Kinda doubt it'll be a hybrid console.  You honestly think MS is going to have it where you can plop one disc into either a Scorpio or XB2 and play on both systems, only with upgraded graphics?  Highly doubt that.  They may have said that to cause a stir, but once they realize Nintendo and Sony aren't down for that, though more importantly devs and pubs, AND that they would be losing money on people who double dip for remakes/upgrades, they'll abandon it real quick.  Nah, it'll be just like any other gen.  We'll get cross-gen games and maybe devs/pubs who will offer free or at low cost upgrades to their games, but tey will still be different games on different discs. 

I doubt MS revealing a XB2, even if it is slightly more powerful than a PS5, will really hurt the WW appeal of the next PS5.  Especially if it is B/C with the highly successful PS4, while still launching for just $399.  Of course, if the Scorpio flounders out the gate, a XB2 will become farther from a certainty.

Well going off of what Microsoft has already said. Yes Scorpio will play the following consoles games. Just like the one will be doing with the Scorpio. Obviously if Scorpio is a total flop those plans could very well change. But Microsoft is here to stay whether you like it or not. They make about a billion a year off of Xbox live. 5$ a month for 20 million people is 1.2 billion. I don't think Microsoft is going to just throw that away.

anyway assuming Scorpio 2 and ps5's games are either 4K native or very close you don't think Microsoft would want to have a1080p version of those games on Scorpio. The console could be 100-200$ cheaper than a ps5 and Scorpio 2 but still play the same games. I think it would be killer for them. And why would devs and publishers be against it. The ps5, and Scorpio 2 would have a non existent install base. Meanwhile the Scorpio could have 10 million or more owners. As long as it is cheap for the devs to get a version on Scorpio. Or Microsoft could simply say no scorpio 2 version without a Scorpio 1 version just like they are doing now with one+Scorpio.

Consoles have never taken CPU performance seriously anyway, so why would they start now and waste money on something that doesn't make pretty pictures on the screen?

Keller left AMD a years ago.

And you know this how? AMD does have other CPU Architectures.
2020 is a long way away in the PC world. AMD may have ditched Ryzen and Socket AM4 by then and released a successor.

It's logical that's why.

I always claimed Vega was a possibility... But it becomes more likely as time goes on, the timing just aligns really well for Microsoft to take advantage of Vega.

And to be fair, people thought the Playstation 4 Pro was going to use something more exotic for the CPU. (Aka. Not Jaguar.) but costs do play a role in these cost-sensitive devices, CPU's take a back seat to GPU performance in consoles, always have... Because of cost. (Aka. You can't have everything.)

Jaguar can still be pushed harder, it's far from being at it's limit.
The Athlon 5370 for example had a clockrate of 2.2Ghz vs the PS4 Pro's 2.1Ghz... But the Athlon was also built at 28nm not 16/14nm which should give you some extra clock rate wiggle room at the same TDP... Plus these consoles are using a Semi-Custom chip design, not a direct clone of the PC chips, AMD would be reworking some things, so they could push for higher clock rates.

Bottlenecks aren't really a thing in consoles anyway, developers work around them well enough... Plus bottlenecks will change depending on a games scene/game engine/price of a can of beans in China... Plus everyone keeps ignoring Jaguars real-life successors... Puma and Puma+. - Which can go over the 2.5ghz barrier.

The other option is... Microsoft just throws another 4x Jaguar cores at the problem and goes wider rather than faster, Excavator would probably still be more transistor heavy than Jaguar/Puma or Puma+ though especially if you push for 8 threads.

GPU's are also able to lift some of the work CPU's typically do anyway these days, developers just need to be a little more creative with how they approach it.

Sadly. He didn't give any pointers to what that hardware might entail.

'balanced' is certainly different in the console world than on PC. The fact that eveything targets a low-level API for extra performance, certainly helps remove a large emphasis on CPU performance.

... And I keep coming back to the original issue. Cost. Cost and Cost.
The general consensus is that Vega is in. There is the possibility of 12Gb GDDR5 memory on a 384bit memory bus for 320GB/s of bandwidth... And that doesn't leave much room for a beefy CPU.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for a console manufacturer to take CPU performance seriously for once, but we need to set realistic expectations, unless you are hoping to pay $1000 for a console.

I'm thinking Microsoft will opt to continue it's use of AMD Cat cores, they work well. They are cheap.

Why start caring about CPU now? Well why not?

Keller left AMD a few times now yes. He designed Ryzen though which was my point. Not sure what him leaving has to do with anything?

I didn't say I knew, I said PS5 could use ARM or x86 Ryzen or BETTER. Could they use something else? Yes. Will they? Most likely not. Vega? Most likely...

You seem to make everything out to be reliant on cost in the end, which does matter to an extent yes, but the cost is the one thing that we know the least about. You want to talk about what we know and what we don't, well we have a much better idea hardware wise, than we do cost wise.

