Next Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post E3 2019, pre GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]

Designed by engineers playing video games at a desk.

Once again, they ignored the necessitiy of front-to-back airflow to fit with other devices in the cabinet/rack, it's so tall it cannot fit in any AV cabinet anyway and it cannot be in front of the TV without obstructing either.

Sony better not try this too, or they'll both end up on the floor.

 

I don't think the energy costs for consumers are under consideration by the console makers. Only their own manufacturing costs.

I do think that going with smaller dies and higher clocks can be more cost effective long term as smaller dies may allow faster transitions to future manufacturing processes with higher yields.

 

Energy costs vary greatly. Some people will even have their energy costs vary within a day.

My xbox uses something like 2 cents an hour of gaming, for me. Which might be $70 total over the life of the console at 2hours a day for 5years.

You're gonna be hard pressed to sell people on pay $50 now save $70 over 5 years. I'll invest my $50 elsewhere thank you.

 

It can lay horizontally and has smaller dimensions than a typical AV receiver.

 

They said it can be horizontal? It's not so bad then!

 

Thanks, I didn't know that. Why is the comparison different for the RX 480 to RX 5500?

 

My numbers were not meant to be taken literally. It's just a made up example

 

When Project Scorpio was first announced they used "4.5x as powerful as an Xbox One(original)". When they used "times as powerful" they were referring to flops..
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/project-scorpio-is-45x-as-powerful-as-xbox-one-phi/1100-6440965/

Last night:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-series-x-will-be-twice-as-powerful-as-xbox-on/1100-6472198/

It's the same language and to me it's referring to flops.

Of course there is a separate issue in that statement in itself as the comparison to the base console is less explicit than the comparison to Xbox One X.

 

But that doesnt matter since the second part is your higher floor.

The building is over 8 times higher than a 1 story building.
The building is over 2 times higher than a 6 story building.

 

That wasn't the jump to a whole new generation of consoles though.

 

Was it referring to flops or relative performance?
Fact is when it comes to XO to 1X there the same metric as same architectural gpu.
Not the case this time around.

 

"Scorpio is more powerful than the original Xbox One, four and a half times. And the six teraflops will impact the games and how they play," he explained.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/project-scorpio-is-45x-as-powerful-as-xbox-one-phi/1100-6440965/

 

They were not the same architecture. XO was GCN 2 / Bonaire derived while 1X was GCN 4 / Polaris derived.

 

He actually said how many TF the console would be. He didn't refer to any TF number this time.

 

I mean, they probably don't want to give exact numbers because they will be adjusting clocks for a while.

 

Congrats to AMD, they must have done some magic to get a 12TF gpu ready in a console, when their current top end desktop part is below 10TF, and that's without RT and all the other stuff, not forgetting the high power use etc.

 

I mean I guess I could completely wrong and he could be misleading us but we have Phil Spencer using pretty much the exact same type of language when talking about a console gpu power comparison. To believe he means different this time or the metrics are different is further reaching than just taking it as a straight comparison of flops.

This guy is the head of Xbox and is knows his statements will be dissected. He didn't use different wording like "performs 2X" or "performance" is 2X the GPU of Xbox One X. Gamespot's own "exclusive" article about the specs states right after Spencer's quote: "And when we do the math too, the Series X seems to be hitting around 12 teraFLOPs (the general metric used as shorthand to indicate graphics processing power)." No pushback or correction from Microsoft on that.

So the proof leans towards flops not some "general performance metric" when comparing the GPU power between consoles. Those interpreting otherwise have less evidence other than there own belief.

By the way I should state that I was believer that these consoles would be in the 9-10Tflop range, not 12. But there is a fairly strong body of evidence between rumours, leaks and now Phil Spencer's own words that is pointing towards 12Tflops.

 

What was the performance difference between the two flop to flop?

Edit
For the record I don't think they would be misleading us either way.
Just pointing out that the comparison to XO to 1X doesn't directly equate due to the fact that basically could be taken either way and would mean the same thing, not in this case.as would be very different actual performance.

 

12+TF
VRS tier 2
HW RT

Xenos 2.0