Eurogamer: PS5 and Xbox Series X Spec Leak.

[DonFerrari]

Pemalite said:

goopy20 said:

I wouldn't necessarily call Gears 5 a failure. But if Uncharted 5 came out and scored a 82 on Metacritic, while selling 20 times less than part 3, I'm sure Sony wouldn't consider it a success either. And no I'm not making that up...

As analyst Daniel Ahmad notes, Gears of War 4 sold 4.5 times better in its launch week, and Gears of War 3 – at the height of the Xbox 360’s success sold 20 times better.

Sales is a tricky thing to quantify though.
A larger platform with more users is obviously going to have even moderately well reviewed games sell better than a console with less users with a highly reviewed game.
Xbox One is certainly a smaller platform than the Xbox 360.

How many copies has Gears of War 5 sold? And how many copies of Gears 3? Let's see if your math and assertions hold up to scrutiny.

goopy20 said:

Truth is that MS has historically failed in running their first party franchises and studios. I mean why do you think Bungie left them or why 95% of the original staff of Rare left the company? MS simply doesn't give their developers the creative freedom to persue new franchises. That's why MS is never going to beat Sony with their exclusives. Therefore, it would make sense for MS to release a more powerful console next gen as that would at least be a proper reason to pick the next Xbox over the ps5. I've never seen any numbers on how the Xbox one X sold compared to the ps4 pro, but I'm guessing the X outsold the pro. If the same thing will happen with a mass market "regular" console is the question, of course. Especially if they plan to sell it for $599 or more, but I get MS's logic behind it. 

In saying that... RARE has put out some solid titles, not industry leading like during the SNES/N64 days, but solid titles either way.

Kameo is probably very underrated, Nuts and Bolts was enjoyable, Viva Pinata was interestingly... Like Crack. I had to force myself to stop playing it.
Perfect Dark Zero had it's shortfalls, but was still a fun game.

Conker Live and Reloaded for the Original Xbox was absolutely amazing.

Killer Instinct was probably one of the most refreshing fighters in years, even if it was badly managed. (And only received input form RARE.)

And then we have Everwild, which looks absolutely gorgeous coming up, it was obviously inspired by Breath of the Wild and Avatar, which isn't a bad thing.

As for exclusives and creative freedom... I think you haven't been paying attention, Microsoft of today is not the same Microsoft from 10 years ago, I would wait and see what happens on the games front... Either way, we all have different tastes when it comes to games, some gamers will resonate with Microsofts titles, others with Sony's and the others with PC or Nintendo.

DonFerrari said:

PS4Pro is about 20% of the sales of PS4 total since launch. So let's say PS4 total 5:1 PS4Pro. In VGC PS4 total have done about 3:1 against X1 total.

So let's say that for a total 1M PS4 sold PS4Pro was 200k, and X1 would then be 350k. So X1X would need to be 200k+ of 350k total or 57% of X1 total (and being X1 sold for 199 or less, with SAD making strong sales, and X1X 499 I think it doesn't make for over half of the total of X1 sales).

So with this data in hand I think PS4Pro outsells X1X even if X1X plays the better version of multiplats for 100 USD more investment on HW.

I don't think the Xbox One X has been the runaway sales success that Microsoft wanted anyway, it hasn't been a failure by any stretch, but it has certainly helped turn around the misconception that the Xbox One is an inferior platform from a hardware perspective which has probably helped their brand image.
I would consider X1X to have been successful in sales and not losing money, but it didn't really change the sales curve of Xbox or helped they reduce the rate PS4 was increasing the lead, but considering they were able to put better versions of the multiplats and people enjoyed the console I have nothing against it.

Mr Puggsly said:

"Some of Rare's greatest success has actually been with MS."

Pretty difficult to top Donkey Kong Country 1,2 and 3 and Killer Instinct on the SNES... And then beat Golden Eye, Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong and Conker on the Nintendo 64.

RARE's titles haven't been bad on the Xbox, if anything I think they are criminally underrated most of the time, but they certainly haven't been leading the industry. - In saying that, the industry is very different than the SNES/N64 era anyway, lots more competition.

NextGen_Gamer said:

Source: https://wccftech.com/xbox-scarlett-apu-die-shot-analysis-die-size-estimated/

WCCF Tech has estimated the Xbox Series X die size, and it's looking at least possible it will have that rumored 3584 stream processors...

For context, the die size is an estimate but based on the very real die shot that Phil Spencer put on his Twitter account yesterday. So that really is the Xbox Series X processor. The estimate can be off, but not by a whole lot...

