JRPGfan said:
A "sudo" 8k for those people that buy 8k TV's? nah. |
Or we get several tiers of hardware out of the gate.
| Errorist76 said: Be assured Sony has very close ties to AMD (they even developed some Vega features together)... |
That is a bold claim. Now prove it.
| dx11332sega said: Xbox One X and PS4 Pro have been battling positions back and forth in january and February |
Overall I don't think it really matters. The Playstation 4 Pro hasn't exactly been smashing the base Playstation 4 in terms of sales rate.
| Errorist76 said: You also forget, that the Pro‘s GPU is indeed more advanced, as it even uses Vega features the X1X is lacking. Optimisation can do a lot if developers take their time. |
...Like...?
| Errorist76 said: There are like 30 games running at native 4K, even 4K/60 on Pro. It’s not a generational difference at all..it’s a bit of image quality, that’s about it. In very few cases at least better textures. |
The Pro and Xbox One X are basically taking the same games, running them at a higher resolution/framerate with sometimes an increase in visual settings.
That's pretty much all there is to it.
The Xbox One X however does tend to get a few more extra visual settings, higher resolutions and framerates more often.
In the end though, both platforms are typically just taking advantage of extra settings that were already made for another technically superior platform, the PC, they still aren't receiving everything though.
| Bofferbrauer2 said: Thus the GPU part needs at least 10-12 TFlops of raw calculating power to stand out visually over the Pro, and that doesn't come cheap. |
Why does it need it? And how does it relate to how expensive it is?
| Bofferbrauer2 said: Graphic cards in that power range cost more than an entire console right now, and even by 2020 it doesn't look like their price will be under 200$ by then. |
Yeah. GPU's right now aren't representative of actual costs though.
DRAM prices have artificially inflated prices... And then they have additional pressure from bitcoin snapping up GPU's left, right and center.
I suggest you don't take the current price dynamics as something representative of chip costs.
| Bofferbrauer2 said: Add to this the need for more RAM and a stronger CPU plus the price of all the rest of the hardware and I hardly see how a price of 399$ can be achieved without resorting to an unhealthy heavy amount of subventionning |
Good thing higher density RAM released this year... And stronger CPU's have been around for the good part of a decade.
| Errorist76 said: I remember the 360 giving highend PCs a run for their money at release. |
That is because it did. The Xbox 360 had a Radeon x1900 hybrid GPU which did legitimately give high-end GPU's a run for it's money. - Well, until nVidia brought forth the amazing Geforce 8800, then the PC was ahead of consoles again.
However... GPU's have gotten exponentially faster, larger, more power hungry and expensive, it will never happen again.
Even the Xbox One X has a mid-range GPU. - And that was a "Premium" console.
| Intrinsic said: You will also know that there is no way that the XB1X can hold its own when its still powered by the Jaguar CPU. |
To Microsoft's credit, they have taken Jaguar as far as it can go.
It's got a decent clock rate at 2.3ghz, it won't set any records on fire though, but 700mhz is 700mhz over the Playstation 4.
However... Where things get muddied is that Microsoft has offloaded as much work as they could that is typically done on the CPU onto the GPU/Fixed function blocks, so developers if they do the right thing... Should extract more out of the Xbox One X CPU than the clock rate frequency bump implies.
| Errorist76 said: I game on PC, thank you. Problem is PCs are also held back by those weak CPUs. The Jaguar was already outdated at release 5 years ago. My 7 year old i5 is faster than the CPU in the X1X! That’s why it’s still sufficient for 99% of games. |
My 10 year old PC's Core 2 processor is faster than what's in the Xbox One X. So not really saying much. :P
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
