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

We don't have source to say MS was spinning or lying.

But if they were saying it's 4x more powerful because of creative math, or let's say they put something better than potato CPU that would disengenuous.

Maybe you still remember "the powah of the cloud "

But seriously , we still don't know the exact number it perhaps they can achieve that number who knows? but common sense said it's almost impossible to have 4X of 6 teraflop number even more on Navi teraflop number. But it will be another funny memes if Xbox Scarlet is less powerful  than what they trying to promote. LOL 

Well I do remember The Cloud Power. And I wouldn't put it besides MS to spin the truth. But until we can be certain I'll give the benefit of doubt and expect a system that is roughly 4x better than X1X, or about 16x better than X1, which was a reasonable jump gen-to gen (a little above usual 8-10x)

thismeintiel said:
DonFerrari said:

We don't have source to say MS was spinning or lying.

But if they were saying it's 4x more powerful because of creative math, or let's say they put something better than potato CPU that would disengenuous.

Well, it is MS we're talking about. You know, the company that had fake devkits, ones that were more powerful than the XBO, running playable demos of games. Games that were than downgraded to be able to run on the actual HW. Even taking said fake demo onto Jimmy Fallon for him to play.

My guess is that they probably ran a benchmark test on the CPU and got ~4x the score that the X got, so stated that as actual overall performance.

That would be a bad behavior, but with precedent.

Lafiel said:
thismeintiel said:

Well, it is MS we're talking about. You know, the company that had fake devkits, ones that were more powerful than the XBO, running playable demos of games. Games that were than downgraded to be able to run on the actual HW. Even taking said fake demo onto Jimmy Fallon for him to play.

My guess is that they probably ran a benchmark test on the CPU and got ~4x the score that the X got, so stated that as actual overall performance.

dev kits being more capable than the actual console is normal, as devs needs a healthy overhead for analytics programs, debugging software etc etc

at E3 there were contradictory statements what "4x more powerful" means, Phil afaik said this was based on CPU performance, Matt Booty said it was a combination of several factors like CPU,GPU,SSD and RAM

Yes dev kits usually will have more memory or features than regular units. But you don't run games that won't be able on the real HW to claim they are the real game just to lie to everyone.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."