Xbox Series X [XBSX] [Release November 10 2020]

[Johnny Awesome]

The next Tomb Raider is still coming to Xbox. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk and 30% royalty? The only reason would be to stop Sony from buying them.

It's no surprise that MS bought two companies (Bethesda and ABK) that Sony was paying to hurt MS and courting a third (WB).

 

[Liandry]

Nisaaru, I understand what you are talking about. But in most scenarious BW on XSX will be the same, at least in multiplatfor games. And we see this now. Almost an all game comparisons, XSX and PS5 show same results. I don't think there will be any reason to use RAM different on XSX than on PS5 in multiplatfor games, because those additional 5-10% will give nothing. XSX and PS5 are almost 3 years old and still results are the same. In exclusive games things can be different but for now there is almost no proof of that. There are onli some exclusive games on XSX and all of those lose to PS5 exclusives in terms of graphics. For next year or two there are some games announced, but all of them still is behind PS5 games or there are no gameplay trailers, so we don't know how they will look.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But in most scenarious BW on XSX will be the same...

I don't understand how you are coming to that conclusion. You do some curious number wrangling in your earlier post but that's not really looking at it correctly. If XBSX is working from the fast memory, which is confirmed as being up to the devs to load data there, then it is working at 560 GB/s. when you say it doesn't look better, it's only a 17% improvement over PS5's peak BW so what exactly do you expect to see? As discussed in the other threads, the bottlenecks are across the systems' subtle differences and can't be pinned to the same BW. That is, a lack of higher framerates or similar texture detail on XBSX games, say, doesn't automatically point to obtained BW being the same as on PS5.

 

[iroboto]

just had an epiphany and noticed the double standard here, and for some time;

on XSX we see people discuss its combined bandwidth to be below or equal to PS5, even though developers have full control over how and what data goes into its bandwidth pools. And on PS5 discussion assumes it’s always be running 10TF or 2230Mhz, even though developers have absolutely 0 control over it’s GPU clocking.

 

[Liandry]

I don't understand how you are coming to that conclusion. You do some curious number wrangling in your earlier post but that's not really looking at it correctly. If XBSX is working from the fast memory, which is confirmed as being up to the devs to load data there, then it is working at 560 GB/s. when you say it doesn't look better, it's only a 17% improvement over PS5's peak BW so what exactly do you expect to see? As discussed in the other threads, the bottlenecks are across the systems' subtle differences and can't be pinned to the same BW. That is, a lack of higher framerates or similar texture detail on XBSX games, say, doesn't automatically point to obtained BW being the same as on PS5.

I mean what is game is made for XSX and PS5 developers will make PS5 version first because PS5 is less powerful console. And when RAM usage will be made, there will be high chance what RAM usage will be same all almost the same on XSX. And when we compare alot of games what already are released that can be true. As an example, if non graphics data (game code, ai, physics) will use 168 GB/s of BW on PS5 then same amount of BW will be used on XSX, that will leave 280 GB/s on PS5 and on XSX. Scenariuos can be different, more non graphics data, or less. For exclusive game developers can use different method. They can use less non graphics ram, so there will be more cycles for graphics ram an more BW than on PS5. Than potentialy could lead to better graphics on XSX. If I'm not mistaken XSX cant use both ram pools simoutaneously and that mean what some cycles will be for fast ram and some for slow ram.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

As an example, if non graphics data (game code, ai, physics) will use 168 GB/s of BW on PS5 then same amount of BW will be used on XSX, that will leave 280 GB/s on PS5 and on XSX.

No. These are rates, not quantities. You can use 480 GB/s for 0.001s on PS5 to load data into the CPU cache for processing, followed by 480 GB/s for 0.003 seconds for GPU work. On XBSX, you can spend 0.0014s loading the same data into CPU caches from the high mem, and then 0.0027s accessing low mem for the GPU to do the same work.

The RAM is not constantly accessed for one second of work distributed over CPU and GPU. These are rates. You need to determine how much data is actually transferred at any given point and then determine how long that would take across each bus. If we split a 1/60th second frame into 25% CPU work and 75% GPU work, completely arbitrary numbers, PS5 can transfer a maximum of 2GB for the CPU and 6 GBs for the GPU in that time. XBSX can access 1.4 GB from high mem and 6.75 GB from low mem. Note that 2 GB is a hell of a lot for CPU - I'm guessing most CPU workloads consume a lot less data meaning proportionally more BW available for GPU work. As you can see, as the workload shifts away from CPU, the XBSX can access more of its high BW for GPU work, but as CPU workload increases, available time to access the faster BW decreases. Maybe a Bethesda database monster spends a lot more frametime with CPU work reducing the time GPU can access the RAM and reducing the amount of data it can get. And that's by reducing the amount of time the GPU is accessing the RAM, not by reducing the BW of the GPU.

