Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Assassin7

Xbox One X, true 4K 60FPS capable. Apparently.

40 posts in this topic

So, if you havent heard, MS released the Xbox One X (which is the final form of Project Scorpio) why Xbox One X? Because the acronym is literally "XBOX" so im just going to call it the XboneX instead. 

And yes, its apparently true 4K 60FPS capable. (Or at least 4K 30fps) which they showed off with Forza Motorsport 7 running at allegedly 4K 60FPS.

And its priced at $499 USD. (Or $749 NZD here)

 

Heres the thing though: Bullshit. It has 6.3 Teraflops of computing power. Sounds cool, until you realise the GTX 1070 (not 4K 60fps capable GPU) is 6.5TF. the 1080 is 9TF. Not only that, the XboneX costs, at least in NZ, the same as a GTX 1070 alone, which obviously doesnt include the ENTIRE REST OF THE SYSTEM. 

How did they get a FULL console that is 4K 60FPS capable to cost less than a GPU that cant reliably run 4K? Apparently its using AMD Vega, which must be absolutely amazing if this is true.

But I dont think it is. I think it'll be supersampled or upscaled or 4k interlaced and not Progressive (2160i and not 2160p) heck, did the normal Xbone even get 1080p support? It was 900p IIRC. 

 

Optimisation is a thing, but I just dont think it could be optimised that well on what is brand new hardware (if it is vega) and enough to make true native 4K progressive @60fps possible. 

Anyway, thats my opinion on it at least, i guess ill have to wait and see to be proven wrong, which if I am credit where credits due well done to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i was given the impression it was a 4k 30fps console which is a step up from the PS4 Pro upscaled 4k but still meh.

I mean, if you want the no-hassle plug in and play 4k entertainment box which a console is nowadays, sure. 

 

If i were to get a console, I'd get a Switch anyway since Microsoft are quite happy to make all their exclusives also Win10 compatible which is really nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this xboxoneX still using onboard GPU ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DHP said:

Is this xboxoneX still using onboard GPU ? 

no idea. All I know at least so far is that they claimed it can run 4K 60FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DHP said:

Is this xboxoneX still using onboard GPU ? 

If you mean an APU with the GPU on die with the CPU, then yes. 

And @Assassin7... it's all about the optimization. Because the game developers are targeting a single fixed hardware config for 4k performance, they can min/max the shit out of every single game asset to hit their performance target. Same reason why back on the 360, while most games were at 720p upscaled or even 640 or lower and upscaled, Forza still ran at 1080p 60fps. Fixed hardware config.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know optimisation is a thing, but I don't think that much optimisation on brand new hardware would be possible. 

I just don't believe it frankly.

 

thats not to mention my opinions on 4K as a whole, I think its way overhyped, and I think its completely pointless for consoles to be aiming for when PCs are barely able to run it with top end hardware. I'd much rather them up the graphics with the new hardware than up the resolution, or up the framerate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you the price is because microsoft is selling the console at a loss per unit. They will make their profits in the long run. Sony did the same thing with the original ps4 to have a lower launch price than original xbox one. I believe they make their profits through first party games, xbox live and other peripherals to make up the difference.

*Edit* and i'm not a big spec guy but i know the processor (i think) is one that Microsoft owns in some form and has basically continued to develop it under its same name. There were tons of articles trying to figure out early when they released specs on how this certain chip could perform at this level until people realized it was just using the same name for licensing purposes if i recall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Assassin7 said:

I know optimisation is a thing, but I don't think that much optimisation on brand new hardware would be possible. 

I just don't believe it frankly.

 

thats not to mention my opinions on 4K as a whole, I think its way overhyped, and I think its completely pointless for consoles to be aiming for when PCs are barely able to run it with top end hardware. I'd much rather them up the graphics with the new hardware than up the resolution, or up the framerate. 

I watched some MS dev video about it, and key is optimization and on fly details/resolution change (at least it was). So console reduces quality in "heavy" scenes to maintain 60FPS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is a combination of everything said above. 

Pricing - MS is not looking for a profit, so that helps with pushing the price down. Also, while I don't think MS makes a single HW component themselves, the prices of these are lower than prices for comparable PC components, simply because there is both big competition as for who will make them which drags the prices down, but there is also no competition - once you get contract for making the component, you have guaranteed volumes, you don't have to worry about competition. Everything is unified and you are making big volumes of the same thing = price goes down even further.

Power - it's a single hardware configuration so the optimization is much easier. Also, since it's a console, the system on it is much lighter and it doesn't run ton of stuff in background so it runs quicker than PC.

