Microsoft Reveals More Xbox Series X Specs (polygon.com) 49
Microsoft revealed new details on its next-generation console, text, on Monday morning, confirming specifications on what the company calls its "superior balance of power and speed" for its new hardware. From a report: The next-gen Xbox, Microsoft said, will be four times as powerful as the original Xbox One. The Xbox Series X "next-generation custom processor" will employ AMD's Zen 2 and RDNA 2 architecture, head of Xbox Phil Spencer wrote on the Xbox website. "Delivering four times the processing power of an Xbox One and enabling developers to leverage 12 [teraflops] of GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) performance -- twice that of an Xbox One X and more than eight times the original Xbox One," Spencer said. He called the next-generation Xbox's processing and graphics power "a true generational leap," offering higher frame rates -- with support for up to 120 fps -- and more sophisticated game worlds.
That 12 teraflops claim is twice that of what Microsoft promised with the Xbox One X (then known as Project Scorpio) when it revealed the mid-generation console update back in 2016. Spencer also outlined the Xbox Series X's variable rate shading, saying, "Rather than spending GPU cycles uniformly to every single pixel on the screen, they can prioritize individual effects on specific game characters or important environmental objects. This technique results in more stable frame rates and higher resolution, with no impact on the final image quality." He also promised hardware-accelerated DirectX ray tracing, with "true-to-life lighting, accurate reflections and realistic acoustics in real time." Microsoft also reconfirmed features like SSD storage, which promise faster loading times, as well as new ones, like Quick Resume, for Xbox Series X.
That 12 teraflops claim is twice that of what Microsoft promised with the Xbox One X (then known as Project Scorpio) when it revealed the mid-generation console update back in 2016. Spencer also outlined the Xbox Series X's variable rate shading, saying, "Rather than spending GPU cycles uniformly to every single pixel on the screen, they can prioritize individual effects on specific game characters or important environmental objects. This technique results in more stable frame rates and higher resolution, with no impact on the final image quality." He also promised hardware-accelerated DirectX ray tracing, with "true-to-life lighting, accurate reflections and realistic acoustics in real time." Microsoft also reconfirmed features like SSD storage, which promise faster loading times, as well as new ones, like Quick Resume, for Xbox Series X.
Ah Ah Ah (Score:2)
You rape and eat babies for profit.
Go home, fascist Mont Pellerin Society forum troll.
Always Online (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Consoles are far better than PCs for gaming. Gaming, you are fiddling with RAM, CPUs, compatibility of motherboards, Windows versions, cooling, malware, while a console, you just plug and play.
This statement is purely a personal truth. While yes it takes experience with computer hardware to manage and upgrade to play the latest games, PC's by hardware comparison are far more superior.
If you're talking about ease-of-use then yes, consoles win hands down. As for better? That's a matter of opinion and not fact. Not everyone has an issue with managing computer hardware and software as you've stated.
Re: (Score:2)
If I still find the time and motivation to play a game I first look if it's available on DRM free platforms like GOG.
If I were to get Cyberpunk 77 (I'm not really that interested) I'll get it from there.
Baldur's Gate 3 will also be available there. In in that case the game developers aren't assholes who lock down their multiplayer to certain platforms. They allow people with GOG versions to play together with Steam versions and so forth
Re: (Score:2)
Can someone post equivalent PC specs? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They don't go into details as far as I can see, but if previous statements line up with these here it would be roughly equivalent to an R7 3700X running a GPU with more raw processing power than an RX 5700X.
Re: (Score:2)
12 TFLOPS, if they are talking about single-precision floating point (32-bit) is about on par with a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.
It would be quite impressive for a console. The Radeon RX 5700 XT does only 8.6 to 10.1 TFLOPS (depending on whether it's overclocked or not I guess).
Perspective (Score:2)
"get that" (Score:2)
"waste that", you mean. :/
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot of PC indie games. (Score:2)
Even if only one in ten is good, you still get more bang for your buck. And you'll support the actual artists instead of an artist-crushing machinery.
Fun theory, but Nintendo is the Keurig of games. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, I don't care about all these tech specs if the games are crap. Bring on the hate, but Nintendo is the only company I trust to deliver fun, compelling, awesome games. Sure, their tech specs are always behind, but I don't care about 12 teraflops if the games are just glorified movies stuck in the uncanny valley in which I get to press a few buttons to bring on the next cut scene.
It's fun to be smug and say that everyone that enjoys something in greater depth than you is a fool. I get it...we all want to do it at some time or another. However, your theory is popular, but simply not true.
For example, Doom....AWESOME game, but it really loses a lot compared to the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro versions. I have a switch and I have doom on it. I had a LOT of fun playing it, but wish I had a real console for it. I'm holding off buying one until the next gen. I was like you before and thought that high performance consoles should focus on fun like Nintendo. Every time I watch videos about it, I am jealous and wish I had those framerates and intensity.
People who romanticize the switch don't spend much time playing it. It's great, it has it's purpose, but the reason the XBox and PS exist is not because their users aren't as smart or wise as you.
Doom, Mortal Kombat, etc...watch the videos. The switch version is fuzzy...has more lag...you can't admire the world you're immersed in as much. The premium consoles allow fast framerates and more frantic action. The best Nintendo games are pretty good, but they lack detail. The worlds are less immersive. Also, the games are many times more expensive....I also find their indie games selection not as rich as the major consoles.