All MS has said about cost is that it won't be as much as people think, it won't be anything we haven't seen before in the console space, and will cost more than XB1 and be at a Premium price point. That could mean $399 to $599. For MS to wait an entire year, just to try and trump Pro with 6Tflops vs 4.2, GPU only, when they are already way behind is crazy. PS5 will no doubt launch before whatever comes after Scorpio, leaving MS even further behind.

You also can't assume MS isn't going to take a loss on Scorpio. I know PS said they weren't doing that anymore, and I believe MS said something along those same lines back then, but they sure meant it less because MS can withstand the losses easier than PS can overall, as long as MS is truly serious about the XB division. PS was also in the gutter back then, and MS was on their high horse. Now that MS has lost so much ground, they very well may subsidize Scorpio, like the 360 and PS3 were, to try and gain back marketshare.

If I were XB right now, that's exactly what I would do if MS would let me. Use some market slang to make it sound like Scorpio isn't next gen because "there are no more gens with Xbox" so gamers don't get angry. Let PS lock themselves into last gen for a couple years anyway, and jump start next gen and get an early lead like they did with the 360. It's the best chance MS has to get XB back into the console game, especially if Switch ends up making waves.

I could be wrong, sure, but if I am, I see even tougher times ahead for XB.

We have Lisa Shu on the record officially stating that the Ryzen design is not available to customization until 2018. So we can speculate:

a) She was lying.

b) She was not lying.

In case a) I see possible legal and massive economical trouble incoming for AMD.

In case b) I do not see Ryzen in the Scorpio

Nobody got called crazy about the Vega stuff. When MS thru the 6TF number into the ring, AMD had absolutely nothing to show gpu-wise for that number. Except the promise of something labeled Vega. And yes, I am still convinced that internally, when that 6TF number showed up to piss on Sony's Pro announcement, MS would have had _absolutely nothing_ to show but paper designs.

He *helped* design. There has been a ton of work done to Ryzen since he left a few years back, otherwise if the CPU was completed before he left it would be on the market already. ;)
I am not understating the work he has done though. He is an amazing architect and has put AMD on the correct path, as long as they keep up their momentum and don't let the platform stagnate for half a decade again, they should be able to reclaim marketshare... And might actually be worth purchasing their CPU's again. (FX is absolute garbage.)

But we also need to set realistic expectations, Ryzen is not going to beat Intel.

Are you serious?
Do you expect your console to cost the same amount as a decent PC?
Sony tried that once with the Playstation 3. They were ridiculed for it.
Microsoft tried that with the Xbox One and they were ridiculed for it.
The Neo-Geo tried that and they were ridiculed for it.
The 3DO tried that and they were ridiculed for it.
The CDi tried that and they were ridiculed for it.
The 3DS was priced fairly high, they were ridiculed for it.

Ergo. Price is a stupidly *important* factor that you shouldn't underestimate.
Microsoft is well versed on the pricing issue having been burned as recently as the Xbox One's launch price, I doubt they would like to repeat past mistakes and why would they?
Scorpio will be a more "premium" console relative to the Xbox One S which was down to $250 AUD here, so double that price in AUD is a realistic expectation in my eyes after supply/early adopter tax settle.

So from historical context alone, we can ascertain that pricing is going to be at a reasonable level and there will be a few corners cut in order to achieve such targets, we also have recent examples of good pricing with the Playstation 4 Pro that sets a successful example for Microsoft to follow.

You simply cannot have the best of everything in a console and a cheap price.

And I will reiterate. If anyone thinks Scorpio will have a fully-intact 8-core Ryzen CPU in Scorpio, then you are going to be sorely dissapointed, so let's nip such expectations in the butt right now, it is not going to happen. Period.

Microsoft stating that the cost won't be as high as people think is somehow a more vague statement than throwing around Teraflops? Please.

I never stated that the Scorpio is going to be a loss-leading product?

I disagree and think Microsoft should do the opposite.

Scorpio could double the performance (or more) of the Playstation 4 Pro in terms of GPU capability, they would be silly not to market it as the "next generation of gaming" and take full advantage of their superior graphics capability.
Plus the Delta between the Xbox One and Scorpio could be rather significant, certainly a larger jump than the Playstation 4 and Playstation 4 Pro brought, that's for sure, they would be silly not to capitalize on that.

So assuming zen is out how much of a performance increase(over the Xbox one or pro) could be achieved with jaguar or puma+. Would it be enough for Scorpio to play 9th gen games (ps5 Scorpio 2).

I've been wanting to ask someone about this and you are very knowledgeable. Why didn't Sony/Cerny go with Puma+ on the PS4 Pro?

I recall reading that it was more straightforward to keep Jaguar since the logic wouldn't change. Developers woud be tasked with accomodating the extra GPU resources. Since it was a lighter job they would be more likely to support the Pro. Doesn't this imply (assuming Scorpio doesn't keep Jaguar) that it's more tedious to support Scorpio?

I also recall reading that a higher frequency probably would have meant an external power supply. But I'd take a 2.5GHz Puma+ for stable framerates..

here is a good video speculating what might be in scorpio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKeUX96nvfM

another good video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq59OCmJagQ