Apart from that, as you yourself in title said, it's "4k 60FPS CAPABLE". So it is capable of achieving this, doesn't mean it will. Exclusivites/first party titles might be able to do that, although some dynamic resolution/details might be present, and open worlds or just very demanding games won't run in that. Multiplatforms will most likely be just upscaled.

 

However, I'm with you on the whole 4k thing. I don't consider it a huge visual upgrade, it's just been really marketed since it is much more simple to up the resolution to make games look better. I'd much rather see new engines, ray tracing, or even better, finding ways to make visually good games for less time/money (lots of AAA games are safe bets, because nowadays they are super expensive to make, this needs to change going forward or in a couple of years all we're see is AC36/COD89/NFS136).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XBoneX has Dolby Atmos support so 5.1.2 possible :kreygasm: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2017 at 10:06 AM, Assassin7 said:

Optimisation is a thing, but I just dont think it could be optimised that well on what is brand new hardware (if it is vega) and enough to make true native 4K progressive @60fps possible.

It's a slightly downgraded RX580 / slightly upgraded RX480 (not really sure which since I couldn't find the manufacturing process info):serb: 4k 60 FPS in menu maybe :serb:

EDIT1: To add some info, base RX580 (which is literally a slightly upgraded RX480 by itself) has 36 CUs, 32ROPs, is clocked at 1270/1340MHz TB, and the memory is at 8000MHz, with 256-bit memory interface. [6.2TFLOPS]

XboneX GPU has 40 CUs, to me unknown number of ROPs, but it's at best 32, is clocked at 1172MHz and has shared system memory at 6800MHz. [6.0TFLOPS]

Now, base RX480 is clocked at 1120/1266MHz TB, 36CUs, 32ROPs and memory is clocked at 7000/8000MHz for 4gig and 8gig version respectively. [5.8TFLOPS]

Based on all this, I would say that the XboneX GPU is a mix of 580 and 480 with some additional crap thrown in. It has more CUs with most likely the same amount of ROPs, slower core and memory than RX580 which puts it slightly ahead of RX480, but it's not enough to match the current gen top-mid AMD GPU, much less to exceed it in performance.

EDIT2: All the GPUs, including the XboneX one, are based on the Polaris architecture. No VEGA for you, console plebs. :doge:

4k? Sure, minimum details and at 30FPS lock with frequent drop to 20-ish even with dynamic resolution.

4k 60FPS? Game menus and movies at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, canadiantrex said:

If you mean an APU with the GPU on die with the CPU, then yes. 

And @Assassin7... it's all about the optimization. Because the game developers are targeting a single fixed hardware config for 4k performance, they can min/max the shit out of every single game asset to hit their performance target. Same reason why back on the 360, while most games were at 720p upscaled or even 640 or lower and upscaled, Forza still ran at 1080p 60fps. Fixed hardware config.

Eh, no. Sorry, but that's overly simplified. What you also need to take into account is postprocessing, etcetera etcetera - resolution is not the only thing. Optimisation isn't some magical trick that makes an AAA game run on a calculator because muh fixed hardware. Yes, it has impact, but not to some grand levels. What most people don't realize is that optimisation does not help reach high FPS as much as it smoothens it out and prevents frame dips, stuttering, etc. There simply is a limit to what hardware can do, and optimised software, whether it's drivers or game, or whatever, will only help you so much.

So yeah, Forza can run at 60FPS at 1080p, but my question is - what resolution are the shadows, what is the post processing, particle effects, etc etc? I watched some videos of Forza 6 (if that's not the one you are talking about, tell me which one you meant) and right of the bat, I could see a lot of sacrifices to achieve that 1080p at 60fps - low poly models of pretty much anything aside from the cars, the lighting was really simplified, the textures of anything that was not the cars were low res, particle effects were at best 2010 level, the cars themselves weren't that well detailed, etcetera. Looking at the Forza forums, a lot of people even admit that the game sacrificed some graphical detail which was present even in previous games in order to run at 60fps in native 1080p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EndlessAgony said:

So yeah, Forza can run at 60FPS at 1080p, but my question is - what resolution are the shadows, what is the post processing, particle effects, etc etc? I watched some videos of Forza 6 (if that's not the one you are talking about, tell me which one you meant) and right of the bat, I could see a lot of sacrifices to achieve that 1080p at 60fps - low poly models of pretty much anything aside from the cars, the lighting was really simplified, the textures of anything that was not the cars were low res, particle effects were at best 2010 level, the cars themselves weren't that well detailed, etcetera. Looking at the Forza forums, a lot of people even admit that the game sacrificed some graphical detail which was present even in previous games in order to run at 60fps in native 1080p.

