By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
CGI-Quality said:

Regarding bottlenecking ~ let's take a look.

Is the CPU able to process data fast enough to keep up with the Xbox One X's GPU? Well, considering the relative weakness of the Jaguar CPU in the X, yes, it is often bottlenecked as a result (though you won't see stutters as much as you will just see a higher number of games running @ 4K/30fps versus 4K/60fps). The GPU, on the other hand, isn't, namely because it isn't the one that's slower in the relationship.

Ultimately, the X1X, like the Pro, is very much bottlenecked by the slower part. Not saying the device is 'bad', but it is bottlenecked by the slower CPU.

Pretty much what I am saying.

The Pro and X1X are pretty well equipped in GPU power for current gen games to achieve 60 fps at about 1080p or higher depending on the game and hardware.

Since the mid gen upgrades did a more modest CPU upgrade, 60 fps in many current gen titles is still not feasible. Many games that do aim for 60 fps struggle.

Maybe its possible more games could aim for 60 fps more often if being built around X1X's CPU capabilities, much like Gears 5 and Forza Horizon 4 demonstrate. But that's a lot of work for an experience only X1X users would have. MS actually has an incentive to do that work.

And there is me that in about every single game chose the "pretty graphic" toggle against "performance mode" =p

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

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"

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