New Xbox Series X details disclosed, including 12 TFLOPS of GPU power

onetheycallEric

Posts: 214   +37
Staff member

Last year at the Game Awards Microsoft made its initial Xbox Series X announcement with a holiday 2020 release date, which marked the dawning of a new console generation and ensuring the months ahead would be busy and rife with little details. So far, Microsoft has set the pace, as we know comparatively little about Sony's PS5. Sony is again skipping major shows in favor of its own events.

In a post over at the Xbox Wire blog, Phil Spencer is offering some new details on the Xbox Series X. Microsoft has long touted that the Xbox Series X will be a significant generational leap over current Xbox hardware, but now Microsoft is confirming that the new console will offer 12 teraflops of GPU performance. For those counting, that's roughly twice that of the Xbox One X, and eight times that of the original Xbox One -- at least on paper.

At the heart of the Xbox Series X will be a semi-custom SoC from AMD based on Zen 2 and RDNA 2. The RDNA 2 architecture has eluded PC enthusiasts, although it's expected to arrive with AMD's "Big Navi" cards at some point in 2020.

Microsoft is still keeping some details close to its chest, such as its SSD specifications. Both Sony and Microsoft are migrating to solid state storage, and we suspect the SSDs will be NVMe and PCIe 4.0 based, as PCIe 4.0 support is baked into the Ryzen 3000 silicon. It's been rumored that Samsung could be providing SSDs for the new consoles, if recent leaks are to be believed.

Microsoft is also doubling down on hardware-accelerated ray tracing, courtesy of DirectX. Additionally, Microsoft's own version of Variable Rate Shading will also work on the Xbox Series X. Microsoft rolled out support for VRS on Windows with DirectX 12, and current Turing hardware supports Nvidia's implementation of VRS.

There's also the recently announced Smart Delivery, which allows gamers to buy a game once and then play the best possible version of that game, whether it be on the Xbox One or Xbox Series X. This is something that Microsoft is committing to with all of its Xbox Game Studios titles, as well as making it available to all third party developers. For instance, for those who buy the Xbox One version of Cyberpunk 2077, they will also have the option to move to the Xbox Series X version later on, free of charge.

The Xbox Series X will also support Microsoft's Dynamic Latency Input (DLI), which is supposed to improve the latency between the controller and console. There's also support for HDMI 2.1, bringing with it support for Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM) and Variable Refresh Rate (VRR). Finally, there's "quick resume," which allows for immediately resuming multiple games from a suspended state. This is technically something that can already be done on current Xbox consoles, but with only one game at a time.

In the coming months, we're sure to learn more about Microsoft's Xbox Series X.

Permalink to story.

 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 3,502   +3,346
To put this in perspective, my 2080Ti is capable of 14.2 Teraflops.

Can’t wait to see them compare the Xbox, PS4 and a Gaming PC.
 

amstech

Posts: 2,643   +1,804
I'm just LOL'ing now at all of the #PCMasterRace clowns on reddit that insisted there was "no way" Microsoft or AMD could put a 12 TFLOP GPU in the next Xbox.
Why?
Those specs are already outdated, and were 9 months out from launch.
By the time the new consoles release they will be ancient history from a hardware standpoint, however those specs are impressive. I'm excited to play a new console later this year on my 75" 4K QLED, considering how damn good this little Nintendo Switch looks.
No console is ever going to compete with PC gaming hardware, clock frequencies and CPU power, GPU power, versatility ext.
I do like the backwards compatibility features though, AMD seems to run ok when its in a closed off ecosystem with dedicated, unchangeable hardware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OptimumSlinky

Evernessince

Posts: 5,418   +6,010
To put this in perspective, my 2080Ti is capable of 14.2 Teraflops.

Can’t wait to see them compare the Xbox, PS4 and a Gaming PC.
Kind of sad actually. They will certainly get more juice out of the console GPUs and that will likely put the consoles on par with your 2080 Ti. That's assuming RDNA2 brings 0 IPC bonus. If it does, it'll be faster.

I'll say this right now, I will not spend around the price of a console on just a graphics card to get equal performance or less. I can imagine that if the current status quo stays, as in $800 for just the GPU and it's slower then the console, many people will be skipping another generation. The pricing of GPUs has gotten out of hand. It will be a sad day if you have to spend $1,200 on just your GPU to beat a fricking console.
 

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 246   +430
Why?
Those specs are already outdated, and were 9 months out from launch.
By the time the new consoles release they will be ancient history from a hardware standpoint, however those specs are impressive. I'm excited to play a new console later this year on my 75" 4K QLED, considering how damn good this little Nintendo Switch looks.
No console is ever going to compete with PC gaming hardware, clock frequencies and CPU power, GPU power, versatility ext.
I do like the backwards compatibility features though, AMD seems to run ok when its in a closed off ecosystem with dedicated, unchangeable hardware.
Because nVidia fanboys couldn't understand just because they paid $800 for a 2080 Super doesn't mean it's worth that much, or costs anything near that much to manufacture.

