JRPGfan said:
Xbox One X wont even have 2 full years on the market before Its replaced by a Xbox Two? jeez. |
As someone who loves new tech, not a bad problem to have.
| loy310 said: Pfft, what about the head start it got on the Switch, in a year it will outsell XB, being 1st dont mean jack. They gonna have to head start by 3 years to run away with it. |
To be fair though, Nintendo does target different demographics than Sony and Microsoft on the whole.
| Azzanation said: Next gen is clearly going to be pushing technology however what about those PC ports, do all these devs think that PC gamers are going to be running with 10+ TF gaming PCs on average just to run PS5/XB2 games? |
* There is more to performance to flops.
* Games/Game Engines tend to be scalable as well.
* Launch games tend not to push console hardware to it's absolute limits.
| Azzanation said: They barely have 4TF on average, does that mean next gen games wont work on PCs? |
* Flops isn't everything.
People are using flops like they used to use "bits". It's not accurate.
| Azzanation said: Because if it can work on a low level PCs than it can work on the X, and MS will make sure that's the case if they go that PC route. |
The Xbox One X's CPU is it's weak point.
| Azzanation said: If they support low level PCs next gen than sure, the X will be considered a low level PC and be supported because it will be part of Xbox's ecosystem which will support there next Xbox and the previous ones mainly the X. |
The Xbox One X is essentially a Mid-Range PC with a low-end CPU.
| Azzanation said: Let me ask you this, do you think next generation developers aren't going to care for the 10s of millions of PC gamers because there hardware isn't up to PS5/XB2 standards? |
They don't have to care.
The PC goes through this transition EVERY SINGLE console generation, we are heading into the 9th generation of consoles, I can assure you... What you describe is a non-issue.
It's never even been an issue.
| Azzanation said: I was running Doom 2016 on my 2010 AMD 6970 2gig VRAM.. that's .600 TF |
False.
I should know, I was running four Radeon 6950's unlocked and modded into 6970's and running games at 7680x1440.
They are actually 2.7 Teraflop GPU's.
Remember... Shaders * 2 instructions * clock === 1536 * 2 * 880 = 2.7 Teraflops.
| Azzanation said:
|
The 6970's are old Terascale/VLIW4 GPU's. They are simply inefficient and tend to be more efficient at Direct X 9.0 workloads than say... Direct X 11, it is one of the Pro's/Con's of VLIW.
I actually have a 6950 unlocked into a 6970 sitting on the shelf staring right at me right now.
| HoloDust said: I really can't say I've followed much of your convo, but: 6970 is 2.7 TFLOPS GPU...that performs slightly to 20% (depending on the game) below R7 265 (1.84 TFLOPS GPU). R7 265 is, more or less, performance level of PS4's GPU. |
The Radeon R7 265 is a slightly boosted Radeon 7850 from what I can tell.
But for modern games... You can bet your ass I'll choose the 7850 over a Radeon 6970, despite the 6970 having a "1 Teraflop" more than the 7850.
Terascale simply hasn't aged well.
| CGI-Quality said: High-End Gaming PCs will always be held by by lower common denominators, because games aren't being made for them. Yes, people who have those types of rigs can enjoy advantages, by none of my highest end parts are being taken advantage of. |
High-end PC games tend to dump most of their spare resources pumping up resolutions/framerates. I.E. Super Sampling/120fps and so on anyway.
| Azzanation said: Oh Don, like usual the point has gotten way over your head. 360 is not the same architecture as the X1 and PC (You knew that right?) |
There is a ton of similar technology that the Xbox 360 inherited from the PC, case in point... The Xbox 360 had a rudimentary Tessellator that was taken from ATI's PC GPU's, something that wouldn't become standardized until this console generation/Direct X 11.
The fact it's CPU is of a different ISA is probably the largest differentiator.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