I believe he was referencing Forza Motorsport 7 which launches this fall right before the new console. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2EEkhYcvvk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, EndlessAgony said:

Eh, no. Sorry, but that's overly simplified. What you also need to take into account is postprocessing, etcetera etcetera - resolution is not the only thing. Optimisation isn't some magical trick that makes an AAA game run on a calculator because muh fixed hardware. Yes, it has impact, but not to some grand levels. What most people don't realize is that optimisation does not help reach high FPS as much as it smoothens it out and prevents frame dips, stuttering, etc. There simply is a limit to what hardware can do, and optimised software, whether it's drivers or game, or whatever, will only help you so much.

So yeah, Forza can run at 60FPS at 1080p, but my question is - what resolution are the shadows, what is the post processing, particle effects, etc etc? I watched some videos of Forza 6 (if that's not the one you are talking about, tell me which one you meant) and right of the bat, I could see a lot of sacrifices to achieve that 1080p at 60fps - low poly models of pretty much anything aside from the cars, the lighting was really simplified, the textures of anything that was not the cars were low res, particle effects were at best 2010 level, the cars themselves weren't that well detailed, etcetera. Looking at the Forza forums, a lot of people even admit that the game sacrificed some graphical detail which was present even in previous games in order to run at 60fps in native 1080p.

All that literally falls under "min/maxing the game assets"

So... yeah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turn 10 (the devs of forza) have always optimized the crap out of their games. Forza 5 ran at 1080p 60fps on the original Xbone despite it being brand new hardware, and most other games could barely do 900p 30 at the time. This vid from DF hypothesizes some ways how they've been able to achieve native 4k at 60fps for Forza 7 (though most other games on the XboneX are just going to be checkerboarded/upscaled/have dynamic resolution

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they managed to achieve 1080p 60fps on the 360 with Forza 4. 

BRB, googling shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, canadiantrex said:

All that literally falls under "min/maxing the game assets"

So... yeah...

All that is not muh fixed hardware allows better optimization so it kinda defeats the whole point of your post. I can do that with Witcher 3 and make it run 4k 60FPS on every GFX card if I really wish to by making all the models low poly, making the textures low-res, turning off advanced post processing, etcetera - but that's not optimization. Optimization is taking something and making it run better while keeping it one the same level of graphical detail.

Just to be clear, I'm not shitting on Forza devs, quite to the contrary - it's refreshing to see devs that understand that a racing game like that profits way more from higher framerates rather than saddling it with shitton of stupid glitter that will allow it to barely run at 25-ish FPS. I don't doubt they optimized it to hell, and optimized it well - but the game also clearly shows that it was not enough and the hardware simply wasn't good enough to give both excelent performance and excelent level of graphics and thus they had to downgrade a lot of stuff. The GPU of Xbone and Xbone S simply doesn't have the computing power to pull off high gfx with high fps, it's literally a low-end AMD GPU, my overclocked Radeon R5 330M has almost the same power - and that's laptop GPU in a 270€ Lenovo POS, aside from that, the CPU in Xbone is literally two of my CPUs put together and it has less RAM than this POS (12GB vs 8GB).

9 hours ago, robosapieo said:

Turn 10 (the devs of forza) have always optimized the crap out of their games. Forza 5 ran at 1080p 60fps on the original Xbone despite it being brand new hardware, and most other games could barely do 900p 30 at the time. This vid from DF hypothesizes some ways how they've been able to achieve native 4k at 60fps for Forza 7 (though most other games on the XboneX are just going to be checkerboarded/upscaled/have dynamic resolution

 

That's literally two fanbois gushing over the game which looks nowhere as good as they say. Sure, it looks good, but once again, we come to the same thing as with Forza 6 - a lot of things are downgraded and easy to spot even at first glance.

8 hours ago, canadiantrex said:

Pretty sure they managed to achieve 1080p 60fps on the 360 with Forza 4. 

BRB, googling shit.

By your definition of optimization, I can do that too - and easily - with every PC game ever. You are literally arguing that old Mario games are well optimized since they can run at hundreds of FPS on modern machines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC the 360 NEVER ran at above 720p.

