Xbox One X(Scorpio) Launches Nov. 7

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

For the 4th time, I'm not saying his CPU choice wouldn't have worked.

Except you're arguing that his build isn't comparable because it doesn't use an 8-core cpu, which is nonsense.

49 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

Except from the fact that the CPU you have chosen is wrong, .....

45 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

Your missing the point, I'm not saying the CPU can't handle it, I'm saying you've tried to put together a PC that isn't using the same or equivalent parts so that the price will look better. Not saying it can't be done, just saying you haven't done this.

 

[Eniqmatic]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except you're arguing that his build isn't comparable because it doesn't use an 8-core cpu, which is nonsense.

 

 

No you've mistaken what I was trying to say, I meant the CPU is wrong in terms of price, it doesn't cost the same.

 

Edit: As proven when I said in that quote above "I'm not saying the CPU can't handle it"

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

No you've mistaken what I was trying to say, I meant the CPU is wrong in terms of price, it doesn't cost the same.

But that doesn't matter. It will yield similar results. 

 

Let's say the consoles used a 6-core 4930k that costs $600~. I wouldn't be expected to use a $600 4930k to build a comparable PC when I could use an R5 1600, which is both cheaper and better.

[Eniqmatic]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

But that doesn't matter. It will yield similar results. 

 

Let's say the consoles used a 6-core 4930k that costs $600~. Would I be expected to use a $600 4930k or would an R5 1600 make far more sense being $200~ and with better performance.

I don't disagree with that, but your still missing the point, your paying for an 8 core AMD CPU on the Xbox. So when trying to build the same PC to show that the value isn't great, you should use the same costing parts to show that the value isn't that great on the Xbox if that is what you believe.

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

I don't disagree with that, but your still missing the point, your paying for an 8 core AMD CPU on the Xbox. So when trying to build the same PC to show that the value isn't great, you should use the same costing parts to show that the value isn't that great on the Xbox if that is what you believe.

You're paying for an 8-core AMD CPU that yields similar performance to a G4560. The specific hardware that is used is irrelevant, all that matters in a comparison trying to demonstrate relative performance is performance. You don't need to use the same hardware if something cheaper will give you the same results. 

 

By your logic I should also be required to find the OEM board that is used as well as the PSU, and everything else.

[suicidalfranco]

18 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

• Ease of use 
• Split screen
• Exclusives
• UHD Blu-Ray
• Size

FIFY

[Dash Lambda]

6 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

I don't disagree with that, but your still missing the point, your paying for an 8 core AMD CPU on the Xbox. So when trying to build the same PC to show that the value isn't great, you should use the same costing parts to show that the value isn't that great on the Xbox if that is what you believe.

But the part choice is part of the value. Let's say we have access to exactly the same parts as the Xbox and putting them together costs $500 -What if you can make something that performs better for $300 if you use different parts?

When comparing different machines in these circumstances, you compare performance.

 

Also, do we even know anything about the CPU aside from Microsoft saying "customized"? We can infer all day, but I haven't seen anything specific...

EDIT: About the architecture, I mean. I know it says 8-core.

[Eniqmatic]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

You're paying for an 8-core AMD CPU that yields similar performance to a G4560. The specific hardware that is used is irrelevant, all that matters in a comparison trying to demonstrate relative performance is performance. You don't need to use the same hardware if something cheaper will give you the same results. 

OK I cannot explain it to you any other way. In my opinion he was trying to build the same PC as the hardware in the Xbox to show that the cost was the same.

 

However the main point is that when you total everything up in his build, the price comes out to over $300 dollars minimum (when the Bluray drive, Harddrive, OS and a cheap keyboard and mouse are added) than the Xbox, which isn't a small number at all. 

[Dackzy]

eh, I wouldn't by it, but I would also not complain if someone gave it to me. This might be the first console that might be worth taking a look at for me, but that CPU kek. 

 

I could just buy a 500$ GPU when I upgrade my PC and get better performance than this console can give. I am going to upgrade my desktop anyways, I need more cores and more GPU power, so why waste money on a console?  

 

I could defiantly see this as a very popular console since more and more are buying 4k TVs and a console is just very simple and easy.

