Read this and answer the question

Tech media website CNET gave new Super Slim 4 out of 5 stars ("Excellent"), saying "The Super Slim PlayStation 3 shrinks a powerful gaming machine into an even tinier package while maintaining the same features as its predecessors: a great gaming library and a strong array of streaming services [...]", whilst also criticising the "cheap" design and disc-loader, stating: "Sometimes [the cover] doesn't catch and you feel like you're using one of those old credit card imprinter machines. In short, it feels cheap. You don't realize how convenient autoloading disc trays are until they're gone. Whether it was to cut costs or save space, this move is ultimately a step back." The criticism also was due to price, stating the cheapest Super Slim model was still more expensive than the cheapest Slim model, and that the smaller size and bigger hard drive shouldn't be considered an upgrade when the hard drive on a Slim model is easily removed and replaced. They did praise that the hard drive of the Super Slim model is "the easiest yet. Simply sliding off the side panel reveals the drive bay, which can quickly be unscrewed." They also stated that whilst the Super Slim model is not in any way an upgrade, it could be an indicator as to what's to come. "It may not be revolutionary, but the Super Slim PS3 is the same impressive machine in a much smaller package. There doesn't seem to be any reason for existing PS3 owners to upgrade, but for the prospective PS3 buyer, the Super Slim is probably the way to go if you can deal with not having a slot-loading disc drive."

Was the lowest-priced Super Slim more or less expensive than any of the PS3 Slim models?
more expensive