Next Generation Emulation banner

22881 - 22900 of 22961 Posts

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
I'm very curious to see how much it sells. From what I remember, hardware makers found that the best price point to sell something was under 300$. That was years ago, so maybe things changed, but it does put the Series S in a good spot.
On the other hand, we're talking about paying 300$ for 4 tflops versus spending 500$ for 12 tflops. Or 25$ for 4, 35$ for 12. The Series S will release and immediately be weaker than the Xbox One X. I tend to save my money and go for a cheaper option, yet I would still prefer to pay the extra 200$ as the Series S seems like a strange choice for a brand new console.

I don't have any prediction for this, it just seems like a big question mark. 300$ is easy access to the games which will be released for the next 6 years, but if you're gonna buy a console that you'll keep for that long, it seems likely that you'll either go for the 500$ model, or do the 2-year 35$ deal.
I could see their intention being to reach people who stuck with the old, original Xbox One model with this 300$ model. And reach XOX users with the Series X model. I do wonder if early adopters will actually be willing to buy a 300$ console, as I would expect early adopters to be the same kind of people who buy a 500$ console instead.

It's worth a shot either way. The only way I can see this being a mistake is if they only sell 5 copies and decide to stop supporting it. Doubtful tho.
The XSS may be 4 TF but is a next-gen GPU inside not to mention the almost exact same components as the XSX. Basically it dance circles around the X1X and PS4 Pro and apart from the resolution there shouldn't be any notaciable difference and if they use DirectML they could potentially bring similar image quality too for a budget.

The strange thing I noticed is that for some reason the console attracts people that I never thought would ever think about buying an Xbox console. For example, most of my friends are ponies, and some of them are even working for Sony for free, doing everything they can to make sure people choose a Playstation console over an Xbox (for real) at their stores. The same people are now talking about buying a PS5 and an XSS. Also many casuals here at work are talking about getting a XSS and the past days is the #1 topic during breaks.

The only ones I have seen talking about getting a XSX are some Xbox fans and the usual hardcore ones. I would get a XSX myself if I decided to get one but this time around neither Sony or Microsoft have anything that makes me want their consoles.

I'm also very interested to see how it turn out but I believe the XSS is going to sell quite a lot. However, since MS don't release numbers I guess is going to be hard to say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,032 Posts
The XSS may be 4 TF but is a next-gen GPU inside not to mention the almost exact same components as the XSX. Basically it dance circles around the X1X and PS4 Pro and apart from the resolution there shouldn't be any notaciable difference and if they use DirectML they could potentially bring similar image quality too for a budget.
Microsoft themselves described the XSS as both 3 times the tflops of the Xbox One, and 4 times the processing power. The X1X was 5 times.
Even after porting Gears 5 at 120fps, Coalition said "4 times more powerful than the Xbox One S". At the very best, that's slightly less powerful than the X1X. After some quick calculations, running Gears 5 at 1440p @ 120fps (which is what appears to have been the case) would take 90% of the X1X GPU.
So based on the raw power, based on what MS and Coalition said, and based on the game running, I don't think the XSS is stronger than the X1X. Not in term of GPU power at the very least.
The one area where it's stronger is the CPU. It got a weaker GPU, less VRAM, beefier CPU.
The weaker GPU and smaller VRAM would also explain why the XSS may not be even be able to run Gears 5 in [email protected]
MS lists the XSX as having a maximum output of [email protected] and [email protected] They list the XSS as having an output of 1440p only (60 and 120), they don't list 4K at all. They only mention upscaling to 4K, but running at 1440p.



I don't see someone moving from a X1X to a XSS and hoping for DirectML to make it worth it. I see them buying the XSX instead and knowing it will be worth the upgrade. Buying the XSS would be a sidegrade, and if someone is willing to pay 300$ for a sidegrade, they're willing to pay 500$ for an upgrade.

This is why I said: "I could see their intention being to reach people who stuck with the old, original Xbox One model with this 300$ model. And reach XOX users with the Series X model. I do wonder if early adopters will actually be willing to buy a 300$ console, as I would expect early adopters to be the same kind of people who buy a 500$ console instead."
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
Microsoft themselves described the XSS as both 3 times the tflops of the Xbox One, and 4 times the processing power. The X1X was 5 times.
Even after porting Gears 5 at 120fps, Coalition said "4 times more powerful than the Xbox One S". At the very best, that's slightly less powerful than the X1X. After some quick calculations, running Gears 5 at 1440p @ 120fps (which is what appears to have been the case) would take 90% of the X1X GPU.
So based on the raw power, based on what MS and Coalition said, and based on the game running, I don't think the XSS is stronger than the X1X. Not in term of GPU power at the very least.
The one area where it's stronger is the CPU. It got a weaker GPU, less VRAM, beefier CPU.
The weaker GPU and smaller VRAM would also explain why the XSS may not be even be able to run Gears 5 in [email protected]
MS lists the XSX as having a maximum output of [email protected] and [email protected] They list the XSS as having an output of 1440p only (60 and 120), they don't list 4K at all. They only mention upscaling to 4K, but running at 1440p.