It reminds me of the Keurig....I don't know anyone who owns one but actually drinks much coffee. Both are convenient and make sooo much more sense if you don't actually use them...and are great when you can't have your preferred platform. People who don't drink coffee think I overdo it when I grind my beans before making coffee. People who drink coffee get it! A switch is great when traveling (although you need a pro controller to play an FPS...those built in sticks are too delicate)...just like a Keurig is great in a hotel. If you play games a few times a week, you'll find yourself longing for more diverse games...good graphics...better immersion...some huge big budget title you cannot play because the switch cannot handle it, etc. You'd never go to a coffee shop and order a cup or Keurig if you could get something made from espresso and fresh beans...a switch is like paying a lot more to get a few great 1st party games and then some really compromised ports of games that are so much better on XBox/PS.
Finally, one HUGE HUGE difference.....XBox game pass....Nintendo doesn't have an equivalent. I can pay a reasonable fee to MS and get top games on demand...no trip to the store, no wasting $60 on crap games...can take risks and try new things....just like Netflix allows.
I like my switch. It's nice for vacation and playing simple games like Mario Kart with my small children. It's not a good platform for shooters or adventure games, though...and I really love shooters...I'd buy an XBox series X today if I could....for the XBox game pass alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Badly designed software will do that because hardware can only compensate for shoddy design to a point.
You can also crank up the graphics settings, resolution, and or super sampling anti-aliasing which will bring just about any graphics card out there too its knees.
Your game might look prettier, but that alone doesn't really make the game any better. As a result 'bringing to its knees' is not good metr
Re: (Score:2)
How do you backup your save games on your Switch?
While Nintendo focuses on fun (because they can't even begin to compete graphically) they do some REALLY bone-headed decisions like the one mentioned above.
From Software, Sega, WayForward, Sony (Score:2)
From Software, Sega, WayForward, and Sony still seem to be developing and publishing real games.
Um... what? (Score:4, Interesting)
Um... balance of power and speed? What the fuck does that mean? Don't those usually go together? Are they afraid of making it too powerful and/or too fast? Or do they really mean balancing price against power and speed? And "superior" to what?
(sigh) Fucking marketing people.
I can only guess... (Score:2)
But I think some clueviless marketdroid mistranslated the balance between high frame rate low detail and high detail low frame rate that is achievable.
Aka you don't have to make as many compromises whether you chose rendering speed or image quality.
Nevermind it's a locked-down always-online money-leeching machine, and nevermind there being no actual game(play, story or aesthetics). As long as it shined and twinkes right, the livestock will line up to be milked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe they mean power consumption? You can make a pretty powerful console if it needs at 60cm 2000 RPM fan and 12kg of copper to keep it cool.
Maybe it's code for "we are thermally constrained by the form factor." The typical console slab shape isn't particularly great and they have to assume it will get buried in a TV unit in the desert.
Re: (Score:2)
From another Slashdot article just today
"The CEO of the RISC-V Foundation (a former IBM executive) touted the open-source CPU architecture at this year's HiPEAC conference, arguing there's "a growing demand for custom processors purpose-built to meet the power and performance requirements of specific applications...""
They're obviously talking about power consumption and processing power.
They're balancing what they can throw in the box without sending electric bills through the roof for direct power draw and
Really? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, well, maybe they can now. (Score:2)
Maybe itâ(TM)s the tightness of integrationy the socket, etc. Let's see what their next gen of dedicated GPUs will be like.
Or just MS lying. Which is already synonym.
Re: (Score:2)
AMD previously reserved the largest Polaris series (like in the rx480) chip for the xbox one x (aka Ex-bonks), which although larger than the 480 ran at lower clocks for better efficiency.
This strategy doesn't really work in a market where AMD has to compete with nVidia on performance per dollar like in the gaming card segment, but it does deliver solid total value for consoles like this horribly named xbox series x. Why can't they just call it the xbox 4?
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't they just call it the xbox 4?
because it wouldn't be able to compete against the PlayStation 5. Everybody knows 5 is bigger than 4.
Not enough! (Score:2)
I'll wait for the Xbox Series XXX Super-XTR II Turbo. President Comacho edition.
No thanks (Score:2)
The PS5 is going to have a built in ray tracer which - if they implement it properly - will make all current texture mapped polygon based games look like something out of the ark.
Though when MS release the XBox Series XXX I might be interested in what they're offering especially if it comes with haptic feedback ;o)
Re: (Score:1)
"The PS5 is going to have a built in ray tracer which..." ...Will only deliver about 40FPS because current raytracing tech sucks and likely will for a decade or two to come.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
black box model obsolescence (Score:2)
One would think that the he black box model of Playstation and XBox is surely heading for its death throes.
These specs are not that impressive and can be exceeded with a well spec'd PC for ~ $1K. In a year, even moreso.
Moore's law at play I suppose. The product development is unable to keep up with the technology innovation. Coupling this with the increasingly tech-saviness of the population and I just can't see this model being sustainable for much longer.
Re: (Score:2)
So they're stuck with whatever the designers put in there until they buy a new gaming console. While on a PC you can easily upgrade your graphics card a couple of years after you built your system.
However this way gaming consoles can keep the price per unit low due to standardize mass production. And as I hear they often sell the units even below cost, making up for that initial loss of profit by the more expens
When the APU's Align. (Score:1)