By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HollyGamer said:
Azzanation said:

Not all hardcore gamers are PC only. There are plenty of hardcore console gamers who want the best visuals just as much as the next PC gamer in fact I know more PC gamers who play on PCs weaker than a Pro and an X and also there is plenty of info about the average PC gamer that does not have a high end PC. Not everyone wants a PC and that's coming from a PC gamer myself. I have plenty of friends who refuse to go out and build a $1500aus PC just to play games better than a $600aus console. 

As I mentioned before, games will always push the bar every new gen and they will eventually utilise 100% of the hardware in the next machines so having a 30% advantage will be noticeable. A better argument would be would console gamers care that much? Yes and no. Many console gamers this gen made a huge fuss over 900p to 1080p. You might not care but there will be others that do.

I don't need to zoom in to see the differences in games from a Pro to an X or an X to a Ultra PC game. I can tell, weather it affects my gameplay experience it doesn't. Next gen is going to be about what you deem affordable as its going a direction of how much you want to spend for quality.

True, not all hardcore gamer are PC only, but most of them are on PC. Because best graphic can only be achieved on powerful PC that is irrefutable fact.  And not all hardcore gamers build  1500 USD , instead they buy GPU that cost 500 USD on par with 600 USD Xbox X and just upgrade their normal  PC instead building a new one. I don't see any reason to not upgrading your PC, but a loyal Xbox fans will probably buy Xbox X instead PC or go with Xbox and  PC 

30% will not be noticeable especially when most of xbox games are made using directX api that is good at scaling on many platform (consoles, many variant of PC on the market, future hardware compatibility)  but bad at optimizing on single devices. It's the opposite with Playstation API with their GNM and GNMX which is bad for porting games, bad at future hardware compatibility but good on optimizing one single device. 

Also there are more factors then just Teraflop number. like memory bandwidth, GPU speed etc etc. Even some expert said many game developer choose small CU count but higher clock instead bigger CU count but less cloaked frequency. PS5 are rumored to have 2 Ghz with small CU that will benefit on pixel rates and geometry shaders. On top of that  both are using the same memory bandwidth speed (Flute benchmark indicate PS5 will be using 18 Gbs of GDDR6 instead on the numer on the OP) . While Xbox will be using 56 CU with 1700 Mhz speed to achieve 12 teraflop with memory at 18 Gbs as well. This means it will be even far smaller then 30% in reality. This is very different scenario then PS4 and Xbox One comparison,  where the hardware is even bottleneck on  memory bandwidth. 

I think only very small people that can only tell the difference and you is one of them , also lets be honest here without going to Digital foundry nobody able to pint point the difference , especially when Digital foundry  pause the games, zoom in and out and bring the pic close together to compare it. Nobody really care that much. Probably only hundred thousand people like you who will care to see Digital Foundry to see the difference and  buy Xbox X many will just buy new GPU. And all of the person who go to Digital foundry are niche gamer and super hardcore.

Let's look on this gen on how a powerful Xbox One X is, It still unable to  changed their sales number. Content, price, brand is the most important thing,  power also important but on certain degree. 

@bolded: that's absolutely not true, especially when you have ray tracing lowering the fps count so significantly. at similar graphic settings can be the equivalent of playing at 30+ fps vs 60 fps locked