[79wjd]

7 minutes ago, Eniqmatic said:

OK I cannot explain it to you any other way. In my opinion he was trying to build the same PC as the hardware in the Xbox to show that the cost was the same.

 

However the main point is that when you total everything up in his build, the price comes out to over $300 dollars minimum (when the Bluray drive, Harddrive, OS and a cheap keyboard and mouse are added) than the Xbox, which isn't a small number at all. 

The main point is that you can use any (new and not used) hardware you want as long as the performance is comparable. 

 

The fact is that there is no simple comparison between the two as consoles also require a $60/year fee if you want to play online and games are significantly more expensive (especially if they're older games). But not being able to use the exact same parts is not the issue. 

[Majestic]

32 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

@Majestic

• Ease of use 
• Split screen
• Exclusives
• UHD Blu-Ray
• Size

Consoles have basically always only made sense for the subset of people that care about something that is simpler to use and offers better local split screen along with the exclusives they care about. 

 

The point of the comparison was to compare what $500 gets you with an Xbox X vs. a similarly priced PC. Although he should have also added in an HDD, wifi, and the cost of windows+peripherals.

Ease of use, name an example

Split screen, fine.

Which exclusives, I didn't see any in the presentation

Can be bought seperately

Mini-ITX

 

Also, this isn't a console vs. PC per se, I was also comparing it to the XBOX One S. Why this box in particular.

And yes, +$50 for the drive. Perhipherals isn't fair, as you don't include the UHD tv in that 499 either, or the second controller for split screen.

[79wjd]

Just now, Majestic said:

Ease of use, name an example

It's still easier to setup/use in general, it offers a better living room environment, and there tends to be fewer issues than with Windows/a whole computer. I've used my PC on my TV with a controller and I still found a console to be more convenient. 

Just now, Majestic said:

Which exclusives, I didn't see any in the presentation

I didn't watch the presentation, but there are more than likely going to end up being console exclusives as there always are/have been.

Just now, Majestic said:

Can be bought seperately

Yes it can, but that's still a hefty additional cost ($250 for a player, $130 for a 5.25" drive).

Just now, Majestic said:

Mini-ITX

Still quite a bit larger than an Xbox X

Just now, Majestic said:

Also, this isn't a console vs. PC per se, I was also comparing it to the XBOX One S. Why this box in particular.

The only real advantage compared to the One S is a higher resolution, which is enough for some people. 

[michaelocarroll007]

15 hours ago, Chaos_Sorcerer said:

So are we looking at 980-ish performance? It'll be pretty impressive if they can sell one for $399.

 

So is this console the next generation? Or is it another half-assed upgrade like the PS4 Pro?

its more like a 970 1060 with better optimization. probably given visuals id imagine around 980 Visuals.  its a higher end 480/580 in actuality

 

The PS4 pro was like 4 times faster i believe but runs games between 1440p- 2160p then typically closer to 1440 then  upscaled a bit to reach the actual 2160p. The Xbox is 5-6 times faster and supposibly wont scale. which means probably same visuals as PS4 pro but not scaled upwards and done natively. but i doubt they can crank any settings up and still achieve 4k. Either way for the size price and hardware its worth it for anyone whos intrested in just overall better looking games.

[suicidalfranco]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

I didn't watch the presentation, but there are more than likely going to end up being console exclusives as there always are/have been.

all gone, not one announced that wasn't "and W10" too

[Red Hardware]

15 hours ago, BuckGup said:

Yeah a 480 isn't going to play 4K 60FPS without looking like utter dog vomit

Hi 

You are right but it's a console and games are highly optimized for it

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Red Hardware said:

Hi 

You are right but it's a console and games are highly optimized for it

Even with optimization, they can't do some voodoo magic. 4k@60 isn't going to happen without settings being lowered significantly. 

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Even with optimization, they can't do some voodoo magic. 4k@60 isn't going to happen without settings being lowered significantly. 

The settings will be the same as the current Xbox, they already showed Forza engine scaling to 4k60 with 0 optimization.

[Misanthrope]

10 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Even with optimization, they can't do some voodoo magic. 4k@60 isn't going to happen without settings being lowered significantly. 