And the thing is, resolution =/= graphics quality. Minecraft at 4K doesnt suddenly look amazing when compared to 1080p. Id MUCH rather have better graphics @1080p than worse @4K myself, and thats what I think this console is missing the whole point of. Resolution itself doesnt make graphics better. You're giving the console all this power and wasting it on making it run 4K when instead you could be pushing it to rival current PC graphics at 1080p, which currently is STILL what most people are running because lets not forget that 4K is expensive, and how many people are we gonna get buying their brand new XboneX thinking "Yeah 4K!" And plugging it straight into their 720/1080p TV and literally not getting any difference. Im going to guess A LOT, which makes the entire console pointless

 

Edit: cheapest 4K TV here costs $800+ NZL, plus $750 for the XboneX, that'll build you quite a decent gaming Rig with a 7600K and a 1060. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Assassin7 said:

Edit: cheapest 4K TV here costs $800+ NZL, plus $750 for the XboneX, that'll build you quite a decent gaming Rig with a 7600K and a 1060. 

add an extra $300 to that tv price, just because it says 4K doesn't mean it is :P it MUST have HDR to make it a proper 4k tv, otherwise its just glorified 1080p. and HDR TV's cost slightly more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EndlessAgony said:

I don't doubt they optimized it to hell, and optimized it well - but the game also clearly shows that it was not enough and the hardware simply wasn't good enough to give both excelent performance and excelent level of graphics and thus they had to downgrade a lot of stuff

No fucking shit Sherlock. The console in its entirety costs about the same as a GTX 1070 so obviously it's not going to offer both "excellent" (that's how you spell it btw) performance along with excellent graphics. It just pisses me off so much when people act so closed-mindedly and think that PC can never learn anything from consoles because lul master-race. What the XboneX shows, is that it's definitely possible to play games at higher resolutions and framerates even on mid-end hardware (with some compromises obviously). You can barely tell the difference between most modern games on PC if you're running the "ultra" preset or "high". So why not use those resources that are being used to accurately recreate the hair on the back of your characters neck that you can't even see, and put them to use somewhere where it actually matters, such as making it run at a higher resolution. I actually wouldn't mind playing Witcher 3 on the medium preset but at a higher resolution. I haven't even touched a console for like 2 years now, but that doesn't mean I'm going to shit on all the people who play on them. Anything that can allow people to experience games at a higher quality without also breaking the bank is a good thing IMO. You really think the average Joe wanting to get something for his kids to play on, really cares about the amount of post-processing passes his game goes through, or what level of FXAA/SMAA anti-aliasing his game has? Ofcourse not. Enthusiasts such as ourselves do care about that stuff, but that doesn't mean we should shit on the people who don't. Maybe these new console releases will also force Nvidia to get their head out of their ass and fix the pricing on their GPUs, and also teach AMD to not do that shit.

11 minutes ago, Assassin7 said:

IIRC the 360 NEVER ran at above 720p.

Not true. There were some games that did run at 1080, and Forza was one of them

13 minutes ago, Assassin7 said:

And the thing is, resolution =/= graphics quality. Minecraft at 4K doesnt suddenly look amazing when compared to 1080p. Id MUCH rather have better graphics @1080p than worse @4K myself, and thats what I think this console is missing the whole point of. Resolution itself doesnt make graphics better. You're giving the console all this power and wasting it on making it run 4K when instead you could be pushing it to rival current PC graphics at 1080p, which currently is STILL what most people are running because lets not forget that 4K is expensive, and how many people are we gonna get buying their brand new XboneX thinking "Yeah 4K!" And plugging it straight into their 720/1080p TV and literally not getting any difference. Im going to guess A LOT, which makes the entire console pointless

I'd like to think that people in this day and age aren't THAT stupid. I don't think it's that uncommon for people to have a 4k TV in their living room for Netfilx etc. As for why they're making games run at higher resolution instead of higher graphical quality/framerates, I think (this is just me hypothesizing here. I don't know the nitty gritties of this stuff) it has to do with the fact that the console's CPU is a bit underpowered as compared to their GPU. Higher resolutions usually take strain away from the CPU and put it on the graphics card, whereas higher framerates and some graphical options will affect the CPU. Either that, or it could just be marketing stuff. Either way, the fact that they've made atleast one game run at native 4k and 60fps while also not greatly sacrificing graphics is really impressive to me. (Destiny 2 at 30fps tho :MingLee:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, robosapieo said:

No fucking shit Sherlock. The console in its entirety costs about the same as a GTX 1070 so obviously it's not going to offer both "excellent" (that's how you spell it btw) performance along with excellent graphics.

>yfw you are absolutely butthurt, but have no real arguments so you resort to shit on someone for a typo

s71u5.jpg

It just pisses me off so much when people act so closed-mindedly and think that PC can never learn anything from consoles because lul master-race. What the XboneX shows, is that it's definitely possible to play games at higher resolutions and framerates even on mid-end hardware (with some compromises obviously).

