsets go, I really don't think there is much about the oldest models that should make anyone worry. I think these have been become buzzwords in the video game community, thanks to the horrific job Microsoft did in putting the 360 together. Everyone has to remember, though, that computer components can withstand extremely high temperatures. My CPU, for instance, is currently at 40C/104F. GPUs can easily deal with even higher temps.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for that. I was beginning to wonder if everybody had just eaten a big bag of crazy.

[quote name='Anexanhume']That being said, it's a completely fair statement to say a BC PS3 is more likely to fail than a new one. They generate more heat and have older drive mechanisms.[/QUOTE]

Well, uh, no it's not unless you have some sort of evidence besides blog comments.
 
If you had the choice between buying a used 60gb right now with older components, which are more likely to lead to problems, versus a brand new system with newer & more reliable parts I would go with the new system. I don't see why that's crazy. Especially when some of the old systems have had ylod and Bluray problems and if you already own a PS2. You'll also save even more money by using less energy. Google ylod and 60gb Bluray problems if you don't believe us.
 
[quote name='bsesb2003']People are still better off trying to find a used 60gb w/ PS2 BC (if you can find one) and then upgrading the HDD IMHO. Of course, if someone wants to by spend $469 for a PS3 and $100 for a PS2, well, my guess is some folks are...[/QUOTE]

Most people who want a PS3 probably own a PS2 already. That is certainly the case for me.

The 45nm build of the newer PS3's is very attractive to me, because it will cost me half as much to run as the launch PS3's (~.50 cents vs ~.25 cents per 24 hours of use). Not a whole lot of money, but every little bit counts, especially if you're trying to be green (which I'm not :p). Not to mention reduced heat means longer lifetime for the hardware.

Thanks for the post OP, I've been considering a PS3 all year, just keep trying to wait for better deals. Sadly it looks like Dells deals are gone...so I might jump on this. I'd want to buy uncharted anyway...just have to ensure this is in fact the 45nm build and not the 45nm w/ 65nm RSX. I want the newest chips inside. I will just keep playing my PS2 games on my PS2.
 
[quote name='Nameless One']Most people who want a PS3 probably own a PS2 already. That is certainly the case for me.

The 45nm build of the newer PS3's is very attractive to me, because it will cost me half as much to run as the launch PS3's (~.50 cents vs ~.25 cents per 24 hours of use). Not a whole lot of money, but every little bit counts, especially if you're trying to be green (which I'm not :p). Not to mention reduced heat means longer lifetime for the hardware.

Thanks for the post OP, I've been considering a PS3 all year, just keep trying to wait for better deals. Sadly it looks like Dells deals are gone...so I might jump on this. I'd want to buy uncharted anyway...just have to ensure this is in fact the 45nm build and not the 45nm w/ 65nm RSX. I want the newest chips inside. I will just keep playing my PS2 games on my PS2.[/quote]
Glad I could help and you present some compelling info. If I did not have PS3 I don't know if I'd jump on this specific deal or not as I figure Uncharted will probably have its price reduced a few months before the sequel, probably Greatest Hit around August I'm guessing. Might depend on whether or not you would want to swap out the HDD for your own and get 80gb instead if another deal on that shows up. As far as 45nm I don't think those have hit yet. Here is info on that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware#cite_note-specs-4
Configurations
To date, the PS3 has had several component revisions which serve to reduce power consumption. This in turn results in production savings, lower heat production, lower cooling requirements and quieter running. Since launch, the Cell has had its process shrunk from 90nm to 65nm. According to rumors and early Sony plans the RSX GPU has also been shrunk, but that the actual switch would have happened has not been confirmed by Sony or third party disassembly. Further improvements are planned, with IBM/Toshiba announcing plans to commence fullscale 45nm Cell production in 2009,[4] which will result in a further 40% reduction in power consumption over the 65nm Cell.