I don't see someone moving from a X1X to a XSS and hoping for DirectML to make it worth it. I see them buying the XSX instead and knowing it will be worth the upgrade. Buying the XSS would be a sidegrade, and if someone is willing to pay 300$ for a sidegrade, they're willing to pay 500$ for an upgrade.

This is why I said: "I could see their intention being to reach people who stuck with the old, original Xbox One model with this 300$ model. And reach XOX users with the Series X model. I do wonder if early adopters will actually be willing to buy a 300$ console, as I would expect early adopters to be the same kind of people who buy a 500$ console instead."
They aren't comparable just like that and here few reasons why:

1. The X1X have a very bad CPU compared to the XSS
2. The X1X GPU is GCN based as far as I know while the XSS GPU is RDNA2
3. The X1X have GDDR5 while the XSS uses GDDR6(I haven't read the exact numbers but it should be faster)
4. The X1X can use at max a SSD while the XSS have a nvme integrated

There are far more than just that but those are the ones that I can think from the top of my head. Those points alone show a vastly superior console regardless and in terms of bandwidth and simple raw power the XSS dances circles around it.

Comparing the two with just simple tflops count doesn't match up as there is more than just that. There is a huge bandwidth and capabilities differences between the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,032 Posts
They aren't comparable just like that and here few reasons why:

1. The X1X have a very bad CPU compared to the XSS
2. The X1X GPU is GCN based as far as I know while the XSS GPU is RDNA2
3. The X1X have GDDR5 while the XSS uses GDDR6(I haven't read the exact numbers but it should be faster)
4. The X1X can use at max a SSD while the XSS have a nvme integrated

There are far more than just that but those are the ones that I can think from the top of my head. Those points alone show a vastly superior console regardless and in terms of bandwidth and simple raw power the XSS dances circles around it.

Comparing the two with just simple tflops count doesn't match up as there is more than just that. There is a huge bandwidth and capabilities differences between the two.
1. It did, but the CPU won't make the GPU 2 times faster.
2. Yes, but that's not relevant unless you mention which feature from RDNA 2 is used to close the performance gap. Which feature, which optimization, allows it to run Gears 5 at native 4K.
3. False. While the XSS does use GDDR6, the VRAM in the X1X is significantly faster.
4. NVME won't help run 4K if the machine lacks GPU power.

Vastly superior console in term of design for power vs money? Absolutely. Far superior design.
Vastly more powerful in term of power? No.
Vastly more powerful in term of bandwidth? No, the X1X has far more.
It dances circles around it in term of value. It doesn't dance circles around it in term of power.

Has MS actually said the XSS was more powerful than the X1X? Because I've only seen them describe it as slightly weaker than the X1X, and I've genuinely not seen them showcase it as stronger.

The X1X is listed as having 12gb of vram with a bandwidth of 326 GB/s. The XSS is listed as having 8gb with a bandwidth of 224 GB/s and 2gb with a bandwidth of 56 GB/s.
You're correct that there's a huge bandwidth difference between the two, but it favours the X1X. The X1X was equipped for native 4K, the XSS clearly wasn't.

Once again: Microsoft literally lists 1440p on the spec sheet of the XSS, and 4K on the spec sheet of the XSX. There's a strong reason for this. They're not being humble, they're being honest.
I've seen them describe it as much more powerful than the Xbox One S, but slightly less than the Xbox One X. I've seen them showcase Gears 5, but not in 4K. The specs aren't built for 4K, are lower than the X1X, and RDNA 2 doesn't magically turn 8gb of 224 GB/s vram into 12gb of 326gb/s vram. RDNA 2 helps, especially when it comes to lowering the price of powerful hardware, but you still need a certain amount of raw power to push this through.

I don't really see why we're arguing over this, MS has been pretty straightforward about the XSS.
To be clear: I'm not saying that someone buying a console this November should buy a X1X over a XSS. It would make no sense to buy a console about to be discontinued. What I'm saying is: for someone with a X1X, the XSS is a sidegrade, not an upgrade. You lose GPU power, you lose bandwidth, you gain CPU power. Paying 300$ doesn't give you something meaningful if you own a X1X. Therefore, someone owning a X1X would logically go for the XSX. Since you do get a meaningful upgrade for your 500$.

