Microsoft Xbox One X Scorpio Price Prediction and Reaction

Predict Scorpio's launch price:

  • Total voters
    78
  • Poll closed .
Recop said:
Not really ?

PS4/Pro GPU : +128%

Pro/X GPU : +43%

This comparison alone said it all... GPU is by far the most decisive factor in a gaming hardware.

PS4/Pro CPU : +31%

Pro/X CPU : less than 1%

Concerning the bandwidth we have :

218/4,2 = 52Gb/s per TFlops

326/6 = 54Gb/s per TFlops

But this calculation might be too simplistic, i don't know.

Also, it's 33% more for the RAM. Pro = 8 GO GDDR5 + 1GO DDR3
Click to expand...

I already mention it is true if u look only at % increases of TFLOPs . But bandwidth only increase by 25% from the 4 to the Pro while RAM amount allocated to games increases by .5 GB or 10% in terms of GDDR which is what that extra 1GB of DDR3 buys the PRO. Scorpio provides 64% more RAM to games than the PRO.

So 128% vs 43% alone paints one picture but when you look at 128%, 25% and 10% versus 43%, 50% and 64% (or 2.4 TFLOP, 42 GBps, 0.5 GB vs 1.8 TFLOPS, 108 GBps 3.5 GB) another is painted. If Tflops was the only important metric of a gpu than PC gamers would all be happy with 4 GB VRAM, 128 bit wide, 10 TFLOP cards.
 
For me the biggest issue is timing. If PS5 comes out in 2019, is MS going to ditch the console after 2 years in the market? Puts them at a very hard spot.
 
jayco said:
For me the biggest issue is timing. If PS5 comes out in 2019, is MS going to ditch the console after 2 years in the market? Puts them at a very hard spot.
Click to expand...
Xbox One X = Xbox One Scorpio = XS just easier imo.

Nothing to ditch here.
Assume a drop off of $50 a year.
That would move XS to $399 after 2 years on the market (at best, not conservative see 4Pro price changes after 1 year)
What could PS5 possibly offer? 2x the performance at the same price?
2x the performance at 799?
As written earlier (even to the disappointment of many fans) per cost FLOP of XS is in line with the market, a dramatic and revolutionary change has to occur for PS5 to release with double the performance and enter the same price bracket; something in which MS could follow suit and dramatically drop the price of XS.
 
Last edited:
Johnglen said:
The reactions on the internet have been ultra brutal and I am not talking about Sony loving places like neogaf. This is "tvtvtvtv" reactions...
Click to expand...

Alot of people balked at the price of the Switch and yet somehow people are still willing to pay a hefty premium over retail. When you look at the market and see it has a place for $150 controllers, $300-$400 headsets and costly SSD drives then I don't think a $500 is far fetched. A little hard to swallow for a lot of people. But it's not going to stay at $500 forever.

Maybe next year at a better price and some new IPs at next years E3 (basically almost all MS devs will be post release of their major titles in summer 2018), you might be more inclined to purchase a XBOX.
 
Sorry, but the value proposition in this competitive market, is rather low if you factor that the One X is a year late, and has a year less to be relevant until next gen. Well, One games will still be playable, but the focus of dev time will be into x1/ps4, and there´s no word about forward compatibility, they both hint about the relevancy of gens.
 
RDGoodla said:
I thought x1x should have been a $399 console with better visual quality for multiplatform games, just like xbox 360.
Then Ms could take back some market share from PlayStation.

Now I really don't understand what Ms wants. Since a $499 console can't really decrease the sales gap significantly, why spending much money for a mid-gen console?
Click to expand...

To get the hardcore to pay the premium, then drop the price to make it more attractive for others.

The problem with this is that you can get too much negative publicity built up against your offering. Then the consumer sentiment becomes "it's too expensive" and you're fighting an uphill battle. Similar to PS3.
 
You cannot justify price based on facts and data. People have intrinsic thresholds, they are not logical. People have magic numbers, lkike $199 for mainstream console sales. Is $249 really going to break you?

Sebbi, your breakdown on the Pro is more of a criticism on the developers or the those making business decisions. If they are not going to put effort into a patch for the largest install base, let's see what they do for a smaller one.
 
yea we may need a thread clean up. But we should have an acronym clean up as well.
XB1X, 1X, XS imo best way to short form Scorpio from XBO.
 
iroboto said:
Xbox One X = Xbox One Scorpio = XS just easier imo.

Nothing to ditch here.
Assume a drop off of $50 a year.
That would move XS to $399 after 2 years on the market (at best, not conservative see 4Pro price changes after 1 year)
What could PS5 possibly offer? 2x the performance at the same price?
2x the performance at 799?
As written earlier (even to the disappointment of many fans) per cost FLOP of XS is in line with the market, a dramatic and revolutionary change has to occur for PS5 to release with double the performance and enter the same price bracket; something in which MS could follow suit and dramatically drop the price of XS.
Click to expand...