Feature:
20gb-GPU 90nm CPU 90nm typical power consumption 180w
40gb-90/65/135
60-90/90/180
80-90/65/135
80-65/65/110
80-65/65/110
160-65/65/110

Form and power consumption
The PlayStation 3 console is approximately 6 kg (approximately 13 pounds), 325 mm (W) × 98 mm (H) × 274 mm (D).[24]
The case was designed by Teiyu Goto of Sony, and uses the 'Spiderman' font. [25]
The power consumption of the initial PlayStation 3 units based on 90nm Cell CPU ranges from 170–200 watts during normal use, despite having a 380 watt power supply.[26] The power consumption of newer 40GB PlayStation 3 (65nm process Cell/90nm RSX) units ranges from 120-140 watts during normal use.[27] The latest 80GB units use both 65nm Cell and 65nm RSX, and have further lowered power consumption to between 90-120w.
 
Ok, ok, you've won me over -- I'm gonna trade in my old PS3 and buy a new one that is more reliable, uses less energy and cannot play PS2 games!
 
[quote name='bsesb2003']Ok, ok, you've won me over -- I'm gonna trade in my old PS3 and buy a new one that is more reliable, uses less energy and cannot play PS2 games![/quote]
I already agreed with you that if I already had a new 60gb with no problems I would not buy a new PS3. But if I did not or did not and already owned a PS2 then I would buy a new PS3 instead of buying a used PS3. The Nameless One clearly represents exactly what I was talking about... but now you're just trolling.
 
I gotta say, while I respectfully disagree, and do truly appreciate your research and do appreciate the deal post for new buyers. I just have a problem with no BC in the newer releases of the PS3, despite the more efficient chips. I still prefer an older PS3 with BC than a new one without.

As a gamer with a bunch of consoles, I appreciate BC. Any time I can mothball a redundant console lessens the potential fire hazard and mess of all those additional wires running behind my television.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Both sides have their problems. Newer PS3's are more reliable and old PS2's have BC.

The fact is, there is only a solution to one of those problems. You can always buy a PS2 and you've solved the PS2 BC issue. You can't do anything about your old hardware though. That's why I'm selling my 60GB and buying a 160GB PS3.

I plan on getting a ton of use out of my PS3 during it's supposed 10 year lifecycle with games and blu-rays. I want the most rock solid hardware available. Playing PS2 games on the PS3 is nice but it's just extra wear and tear on the blu-ray drive.
 
I dunno -- do you think Blu Rays will exist in 10 years...maybe. Still, I find it hard to believe that the PS3 will be the high-end of BluRay players years from now, although right now it does hold its own against stand alone players. For lots of folks, the PS2 was their first DVD player, and my guess is that they aren't using the PS2 as their main DVD better player today..
 
Yeah, I'm definitely gonna buy a standalone Blu-ray player down the line. And yep, the PS2 was my first DVD player, but that stopped once I was able to get a DVD/VHS set-up for like $75 at Walmart.
 
A lot of people throwing the ol' "Why get a 60GB if you have a PS2?" around seem to forget that eventually, the PS2 will be discontinued. Not only that, but the early fat models are prone to breaking down quite easily. It's much more convenient to have a machine that can play PS, PS2 and PS3 games than to worry about if your only means of playing PS2 games will give out sometime soon.
 
[quote name='Tsukento']A lot of people throwing the ol' "Why get a 60GB if you have a PS2?" around seem to forget that eventually, the PS2 will be discontinued. Not only that, but the early fat models are prone to breaking down quite easily. It's much more convenient to have a machine that can play PS, PS2 and PS3 games than to worry about if your only means of playing PS2 games will give out sometime soon.[/QUOTE]

Until your older PS3 breaks from playing all those PS, PS2 and PS3 games and then you can't play a damn thing w/ the Playstation Brand. There are so many PS2's in the world I don't think it will be a problem buying one 20 years from now. Heck, I can still buy a working SNES from a lot of pawn shops and off of Craigslist. The PS2's are very reliable unless you have a launch model, same story for the PS, and I'm sure it will be the same story for the PS3.

My PS2 works fine. And if the disc drive fails some day, I'll either mod it and use a HDD, or buy a replacement drive as I had to do already for my original Xbox (4 or 5 years ago).
 
Still have my 60GB PS3 that runs like a beast. I've gone through 2 360's, though. This is a good deal for those that haven't gotten a PS3 and don't care about PS2 games, though.
 