What I'm saying shouldn't be controversial, if anything it should be mundane:
Owners of the X1 or X1S are the target for the XSS.
Owners of the X1X are the target for the XSX.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
1. It did, but the CPU won't make the GPU 2 times faster.
2. Yes, but that's not relevant unless you mention which feature from RDNA 2 is used to close the performance gap. Which feature, which optimization, allows it to run Gears 5 at native 4K.
3. False. While the XSS does use GDDR6, the VRAM in the X1X is significantly faster.
4. NVME won't help run 4K if the machine lacks GPU power.

Vastly superior console in term of design for power vs money? Absolutely. Far superior design.
Vastly more powerful in term of power? No.
Vastly more powerful in term of bandwidth? No, the X1X has far more.
It dances circles around it in term of value. It doesn't dance circles around it in term of power.

Has MS actually said the XSS was more powerful than the X1X? Because I've only seen them describe it as slightly weaker than the X1X, and I've genuinely not seen them showcase it as stronger.

The X1X is listed as having 12gb of vram with a bandwidth of 326 GB/s. The XSS is listed as having 8gb with a bandwidth of 224 GB/s and 2gb with a bandwidth of 56 GB/s.
You're correct that there's a huge bandwidth difference between the two, but it favours the X1X. The X1X was equipped for native 4K, the XSS clearly wasn't.

Once again: Microsoft literally lists 1440p on the spec sheet of the XSS, and 4K on the spec sheet of the XSX. There's a strong reason for this. They're not being humble, they're being honest.
I've seen them describe it as much more powerful than the Xbox One S, but slightly less than the Xbox One X. I've seen them showcase Gears 5, but not in 4K. The specs aren't built for 4K, are lower than the X1X, and RDNA 2 doesn't magically turn 8gb of 224 GB/s vram into 12gb of 326gb/s vram. RDNA 2 helps, especially when it comes to lowering the price of powerful hardware, but you still need a certain amount of raw power to push this through.

I don't really see why we're arguing over this, MS has been pretty straightforward about the XSS.
To be clear: I'm not saying that someone buying a console this November should buy a X1X over a XSS. It would make no sense to buy a console about to be discontinued. What I'm saying is: for someone with a X1X, the XSS is a sidegrade, not an upgrade. You lose GPU power, you lose bandwidth, you gain CPU power. Paying 300$ doesn't give you something meaningful if you own a X1X. Therefore, someone owning a X1X would logically go for the XSX. Since you do get a meaningful upgrade for your 500$.

What I'm saying shouldn't be controversial, if anything it should be mundane:
Owners of the X1 or X1S are the target for the XSS.
Owners of the X1X are the target for the XSX.
I think we are talking about different things here.... first of all I was never saying the XSS was for me or for you as I clearly stated I would buy a XSX if I had interest in getting a next-gen console. The reason we are arguing is because you are picking few elements of the consoles and focusing only in the raw numbers while completely ignoring the other elements of the components.

I never said the XSS needs to be a 4k machine because that's what the XSX is for but overall the XSS dances circles around the X1X. Picking few elements and stating is faster is completely BS and we both know it as developers will make use of the new GPU/CPU power and features and go beyond the X1X capabilities. The 120fps demo of Gears 5 alone shows something the X1X can't do because the console is limited in many areas the XSS isn't so what are we doing here?

People who own a X1X will most likely go for the XSX anyway so that wasn't my point either. I'm talking about those who probably never owned a Xbox or probably have a X1S or even worst a OG XB1.
 

·
...
Joined
·
332 Posts

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts

The interesting part is that they stopped using HBM2 in favor of GDDR6...
To lower the price? To improve the instability problems seen in Radeon VII? or both?

Small "stress" benchmark | 1080p 144Hz | GPU: RX 560 (POLARIS11)
The did everything most probably to reduce the price since that was the goal. Heck they even asked a chinese knock off designer to design the FUGLY case :p

In all seriousness... my point is not about the numbers comparisons but more about what we know for a fact.

Ryzen > Jaguar CPU
RDNA2 > GCN
NVME > HDD/SDD
VRS, VRR, SFS, DirectML, Hardware RT

.....What are we doing here???

taking those points in consideration we can't just compare numbers here as it has far more to offer not to mention DX12 Ultimate support. Its like me now focusing in the fact that the XSS CPU clock is slightly higher than the PS5 one and using that as a number comparison.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
If anything then is puking because of the MS console TRASH design and naming lol.

The XSS may be my most hated console design wise.... I can't really stand the design of that console and each time I see it I can't believe that crap is an actual console design.

Squeeze the GPU until it stops rendering, skips frames, or starts fuming, whichever comes first.
Hahahahahahaha!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,603 Posts
The Gamecube suxx on looks...They gave me free Zelda games...Poiple Gamecube or not its the games....
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
The Gamecube suxx on looks...They gave me free Zelda games...Poiple Gamecube or not its the games....
The Gamecube is indeed not the most appealing console but it does look like a nice little console. The XSS looks like trash and like a cheap knock off chinese console that you can buy for 30 bucks and even those look better.