There can also be other factors at play like processors accessing at the same time causing contention which we don't have any data on. But we do know on PS4, CPU accessing RAM at the same time as GPU caused massive reduction in BW to GPU disproportionate to the rate of BW being used by the CPU at the time. And then you aren't always accessing data at peak rate anyway, but doing random memory hops on CPU, which adds more complication to the measurements.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Yes, in general, CPU workloads don't benefit from the massive amounts of bandwidth that is typically available to a GPU. If they did, you'd see GDDR also being used for main memory on PCs. As it is typical, DDR5 4800 gives about 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth, well below what is available to either console. And PC's typically aren't as CPU limited as consoles (IE - despite having significantly slower memory access for the CPU, it's not negatively impacting it to a significant degree compared to the bandwidth that is technically available to the CPU on consoles).

So, if the "slow" section of memory on the XBS consoles was used purely for CPU tasks, even that bandwidth is incredible overkill for virtually any CPU task required on a console.

The only time this "may" be a problem is if GPU data that requires the fastest access possible is located in the "slow" section of memory. At that point that's purely down to the developer not properly assigning where in memory that data should be located (IE - they aren't properly profiling their game) as not all GPU data accesses necessarily require the highest bandwidth available.

The only other time when GPU memory access speeds might be negatively impacted is when both the CPU and GPU are accessing memory simultaneously, but then this type of memory access would negatively impact the PS5 as well.

Regards,
SB

 

[eastmen]

I thought the last 3 TR games were quite strong. Deus Ex would have added another franchise with a lot of potential.

People criticise that MS doesn't provide Action Adventure/Single player experiences and both of these franchises could have provided that or at least could be used as a foundation to build up on.

I think MS has plenty of single player experiences. I don't see deus ex being a strong action adventure game. It's really just an fps with additional content. It's also a dead franchise and MS would have to create a team to resurrect it. They have plenty of ip already to resurrect

 

[Liandry]

No. These are rates, not quantities. You can use 480 GB/s for 0.001s on PS5 to load data into the CPU cache for processing, followed by 480 GB/s for 0.003 seconds for GPU work. On XBSX, you can spend 0.0014s loading the same data into CPU caches from the high mem, and then 0.0027s accessing low mem for the GPU to do the same work.

Many thanks for so big explanation!

 

[Rangers]

There are onli some exclusive games on XSX and all of those lose to PS5 exclusives in terms of graphics.

Some would disagree.

Point is it's a matter of opinion not cut and dry when discussing exclusives.

There are multiplat games where Series X shows an edge, recently Mortal Kombat 1 runs at a higher dynamic res than PS5 on XBSX, and Immortal of Aveum ran ~10 FPS better at points on X (relevant more for being one of the first UE5 games). These are just two that come to mind, it isn't like Xbox doesnt have it's wins, as many as PS5. It just seems where X has an edge it's talked about less.

Also I think it stands to reason, PS5 has higher clocks. On older rooted games that dont stress shaders, which lets be honest is most all of them to this point, it's faster I/O might be expected to win out by a bit. OTOH as games get more advanced and complex farther in to the gen, and more math bound, Xbox could stretch it's legs. The thing is development is so molasses slow now, that who knows when "next gen" games proliferate, year 6?

Then you get into the fact Ps5 has at least a 2:1 worldwide install base edge. As such it's the lead platform, nobody is going to design around 20% more flops on Series X. There's countless factors that could dull the paper edge. I suspect another one is development environment, wasn't there rumors it was worse on X?

Yet ALL THAT SAID. I would agree XSX has not really shown it's paper power edge to date by and large. And that's disappointing. Even if the above factors can help explain, and 15-20% in math parameter may not be huge to being with, when at a fill rate deficit etc.

But I'd be interested in discussion if the split RAM speeds did harm XSX theoretical. Gotta be some devs who know... but they'd basically be the only ones, hands on devs, and it's very hard to find them or get them to talk.