For reference kind of a worst case scenario: Witcher 3 4k on the heaviest part of it (Novigrad) you can expect about this: very nice looking 30 FPS 

(Rig based around an RX480 and i7-2600k)

 

 

[79wjd]

6 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

The settings will be the same as the current Xbox, they already showed Forza engine scaling to 4k60 with 0 optimization.

And Forza wasn't running at high settings to begin with. A 580-class GPU in a console isn't going to magically perform significantly better than a 580 in a PC. 

[Red Hardware]

9 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Because in order to do that, they have to make compromises in other areas.  Lower quality textures, reduced settings, etc.  The whole point of gaming on PC is to get the best looking visuals AND high resolutions, not just "good enough" visuals (I say, as someone who still games at 1080p, heh).

AND  mouse and keyboard AND mods and...

[The Benjamins]

14 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

And Forza wasn't running at high settings to begin with. A 580-class GPU in a console isn't going to magically perform significantly better than a 580 in a PC. 

I never said it was going to run at high settings. the point of the Xbox one X is so you can run existing xbox one games at 4k and due to its 4+ times power it should be able to scale games from 1080p to 4k with out a lot of work, and with optimization they should get a better experience. be it 900p to 4k or visual quality or FPS smoothness.

 

I don't get this expectation it will be 4k60 Ultra stuff.

 

With Forza they showed a good looking game that is able to run at 4k60.

 

I hope devs opt to do 1080p 60+ vs 4k30 super sampling for non 4k users. or make it a option.

[Chaos_Sorcerer]

3 hours ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

its more like a 970 1060 with better optimization. probably given visuals id imagine around 980 Visuals.  its a higher end 480/580 in actuality

 

The PS4 pro was like 4 times faster i believe but runs games between 1440p- 2160p then typically closer to 1440 then  upscaled a bit to reach the actual 2160p. The Xbox is 5-6 times faster and supposibly wont scale. which means probably same visuals as PS4 pro but not scaled upwards and done natively. but i doubt they can crank any settings up and still achieve 4k. Either way for the size price and hardware its worth it for anyone whos intrested in just overall better looking games.

Higher end Polaris + optimization should be around 980 performance. The 480/580 already outperform the 970 and 3GB 1060. They're probably just going to turn down the visuals and call it "4K". Considering that a 580 can sort of run a lot of games at 4K on lower settings at 60FPS, it wouldn't be too surprising. 

[dalekphalm]

20 hours ago, tsk said:

Price: 499$

 

 

 

-snips-

Here's some 4K ingame footage from Forza 7 which was announed simultaneously.

 

Anyone getting this console?
I've been thinking about getting a console myself and retiring from the PCMR, but the Playstation has a more interesting game library.

Please format that quote for Day Theme users. Almost impossible to read without highlighting the text.

 

On topic: Interesting! I've been eyeing the Scorpio since it was announced. The thing is, I'm worried about the Canadian launch price. I'm expecting $599 or more.

 

I might trade up my XBOX One S though when it comes out.

[Shreyas1]

20 hours ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

Problem with the Xbox is .-....

 

 - Cancelled.

 

 - They are screwing the Halo franchise really well, but Halo Wars 2 was a nice game, well see what comes from Halo 6.

 

 - Will be a Playstation exclusive, just like Disgaea and Kingdom Hearts probably will always be.

 

Like seriously, an excellent console with very few exclusives, that are either available for Windows too or get outclassed by the Playstation vast list of awesome games that are actually exclusive to it.

with halo 6, we at least have split screen co-op confirmed. 

[HalGameGuru]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

And Forza wasn't running at high settings to begin with. A 580-class GPU in a console isn't going to magically perform significantly better than a 580 in a PC. 

Except according to MS and the pundits it will. The revised way MS has the GPU and CPU interact and the D3D12 intermediary they claim to have cut the CPU overhead for rendering by half. With good compression textures for 4k will be fine, with a streamlined render and command pipeline it will have an easier time keeping up with geometry and draw calls, and with it being 40CUs, "customized," and well clocked? I don't see an issue with properly optimized games running a native 4k60 without too much trouble.