 

·
Foundry/Foundation
Joined
·
11,687 Posts
Well, seems like the S can at least be put on the side so it would fit under my tv.

The S looks like a speaker, the X like a portable heater.

The naming is still stupid too.
What comes after 360? One. And what comes after one? Series.
At least it's consistently stupid and very "microsoft".

Still waiting for their cloud service to be renamed Seriesdrive.

And I'd say the console to be released after the Series... series...
...
...should be called xbox bing.
Powered by msn live onepass.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
From a size perspective is the smallest that's true.... I personally would get a XSX if I ever decided to get one. Right now there is nothing that interest me from either company and is the first generation i'm not interested at all in the offerings which is sad.

The only positive thing about this generation for me is that we finally have more options which is great.

The naming is still stupid too.
What comes after 360? One. And what comes after one? Series.
At least it's consistently stupid and very "microsoft".

Still waiting for their cloud service to be renamed Seriesdrive.
Yep... I have no idea who make those names but that person needs to be fired ASAP. Have you seen people in their own videos almost saying names wrong??? its so confuse and stupid.
 

·
Foundry/Foundation
Joined
·
11,687 Posts
At least sony got the naming part right (call it boring but it's consistent at least).

It's the generation of ugly machines. At least sony's one appears to have actual games.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
I think that's very subjective though and goes inline with the "Xbox has no games" meme that makes no sense because of that. To me the only games that got my interest so far are all third party titles while first party from both companies looks meh to me. I'm a huge HZD fan but the new one won't be at launch and so other games from both sides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,032 Posts
One thing I personally thought about was that they should offer a limited amount of PS4 games for free (let's say 3) from a larger selection (10 to 15 games) with each PS5. Basically: you redeem a code, pick 3 games, and those are yours to keep forever and play in an improved way on the PS5. This seemed like a good (and cheap) way to leverage their PS4 games to make the PS5 (and the price you pay) more attractive.

The Playstation Plus Collection is... Kinda doing that, and also kinda not doing that. If the PS5 comes with a free temporary subscription to PS Plus, that's not so bad, you do get almost 20 games during that amount of time. You don't need to have ever owned the games before, they're just added to the PS Plus library (afaik). But I would have preferred a permanent gift of those games, guaranteed to be improved for the PS5, as a free taste for new users.

I don't have an issue with it, but I also think it could have been better. It's still a nice benefit, especially if they slowly add more games to it. It's a bit like Nintendo's collection of NES and SNES games, except with modern games instead of oldies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,032 Posts
Also, I don't know if anybody else is gonna try to order a RTX 3080, but orders should be opening early tomorrow (NA time). Seems to be around 6 am PT, but it's difficult to know if it's set in stone.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
17,080 Posts
One thing I personally thought about was that they should offer a limited amount of PS4 games for free (let's say 3) from a larger selection (10 to 15 games) with each PS5. Basically: you redeem a code, pick 3 games, and those are yours to keep forever and play in an improved way on the PS5. This seemed like a good (and cheap) way to leverage their PS4 games to make the PS5 (and the price you pay) more attractive.

The Playstation Plus Collection is... Kinda doing that, and also kinda not doing that. If the PS5 comes with a free temporary subscription to PS Plus, that's not so bad, you do get almost 20 games during that amount of time. You don't need to have ever owned the games before, they're just added to the PS Plus library (afaik). But I would have preferred a permanent gift of those games, guaranteed to be improved for the PS5, as a free taste for new users.

I don't have an issue with it, but I also think it could have been better. It's still a nice benefit, especially if they slowly add more games to it. It's a bit like Nintendo's collection of NES and SNES games, except with modern games instead of oldies.
No.... they talked about hundreds of games at launch on the PS5 and are now offering a very small selected amount of games behind a paywall.

Its not even OK-Ish but simply DOGSHIT!.

Also, I don't know if anybody else is gonna try to order a RTX 3080, but orders should be opening early tomorrow (NA time). Seems to be around 6 am PT, but it's difficult to know if it's set in stone.
We have a debate here as my wife wants the 3090 but I think is a waste of money so we may get a 3080 but i'm pretty sure those at launch are going to be gone before they are even available lol.
 

·
king Kong Never Dies!
Joined
·
2,076 Posts
Miles Morales looking good, the PS5 is $399 and $499 for the non-digital version BUT payed backwards compatibility....

View attachment 201708

WTF?



View attachment 201707
View attachment 201705
View attachment 201706
Hmmm, is that a paid backward compatibility?

From what i was reading, these selected games will be free for those users who have a PS5 and PSN subscription. I don't see it is related to paid backward compatibility, I believe we can run PS4 games on PS5 without needing to pay anything, may be i missed something?
 
22881 - 22900 of 22961 Posts
Top