Just moving to Zen could provide a large increase in performance with little more cost.
 
dobwal said:
200%? The XBOX isn't $750 with PS4 being $250 nor is the XBOX at $500 with the PS4 priced at $167.
Click to expand...

I edited your post and bolded the bits to show what I was talking about. the 200% refers to the fact that to upgrade XB1S to XB1X will cost double what it will to upgrade from PS4 to Pro. TBH the wink should have given away the 'math' ;)

dobwal said:
In 2013, $400 bought you a 1.84 Tflop, 176 GBps and 8 GB of RAM. In 2016, $400 bought you 4.2 TFLOP, 218 GBs and 8 GB of RAM. Using a linear rate increase similar to what we see between a PS4 and Pro, $400 in 2017 would warrant something more like a 5 TFLOP, 232 GBps and 8 GB device.

The XBOX maybe pricey at $500 but it's not like it's performance doesn't warranted that price.
Click to expand...

Again, it's all relative. MS would have been better off keeping to 8GB and lowering the price to $450 (if that was an option). They went on about how well balanced XBO was and now they have the most unbalanced machine out. How many devs (outside MS funded) do you think will utilise the extra RAM when you consider than the % of gamers who will benefit will be in single figures (probably forever)?

And when devs 'need' the extra RAM we'll be talking about next gen anyway - this seems like they're trying to split gens and release schedules from Sony like I suggested some time ago. Everyone was saying how upset those buying Pro would be upset when PS5 came out if it were 2/3 years later - well what about XB1X buyers who are paying 25% more a year later in the gen if gens for Sony and MS are aligned?

What makes sense to me is Sony release PS5 in ~2 years and MS XBoxZ a year or 2 after that.
 
jayco said:
Just moving to Zen could provide a large increase in performance with little more cost.
Click to expand...
It really just comes down to whether or not Sony would be capable of producing Scorpio then MS have been able to.
With the current price point of 499 with 1 TB hard drive, could Sony make the same capabilities for $399? If not, then any additional equipment: Zen, Vega, HBM, memory will increase the prices further.
There's virtually no possibility in which PS5 lands on top of XS with a better performance mixture without a significant price difference.
Zen is not going to be a 'little more cost' then what MS has with Jaguar, its practically impossible, AMD would have the be the worst negotiators in history.
Assume Jaguar is licensed to Sony and MS for their purposes. They can use their own engineers or AMD engineers to modify the CPU as required.
There is 1 price for that license, meaning the longer they use the technology, the unit price continues to drop.

Zen is going to be a new contract. There's virtually no way that agreement to be only a 'a little more than the agreement signed 3 years ago with jaguar'.
 
dobwal said:
So 128% vs 43% alone paints one picture but when you look at 128%, 25% and 10% versus 43%, 50% and 64% (or 2.4 TFLOP, 42 GBps, 0.5 GB vs 1.8 TFLOPS, 108 GBps 3.5 GB) another is painted. If Tflops was the only important metric of a gpu than PC gamers would all be happy with 4 GB VRAM, 128 bit wide, 10 TFLOP cards.
Click to expand...

It's not the only factor but the most decisive one. Then comes the CPU.

We all know that the gap between the PS4/Pro is much larger than that between the Pro/X.

You're the only one here trying to say otherwise. So far, people only tried to discuss if the gap is larger than that between the XB1/PS4 because it's the only reasonable discussion.

But you are free to expect the same kind of improvement the Pro has over the PS4 for the X...
 
I have a feeling when this thing drops to 399, PS5 would literally be around the corner and that's gonna cause way more trouble for X1X to sell than at Nov 2017. I honestly don't see much of a user base for X1X at all in the near future but then again MS probably doesn't care much, their main goal is try to get the image back.
 
RDGoodla said:
It's fascinating how easily you're able to mock and judge what seems to be the greater part of the gaming population.
If 50-100 bucks doesn't make any real difference for 4K TV owners, then you think Scorpio will beat the PS4 Pro in sales as soon as it releases and by a wide margin, right?
Come next holidays, we'll see how the XboneX fares in sales against a $350 PS4 Pro then.
Click to expand...

What do I miss? When have I even mentioned the PS4 Pro?
 
dobwal said:
Scorpio only sports 1.8 more Tflops than the Pro but 50% more bandwidth and 50% more RAM.
Click to expand...

Aaaactually... XboneX has 1.8 FP32 TFLOPs more than the PR4 Pro but 2.4 FP16 TFLOPs less.

Of course this isn't going to make the Pro any faster than the XboneX in probably any circumstance, but the Pro does have a trick or two that can decrease the performance gap.

I'm also afraid that Microsoft's apparent obsession with the "true 4K" moniker might result in games having to decrease other IQ features just to reach those 3840*2160 pixels instead of just upscaling from 1440-1800p to 4K which seem to have very little visual impact unless you're playing in a >70" TV.
I think FFXV will make a great comparison between the mid-gen consoles, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top