PC world trys to build a PC that can compare to Xbox One X for $500 and they can not do it. 

Forza 7 runs at native 4K / 60 FPS but the cheapest build they do is a $652  4k  / 30 FPS machine and I highly doubt it will do 4K / 30.

They even use one of those websites like CD Keys to buy a Windows Key!

Where is the keyboard and mouse?

For the moment, Microsoft’s created a machine that the DIY PC crowd can’t currently match—not when you try to copy both feature set and the cost at the same time, at least. That might be a first, given how often PC gamers tout the benefits that console fans miss out on.

Eh, the same specs maybe, but not better. A budget AM4 motherboard, a Ryzen 5 CPU, 8 GB of DDR4, and an RX 580 are going to run you about $500, maybe even over $500 until RX 580 availability improves, and that'll only match Xbox One X GPU wise, it won't surpass it. A Ryzen CPU is a big improvement over XOX's Jaguar, but PC's have more CPU overhead, so it's not as big of a difference as you might expect. You could go a bit cheaper by doing an Intel i3 build instead of an AMD Ryzen build, but an i3 may bottleneck an RX 580 on certain games, especially at 4K.

The problem with the build from the OP is that he is using an FX-8300 which is a grossly overpowered cpu even with the cpu overhead on PCs.

People aren't reading it properly. This isn't a direct match. It's just a 4k pc as cheap as possible. There's no cooling system and only 8gb of gddr4. Hell, the motherboard is as cheap as they come. It doesn't even support wifi... In 2017. They've essentially cheated on this comparison and still come up short.

The GPU is basically an RX 580, which the 1060 beats in most instances, most often not by much though.

APUs are mainly an AMD thing because most AMD cpus do not have GPUs inside however the AMD CPUs that do have GPUs inside are stronger than the usual GPUs that are known to be inside CPUs and that is why AMD calls them APUs. Intel does not actually call their cpus APUs even if they have GPUs inside them hence why post people do not actually call intel cpus, APUs even though intel i7s have GPUs inside them...

Maybe because some people will actually be using the XBOX to watch 4k blurays so they want to add all functionality.

APUs are mainly an AMD thing because most AMD cpus do not have GPUs inside however the AMD CPUs that do have GPUs inside are stronger than the usual GPUs that are known to be inside CPUs and that is why AMD calls them APUs. Intel does not actually call their cpus APUs even if they have GPUs inside them hence why post people do not actually call intel cpus, APUs even though intel i7s have GPUs inside them...

And again, the reason why intel has GPUs inside their CPUs are due to Workstation and Not gaming....

Intel Iris sucks at gaming because it the reason it exists is cause it accelerates tasks in other parts instead such as Video Encoding with intel QuickSync. It is Not meant for... Again... Gaming.... The reason why it is considered higher "end" gpu in the intel's cpu lineup is because it has more accelerators that help companies do their workstation grade tasks such as photoshop and video encoding without needing to buy an additional GPU. 

Again, the comparsion is silly and that would be like me comparing an n64 to a 72 core intel xeon cpu and saying wow, the n64 is really impressive cause it has a gpu while $150,000 72 core xeon has no gpu...

I don't have any issues comparing xbox one to the usual pc apus which are the AMD A10 series for example, but when you go comparing to high end cpus which have GPUs that aren't even meant for gaming... It is really just silly

I'm comparing consoles CPU to what exist in the PC market.

Those PC APUs are designed with gaming in mind just not high end stuff.

Except... They are designed with general purpose on mind and not just gaming stuff where as console APUs are designed with gaming in mind and not just general purpose stuff. When intel creates an i7, it can be used for video rendering, gaming, photoshop, coding, and tons of other things. When MS/Sony asks Amd to make console APUs, they only have one thing in mind... Gaming...

Again, comparison continues to be silly and pretty much nonsense

Well you arent gonna do clerical work on a console but they do more than gaming.

Anywho, not all PCs are NOT designed for upgrades these days. They make compact PCs about the size of X1 or much smaller. Yet none of them have decent APU like a modern console.

Its not a silly argument, some of these Steam machines were designed without the ability to upgrade much. But they suck and are expensive because there isnt a good/cheap gaming APU in that market. I find it odd thats the case consideribg modern consoles are basically a x86 PC.

The silly argument isn't that there shouldn't be good PC APU for gaming, the silly argument is comparing and xbox one x to an i7 and saying that cause the i7's GPU isn't very good at gaming, the xbox one x is far more impressive which again, ignores the reason why the i7 is built the way it is and why the xbox one x is built the way it is.

I again, agree that if you compare the xbox one x to the pc apus like the AMD A10 series, the xbox one "crushes" those and it's impressive. But comparing it to an i7 is just silly because the AMD A10 apus are the ones that are trying to be purposed as "budget gaming" APUs while the i7s are not...

And yea, steam machines are a mess, that's why most people don't buy them. If an APU like the one on the Scorpio existed on PC, it would be kinda bad cause of how important CPU performance is to PC so having such a jaguar CPU + a strong GPU setup wouldn't work very well. However, it might be finally happen with Ryzen APUs but we will see.

What I am trying to get at is... Comparing xbox one x to Amd A10 APUs on PC makes sense because those two are built to have a similar purpose. But comparing an i7 to xbox one x is just silly.

Ya know... you dont need a high end CPU to run modern games and Windows apps. My CPU is junk but I cam play most modern games fairly well.

With my RX 460 it can do 30 to 60 fps depending on the game. So a PC APU with modest CPU performance and good GPU would be great for cheap and compact gaming PCs in theory, like a console. But for some reason it doesent exist.

The PC market has many options but no cheap APUs for modern gaming. Thats part of the reason Steam machines failed.

Anywho, not all PCs are NOT designed for upgrades these days. They make compact PCs about the size of X1 or much smaller. Yet none of them have decent APU like a modern console.

Its not a silly argument, some of these Steam machines were designed without the ability to upgrade much. But they suck and are expensive because there isnt a good/cheap gaming APU in that market. I find it odd thats the case consideribg modern consoles are basically a x86 PC.

I again, agree that if you compare the xbox one x to the pc apus like the AMD A10 series, the xbox one "crushes" those and it's impressive. But comparing it to an i7 is just silly because the AMD A10 apus are the ones that are trying to be purposed as "budget gaming" APUs while the i7s are not...

If an APU like the one on the Scorpio existed on PC, it would be kinda bad cause of how important CPU performance is to PC so having such a jaguar CPU + a strong GPU setup wouldn't work very well. However, it might be finally happen with Ryzen APUs but we will see.

What I am trying to get at is... Comparing xbox one x to Amd A10 APUs on PC makes sense because those two are built to have a similar purpose.

The PC market has many options but no cheap APUs for modern gaming. Thats part of the reason Steam machines failed.