Yeah, because mid-end PCs, which are the majority of PCs, aren't the ones proving mid-end is enough to play games. No, it's consoles made up of low-end parts that promise and fail to run games at 1080p and their more expensive versions with low/mid end parts promising and failing to run games at 4k that prove you can run games at mid-end hardware. Gotcha.

Consoles are good at one thing - plug-and-play. That will always be their biggest selling point. They are small, you plug them in, and play, or wait out a short install and then play. You have Netflix, etc. for when you are not in the mood to play. No need to fuck around with big desktop sets, no need to have hot piece of shit in your lap, etc. Consoles will never ever be about graphics, so stop fucking deluding yourself. They are shit, but they don't matter for a console. Just accept it and move on.

You can barely tell the difference between most modern games on PC if you're running the "ultra" preset or "high". So why not use those resources that are being used to accurately recreate the hair on the back of your characters neck that you can't even see, and put them to use somewhere where it actually matters, such as making it run at a higher resolution.

Yeah, because SCREEN resolution matters so much more than resolution of TEXTURES in-game, character models and all that stupid shit. Wolfenstein 3D in 4k > Wolfenstein: The New Order in 1080p. Fam, seriously - you need a good mix of both. Shit graphics will not turn good simply because your display device allows 4k.

I actually wouldn't mind playing Witcher 3 on the medium preset but at a higher resolution. I haven't even touched a console for like 2 years now, but that doesn't mean I'm going to shit on all the people who play on them.

My gaming "career" started on the OG Playstation in the 90s and I'm currently thinking about buying both Xbone and PS4 after the summer if I can find a good sale because of exclusives and games from previous gen that I missed out on, along with Nintendo Switch if I can scrounge up the money for that as well. Doesn't mean I will defend their shortcomings though. All of them have shit graphics compared to what actual mid-end PC can pull off, aside from other things.

Also, the fact you didn't mind doesn't mean it's not noticeable and that everyone would prefer it that way. And before you start again, my current laptop has problems with running some 2005 games at high details and 1366x768 resolution, so I definitely am not any graphics elitist, fam.

Anything that can allow people to experience games at a higher quality without also breaking the bank is a good thing IMO. You really think the average Joe wanting to get something for his kids to play on, really cares about the amount of post-processing passes his game goes through, or what level of FXAA/SMAA anti-aliasing his game has? Ofcourse not. Enthusiasts such as ourselves do care about that stuff, but that doesn't mean we should shit on the people who don't.

I don't shit on people for playing on consoles, I shit on people who consider reducing polys in a model and reducing texture res as optimization - which it is not, c-trex :doge:, and on people who will put words into my mouth that I have not said, and who will try to defend things based on stuff that was never a point of said things, like you, rob :doge:

Also, you can build similarly powerful PC as a console for the same money from new parts and more powerful from used parts. So, again - main advantage and the whole point of consoles is plug-and-play.

Maybe these new console releases will also force Nvidia to get their head out of their ass and fix the pricing on their GPUs, and also teach AMD to not do that shit.

And then there is my retarded country where everything electronics is on average 30% more expensive than in the rest of Europe and in North America. If nVidia and AMD stop being dicks to you, we won't even notice, because nothing will change here:cri:

 

Peace :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, EndlessAgony said:

Yeah, because SCREEN resolution matters so much more than resolution of TEXTURES in-game, character models and all that stupid shit. Wolfenstein 3D in 4k > Wolfenstein: The New Order in 1080p. Fam, seriously - you need a good mix of both. Shit graphics will not turn good simply because your display device allows 4k.

But.... but..... the XboneX has 12GBs of vram and a relatively fast memory bandwith, so texture resolution isn't any problem for it? Or did you literally not do any research?

You're like the anti-console fanboy lmao. I thought the PC gaming community was better because they actually know how shit works :minidoge:

Edit: Scrolling up a little, it seems you actually did bother to look some stuff up. Still, why you would make that comment despite knowing what the console can do, is beyond me 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruh... downscaling textures or reducing the amount of polygons in a 3D object to hit a higher frame rate is... optimizing for higher frame rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, robosapieo said:

But.... but..... the XboneX has 12GBs of vram and a relatively fast memory bandwith, so texture resolution isn't any problem for it? Or did you literally not do any research?

You're like the anti-console fanboy lmao. I thought the PC gaming community was better because they actually know how shit works :minidoge:

Edit: Scrolling up a little, it seems you actually did bother to look some stuff up. Still, why you would make that comment despite knowing what the console can do, is beyond me 

I dunno about that, everything I've seen points it to having 12GB of system RAM,  not VRAM.

Just looked it up, all they say is 12GB GDDR5. no mention on actual system RAM. So im thinking it might be doubling as both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.