After correcting for perspective, they put it at 401mm² - an increase over the 359mm² Project Scorpio die (on 16-nm) in the Xbox One X.

Here is how we get to 3584 shaders:

Xbox Series X on TSMC 7-nm = 401mm²

AMD "Navi 10" (Radeon 5700 XT) with 2560 SPs on TSMC 7-nm = 251mm²

AMD "Zen 2" Chiplet containing 8 cores/16 threads with all L2 and L3 cache, on TSMC 7-nm = 70-78mm²

"Navi 10" + "Zen 2" chiplet = ~330mm²

That leaves roughly about 70mm² leftover. The "Zen 2" chiplet is the CPU cores/cache only, but that "Navi 10" die size does include all of the memory controllers (256-bit anyways) and video decoders/display output logic. That leaves a good 70mm² to play with to get to 401mm². I'm not sure if that's enough to increase the textures and shaders to the rumored 224 TMUs/3584 SPs, but I think it's fairly close.

350-400mm2~ tend to be the sweet spot for consoles.

The Xbox One launched with a 363mm2 chip, Xbox One X with a 359mm2 chip.

The Xbox 360 launched with multiple chips, CPU was 168mm2, GPU 182mm2, eDRAM 80mm2. - So it took allot of space when combined.

Mr Puggsly said:

DonFerrari said:

Please list the some of critical and commercial acclaim under MS.

Well according to VGChartz Kinect Sports is their 3rd best selling game. While Kinect Sports 2 sold a couple million, which is still considerably better sales than most of their games.

It may not be a success, its also very polarizing, but Banjo N&B is fucking great. While Viva Pinata actually did well, had multiple releases and a TV show!

Its difficult to quantify since we don't get actual numbers, but it does appear Killer Instinct (2013) and Sea of Thieves did very well. KI had support for like four years and I found this link about Sea of Thieves. https://gamingbolt.com/sea-of-thieves-still-has-millions-of-players-says-rare-plans-to-continue-supporting-it

People have the impression MS acquired Rare and it was all failure. That's not really the case and its why they still exist.

I did loved Viva Piñata, and yes Banjo N&B was good enough. But Kinect Sports even selling a lot isn't memorable at all.

I don't think Rare is all failure but it doesn't have near the relevance it once had, unfortunately (and I don't blame MS for that, sure they have their share on it, but it is a combination of factors over more than one decade).

Still I said critical and commercial acclaim. KS sold good but it isn't critical acclaim nor memorable, VP I don't remember selling that great (but for all the fun it was I don't think people will remember it for decades after like DK and GoldenEye), Banjo I haven't seem people really happy over it (reason why the Yooka Laylee got hype, and didn't deliver).

But if you were considering this as success then sure they had, I won't compare metrics we both would use but will agree that yes they have kept alive and putting games up. I don't like what they did in SoT (was interested in the reveal, but that gone down fast), but I hope they can make a big hit in all aspects for their next game, they still have the potential I believe.

exclusive_console said:

Pemalite said:

Nah. Flops are flops. They are the same math.

In compute scenarios Vega 7 will beat Navi.

Comparing previous gen to current with same CU is going to give lot more performance according to AMD. So tflops number can be misleading.  Lockhart if exist and is 4tf is going outperform the current X. If the new X is 12tf RDNA that is very powerful. Even PS5 9.2tf is big jump compared to the current gen console than the tf number suggest.

DonFerrari said: PS4Pro is about 20% of the sales of PS4 total since launch. So let's say PS4 total 5:1 PS4Pro. In VGC PS4 total have done about 3:1 against X1 total. So let's say that for a total 1M PS4 sold PS4Pro was 200k, and X1 would then be 350k. So X1X would need to be 200k+ of 350k total or 57% of X1 total (and being X1 sold for 199 or less, with SAD making strong sales, and X1X 499 I think it doesn't make for over half of the total of X1 sales). So with this data in hand I think PS4Pro outsells X1X even if X1X plays the better version of multiplats for 100 USD more investment on HW.

I agree. X has had very little impact and I would not be surprised if 90% of people are the same Xbox owner who simply upgraded their console. IMO if lockhart is true and is going to be some 200$ cheaper than X is definitely going to outsell it and might give PS5 some competition. Price and games are more important factor than power. Even on PC very few PC gamers game on 4K. The mainstream always purchase midrange stuff

I expect lockhart to sell more than XSX, but not sure how much it will do against PS5 if it truly is a system 100 cheaper than PS5 but being 1080p vs 4k.