 

[orangpelupa]

Some would disagree.

Point is it's a matter of opinion not cut and dry when discussing exclusives.

There are multiplat games where Series X shows an edge, recently Mortal Kombat 1 runs at a higher dynamic res than PS5 on XBSX, and Immortal of Aveum ran ~10 FPS better at points on X (relevant more for being one of the first UE5 games). These are just two that come to mind, it isn't like Xbox doesnt have it's wins, as many as PS5. It just seems where X has an edge it's talked about less.

Also I think it stands to reason, PS5 has higher clocks. On older rooted games that dont stress shaders, which lets be honest is most all of them to this point, it's faster I/O might be expected to win out by a bit. OTOH as games get more advanced and complex farther in to the gen, and more math bound, Xbox could stretch it's legs. The thing is development is so molasses slow now, that who knows when "next gen" games proliferate, year 6?

Then you get into the fact Ps5 has at least a 2:1 worldwide install base edge. As such it's the lead platform, nobody is going to design around 20% more flops on Series X. There's countless factors that could dull the paper edge. I suspect another one is development environment, wasn't there rumors it was worse on X?

Yet ALL THAT SAID. I would agree XSX has not really shown it's paper power edge to date by and large. And that's disappointing. Even if the above factors can help explain, and 15-20% in math parameter may not be huge to being with, when at a fill rate deficit etc.

But I'd be interested in discussion if the split RAM speeds did harm XSX theoretical. Gotta be some devs who know... but they'd basically be the only ones, hands on devs, and it's very hard to find them or get them to talk.

if that's true that steering feels better on Forza, then hopefully they adopt that steering design in future FH.

 

[eastmen]

if that's true that steering feels better on Forza, then hopefully they adopt that steering design in future FH.

FH should be on this new version of the engine now. So I think the driving should be better however I think they will keep it a bit looser for the more rally type game

 

[orangpelupa]

FH should be on this new version of the engine now. So I think the driving should be better however I think they will keep it a bit looser for the more rally type game

The steering in FH doesn't feel good at all, at least compared to GT.

Btw I was referring to steering wheel steering. I forgot to mention that.

 

[eastmen]

The steering in FH doesn't feel good at all, at least compared to GT.

Btw I was referring to steering wheel steering. I forgot to mention that.

ah, I thought you meant the slightly more arcade like feel which I believe they do because its more of a rally event like sega rally control vs daytona.

 

[fehu]

Apparently, Microsoft decided to try to promote itself: another legal case for FTC.

 

[eastmen]

Apparently, Microsoft decided to try to promote itself: another legal case for FTC.

Pretty good advert. Makes me feel a bit old because I would have flashed back to older systems lol.

Missed chance at having the surface duo phone in the comercial however

 

[fehu]

yeah, maybe into dead or alive beach volley

 

[eastmen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1716471501640397237

Xbox partner showcase tomorrow

 

[Shifty Geezer]

MS to block unauthorised accessories from November 12th.

Xbox's new policy — say goodbye to unofficial accessories from November thanks to error '0x82d60002' (UPDATE)

Error 0x82d60002 informs players their devices will be blocked. Here's why.

www.windowscentral.com

• From November 12, 2023, Microsoft will no longer allow unauthorized third-party accessories to be used with its Xbox consoles.
• Players are reporting a warning message displaying on Xbox when plugging in unauthorized accessories, notifying them of the date their accessories will be blocked with "error 0x82d60002."
• Xbox advises returning the accessory and instead referring to its list of authorized products on its website.
• The message is shown due to the latest console build, which is said to be causing console issues when using these third-party accessories.

Microsoft:

"Microsoft and other licensed Xbox hardware partners' accessories are designed and manufactured with quality standards for performance, security, and safety. Unauthorized accessories can compromise the gaming experience on Xbox consoles (Xbox One, Xbox Series X/S.) Players may receive a pop-up warning that their accessory is unauthorized. Eventually, the unauthorized accessory will be blocked from use to preserve the console gaming experience. For a full list of accessories that are supported on Xbox consoles, please visit www.xbox.com/accessories, our support pages here and here, and our Designed for Xbox Partner Hardware Program page here."

 

[Scott_Arm]

Will probably have some downsides for sure, but it'll also hopefully wipe out modded cheat controllers. They're a serious problem in multiplayer games. I've seen mention of custom accessibility controllers, and they'll need to find some kind of solution for that.