And, yeah, console hardware is static and doesn't keep up with PCs. But MS bringing 12 TFLOPs, hardware RT, and DSR to a $500-$600 price point for a COMPLETE system will have industry-wide impact for these technologies.

And for nVidia to either drop prices or seriously crank up Ampere's performance to make it worth the premium.
 

kira setsu

Posts: 285   +219
What are the cpu specs though? the gpu's in consoles have been banging out crispy graphics since the ps3 era but the cpu side has been a constant chokepoint.

as a ff14 addict, will it be equal to or better than my old 3770k my rig is pushing?(looking at you ps4pro, you chuggy a** machine)

will this be the gen that actually hits a locked 1080p/60fps after years of broken promises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirDigby

amstech

Posts: 2,643   +1,804
And, yeah, console hardware is static and doesn't keep up with PCs. But MS bringing 12 TFLOPs, hardware RT, and DSR to a $500-$600 price point for a COMPLETE system will have industry-wide impact for these technologies.
I would guess $400-$500.
I don't recall how well the PS3 initially sold when they wanted $600...think there was a quick spike then a serious dropoff, then Sony lowered the price. Anyone know this off the top of their head so I don't have to do actual research? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirDigby and 0dium

Evernessince

Posts: 5,418   +6,010
What are the cpu specs though? the gpu's in consoles have been banging out crispy graphics since the ps3 era but the cpu side has been a constant chokepoint.

as a ff14 addict, will it be equal to or better than my old 3770k my rig is pushing?(looking at you ps4pro, you chuggy a** machine)

will this be the gen that actually hits a locked 1080p/60fps after years of broken promises.
It's confirmed to be a Zen 2 CPU. Core count isn't confirmed but it will likely be an 8 core. In any case it'll be much much faster then your 3770K. You are looking at more then 3 times the performance if they utilize the cores well.

I would guess $400-$500.
I don't recall how well the PS3 initially sold when they wanted $600...think there was a quick spike then a serious dropoff, then Sony lowered the price. Anyone know this off the top of their head so I don't have to do actual research? :D
It was indeed $600 originally and yes, it was a hard sell. I don't think these consoles are going to sell for $600. The RX 5700 XT has 9.24 tflops of power and that's a pretty small die (almost half that of the RTX 2060). If you take into consideration the 7nm+ shrink and the RDNA 2 architecture improvements, what's going into the consoles is essentially a 6700 / 6700 XT. In fact that's being a bit reserved given it's a node and an architecture. It might even be a 6600 XT.



Why?
Those specs are already outdated, and were 9 months out from launch.
By the time the new consoles release they will be ancient history from a hardware standpoint, however those specs are impressive. I'm excited to play a new console later this year on my 75" 4K QLED, considering how damn good this little Nintendo Switch looks.
No console is ever going to compete with PC gaming hardware, clock frequencies and CPU power, GPU power, versatility ext.
I do like the backwards compatibility features though, AMD seems to run ok when its in a closed off ecosystem with dedicated, unchangeable hardware.
Whether or not they are outdated entirely depends on Nvidia's / AMD's new cards. Does Nvidia increase prices again? How much of a gain should be expect? 30%? 60%?

30% isn't enough, the consoles would still sit at xx80 level which right now costs $800 for just the GPU. I certainly wouldn't call performance equal to an $800 GPU outdated by any measure, especially if you only paid $500. Forget it if Nvidia raises prices again, there isn't going to be a single thing to save gpus at an even higher price save for a 80%+ performance increase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irata and Nightfire

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 246   +430
These consoles will not be retailing for 500-600. Full stop.
Why not?

Xbox One X was $499, and that was a strong launch for Microsoft and the Xbox brand. I don't see it going above $599 because Sony tried that with the PS3 and it was a disaster.

Microsoft has spent the last two years actively divorcing its profit and revenue stream from hardware (console) to services (GamePass, and Xbox Live before that). The hardware can be sold at a loss if it means people sign up for GamePass and Xbox Live, which both have high adoption rates and are major profit sources for the Xbox brand.
 

bviktor

Posts: 226   +423
I love how everyone speculating about price completely ignores inflation. $600 in 2006 is now worth $768, so yes, an MSRP of $600 is not only possible, it's very probable too.
 

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 246   +430
I love how everyone speculating about price completely ignores inflation. $600 in 2006 is now worth $768, so yes, an MSRP of $600 is not only possible, it's very probable too.
You're not wrong, but console gamers are notorious 1) ignorant of inflation and, 2) price-sensitive when it comes to hardware.

$399 is a psychological "sweet spot" for console hardware. $499 can be successful if its sufficiently "premium" (see Xbox One X) but most console gamers are happiest at the $299-$399 space.