What I'd really like to see next generation is the BC sold separately as an add on, meaning sell the system for $299 and allow people to buy an add on that sits on or attached to the system for $50 that allows BC with PS1-3, XB1-2, GC-Wii. That way there's no worry about losing BC, people getting mad for having to pay for it when they don't care about it, people bitching about price but still expecting BC to stay.

If a person has a PS2 they should buy a new PS3 not try to find a used 60gb that who knows how it was treated. If they are mostly interested in just PS3 they should buy a new PS3. Only those who want to play PS2 games badly upscaled or really hate having multple systems connected should go for a used 60 gb. If you already own one you have the best as long as it works and can be fixed if something happens.
 
Not gonna happen, BC as an add-on has never been effective going all the way back to the 5200. Sony is still selling a boatload of PS2's and now they lowered the price to $100...yippie! Frankly, personally I don't care about BC beacuse once a new console comes out, I move on to the new console. But given the sales of the PS2 slim, people are obviously still buying lots of PS2's. THe question is why are they?

Lets say someone buys a non-BC PS3 because they have a PS2 to play PS2 games. Then their PS2 fat, with those ancient, electricity eating internals, dies an unforseen death...now what...gonna have to buy a new PS2 slim...

Or someone has a BC PS3 and does not have a PS2 but has picked up a number of PS2 games. Then their BC PS3 dies. Now what? Well, I suppose they'll buy two consoles...a new non-BC PS3 and a new PS2 slim just to replace the one console they had before...
 
[quote name='bsesb2003']Not gonna happen, BC as an add-on has never been effective going all the way back to the 5200. Sony is still selling a boatload of PS2's and now they lowered the price to $100...yippie! Frankly, personally I don't care about BC beacuse once a new console comes out, I move on to the new console. But given the sales of the PS2 slim, people are obviously still buying lots of PS2's. THe question is why are they?

Lets say someone buys a non-BC PS3 because they have a PS2 to play PS2 games. Then their PS2 fat, with those ancient, electricity eating internals, dies an unforseen death...now what...gonna have to buy a new PS2 slim...

Or someone has a BC PS3 and does not have a PS2 but has picked up a number of PS2 games. Then their BC PS3 dies. Now what? Well, I suppose they'll buy two consoles...a new non-BC PS3 and a new PS2 slim just to replace the one console they had before...[/quote]
How many times has BC been featured as a purchasable add on? I don't recall it ever being available for purchase separately as an add on. Edit: I see the horribly selling 5200 included an adapter to play 2600 games later in its life which only worked on newer 5200s, released when the system was already failing, a system barely supported by Atari. The adapter released the same year that the 1983 video game crash occurred. So based on this one unique incident back in 1983 I would say BC as an add on has and will always fail... no.

Also, I wasn't referring to an add on for PS3 I said next gen. So if the far majority of PS3's are not BC and Sony offers PS4 with a BC add on for $50 that plays all PS1-PS3 games I think it would sell. Why were you talking about how much better 60gb is because it has BC but now you're saying you don't care about BC?

Also, even if a past console did the BC and they would want people to buy them, they could still profit off a BC add on for the newer console, perhaps with a larger profit relative to cost than the older console, making the add on better than just selling the older console, especially if the add on utilized the hardware it was connected to for upscaling, smoothing, and faster load times.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All this talk of buying a PS2 just to play the old games is fine and well, but you know what? I already have 4 controllers (actually more like 10 if you could guitars and drums and other crap) just for my PS3, and I don't need to be having like 4 more just for some of the games I'd still like to play.

For me, the BC is all about *economy* -- of space, time, and effort, so screw the PS2-for-BC idea. Besides, as CAGs, you should be ashamed of yourselves for talking up the buy-buy-buy mentality as a solution to your gaming needs. Shame shame shame!
 
Add-ons in general have been usually failures or rip-offs. The 5200 had BC, the Intellivision and Colecovision had snap-on adaptors that allowed 2600 games to be played on those systems. There was a Sega Master System adaptor for the Genesis.
 
People are talking like PS2 BC is perfect on PS3 but is not. It probably won't matter for few PS2 games but you really need a real PS2 you have lot of PS2 games.
 
It's mostly the original 80GB that had trouble with BC, due to it being software emulation. A lot of problems with the 60GB were ironed out with an update that made it more or less being like as bigdaddybruce44 said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top