MS and Sony both know this well, so while $599 makes sense from an inflation standpoint, neither of them wants to go there.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,418   +6,010
CPUs are 8-core, 16-thread Zen 2s (so somewhere around a 3700X). We don't know the clock speeds yet. Because of heat and power concerns, I would estimate we'll see somewhere between 3.0-3.5 GHz.
From what Microsoft has stated, they spent up on the cooling. I would not be surprised if they were running at higher clocks.

I love how everyone speculating about price completely ignores inflation. $600 in 2006 is now worth $768, so yes, an MSRP of $600 is not only possible, it's very probable too.
$600 did not sell well for SONY FYI. A $700+ consoles? Sales would tank. Inflation may have gone up but people's paychecks certainly haven't.

PS4 launched at $400 and the Xbox one launched at $500 (with kinect).

It makes sense that people are quoting the prices they are.
 

jbc029

Posts: 103   +186
What a useless statement. 12 TFlops at what precision?

It's like saying your car can go 180, but not specifying whether it's km/h or mph. One is much more impressive than the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ddferrari

pcnthuziast

Posts: 890   +534
I am willing to bet money on the price, like for real. If you think 399 is even possible, you are truly delusional. 499 is possible I suppose, but I will admit I don't see how. 599 is already approaching what some people consider deal breaker territory and while I think even that is quite anemic, it's the baseline of plausibility. 599 or more, not less.
 

bviktor

Posts: 226   +423
You're not wrong, but console gamers are notorious 1) ignorant of inflation and, 2) price-sensitive when it comes to hardware.

$399 is a psychological "sweet spot" for console hardware. $499 can be successful if its sufficiently "premium" (see Xbox One X) but most console gamers are happiest at the $299-$399 space.

MS and Sony both know this well, so while $599 makes sense from an inflation standpoint, neither of them wants to go there.
There's no such thing as "sweet spot" without indicating the year. The PS4 launched in 2013. That $400 "sweet spot" is now worth $443. You can't keep prices down forever, because there's a point where you just end up losing more money with more HW sales. Game sales do compensate, but not infinitely.
 

bviktor

Posts: 226   +423
From what Microsoft has stated, they spent up on the cooling. I would not be surprised if they were running at higher clocks.



$600 did not sell well for SONY FYI. A $700+ consoles? Sales would tank. Inflation may have gone up but people's paychecks certainly haven't.

PS4 launched at $400 and the Xbox one launched at $500 (with kinect).

It makes sense that people are quoting the prices they are.
Reading comprehension, dude. I never said they should sell it for $700+. What I said was that for a console to flop as hard as the PS3 at launch, they'd have to sell it for 760 dollars, so comparing 2006 dollars to 2020 dollars is completely pointless.

And obviously paychecks do follow inflation, whether you acknowledge it or not. In fact, Americans have been earning pretty much the same money for the past 40 years. There are hard facts so I don't even understand what you're trying to prove.
 

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 246   +430
There's no such thing as "sweet spot" without indicating the year. The PS4 launched in 2013. That $400 "sweet spot" is now worth $443. You can't keep prices down forever, because there's a point where you just end up losing more money with more HW sales. Game sales do compensate, but not infinitely.
I said psychological perception which is subjective.

Second, hardware loss is amortized over the generation. You lose money on the hardware upfront, but cost of manufacturing isn't static; it decreases as the generation goes on. You still think it costs Sony $350 to make a PS4 now as it did in 2013?

You offset initial hardware losses with services, but hardware becomes profitable again within 3-4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium

bviktor

Posts: 226   +423
I said psychological perception which is subjective.

Second, hardware loss is amortized over the generation. You lose money on the hardware upfront, but cost of manufacturing isn't static; it decreases as the generation goes on. You still think it costs Sony $350 to make a PS4 now as it did in 2013?

You offset initial hardware losses with services, but hardware becomes profitable again within 3-4 years.
These are not your therapists, these are for-profit companies and they couldn't care less about your feelings. It's only business.

And no, I never said a PS4 costs $350 to make today, I don't know where you got that idea from. That doesn't make manufacturing a PS5 cheaper in 2020 though.
 

dangh

Posts: 144   +170
Good specs, but already got a pc. Will get a ps5 to it, and switch Pro when available and I'm fully set.
 

etempest

Posts: 47   +32
Because nVidia fanboys couldn't understand just because they paid $800 for a 2080 Super doesn't mean it's worth that much, or costs anything near that much to manufacture.

And, yeah, console hardware is static and doesn't keep up with PCs. But MS bringing 12 TFLOPs, hardware RT, and DSR to a $500-$600 price point for a COMPLETE system will have industry-wide impact for these technologies.

And for nVidia to either drop prices or seriously crank up Ampere's performance to make it worth the premium.
AMD has put pressure on Nvidia, not as much as they put on Intel, but still enough to start seeing Nvidia pushing the envelope again, and at more reasonable prices.