Microsoft IGN: Cost of Xbox Series X

[Dodger]

8 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

And interesting point to consider is this, the X1X is 6TF and the new system will be 12TF. While I realize that this seems like a huge jump in power, it kinda isn't. With enough tricks (dynamic resolution, slightly toned down processing effects, etc) and a dip in frame rate, I'm guessing that many if not all of the first year Xbox Series X games can and will run on the X1X. So the low budget version of Series X might already be here. 

 

 

I don't know why the Lockhart can't basically be the 1x with a Zen 2 CPU and SSD be a 4k30 machine, since most people don't care about FPS anyway. 

[legend]

11 hours ago, Duderino said:

1. The Xbox One X release really wasn’t all that long ago.  Moore’s Law is dead, yet their target is a 2x leap.

 

Dying, to the point that businesses are considering different long-term plans based on not being able to rely on it, but not yet dead.

 

That said, you probably shouldn't go by Moore's law if the thing you actually want to measure is video game performance; especially not if you're measuring perceived performance.

[Duderino]

6 minutes ago, legend said:

 

Dying, to the point that businesses are considering different long-term plans based on not being able to rely on it, but not yet dead.

 

That said, you probably shouldn't go by Moore's law if the thing you actually want to measure is video game performance; especially not if you're measuring perceived performance.

Depends on who you ask.

[JPDunks4]

43 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

 

I don't know why the Lockhart can't basically be the 1x with a Zen 2 CPU and SSD be a 4k30 machine, since most people don't care about FPS anyway. 

 

I mentioned this before, but doesn't the CPU have more impact on FPS.  While the TF kind of represents resolution a bit more.  Regardless of the TF in the One X, it still couldn't pump out improved FPS due to the CPU limiting it.  

 

A 4TF Lockheart would be a 1080p 60fps+ box more so than a 4k30fps machine I'd think. 

 

Which I actually think is a winning proposition.  Focus more on FPS and performance over resolution.  Hell try to target 1080p 120fps with TV's now supporting it.  I think it'd go much farther as a selling point over 4k.

[AbsolutSurgen]

A couple of things I found interesting in these stories:

1)  Did I miss something, or did these rumours skip ray-tracing cores?

2)  Rumours have PS5 supporting non-AMD raytracing tech

 

59 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

And interesting point to consider is this, the X1X is 6TF and the new system will be 12TF. While I realize that this seems like a huge jump in power, it kinda isn't. With enough tricks (dynamic resolution, slightly toned down processing effects, etc) and a dip in frame rate, I'm guessing that many if not all of the first year Xbox Series X games can and will run on the X1X. So the low budget version of Series X might already be here. 

True, I have also read suggestions that NAVI is much more efficient per TF -- suggesting the bump in real world performance is somewhat larger than the raw numbers suggest.

[Dodger]

3 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

 

I mentioned this before, but doesn't the CPU have more impact on FPS.  While the TF kind of represents resolution a bit more.  Regardless of the TF in the One X, it still couldn't pump out improved FPS due to the CPU limiting it.  

 

A 4TF Lockheart would be a 1080p 60fps+ box more so than a 4k30fps machine I'd think. 

 

Which I actually think is a winning proposition.  Focus more on FPS and performance over resolution.  Hell try to target 1080p 120fps with TV's now supporting it.  I think it'd go much farther as a selling point over 4k.

 

 

Well if you have an X1 a lot of games give you the option of 4k30 resolution mode, or 1080p 60 fps performance mode. Instead of just targeting 1080p 60fps, why not have the lower price machine give the same option. It can either be a mainstream budget 4k machine, or let it supercharge your 1080p games if that's what you are still rocking. But I'm no tech expert so I'm not sure if this could be reasonably done for around $300. 

[JPDunks4]

5 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

 

Well if you have an X1 a lot of games give you the option of 4k30 resolution mode, or 1080p 60 fps performance mode. Instead of just targeting 1080p 60fps, why not have the lower price machine give the same option. It can either be a mainstream budget 4k machine, or let it supercharge your 1080p games if that's what you are still rocking. But I'm no tech expert so I'm not sure if this could be reasonably done for around $300. 

 

Oh I completely agree.  I'm just not sure a 4TF machine will be able to handle 4k with whatever added bells and whistles next gen games will have.  But for sure, I hope they always offer the options of, Best Resolution, Best FPS, Best Graphical Effects.

 

I think it was @Reputator that gave a bit more of a technical breakdown of it in the other thread.   I personally have very little clue on all this technical stuff.

 

[Dodger]

Just now, JPDunks4 said:

 

Oh I completely agree.  I'm just not sure a 4TF machine will be able to handle 4k with whatever added bells and whistles next gen games will have.  But for sure, I hope they always offer the options of, Best Resolution, Best FPS, Best Graphical Effects.

 

 

 

Well, how much would it cost next year to basically turn a 1X into a system with a 1TB SSD and a Zen 2 CPU? Could it reasonably be done for $299?

 

I still think a 4TF box for $300 is DOA if Sony releases a 9-10TF box for $399. Why get a half next gen console if it's only $100 cheaper? I think Lockhart only exists as a counter to a $499 PS5, which is why it's still not officially announced. 

[Paperclyp]

2 hours ago, Duderino said:

I very much doubt MS considers the $500 price point of the One X a failure.

The 1X is a different thing. It was marketed as a high end thing mid-generation for a demographic they knew was going to be there. 
 

Head to head to start a new generation, I believe MS is still going to care about getting an established base going with their new hardware that isn’t just the people willing to shell out $500. Price and narrative were huge swings in each of the last two console generations. 
 

It’s not going to blow me away if I’m wrong - I don’t have strong convictions about it. 

[TwinIon]

So here's a question: If we assume that Lockhart launches alongside the Series X, and that the specs as we know them now, are about right. Lockhart pushes ~4TFlops, One X ~6TFlops, and Series X does ~10-12TFlops.

 

Will MS keep selling the One X?

[crispy4000]

10 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

So here's a question: If we assume that Lockhart launches alongside the Series X, and that the specs as we know them now, are about right. Lockhart pushes ~4TFlops, One X ~6TFlops, and Series X does ~10-12TFlops.

 

Will MS keep selling the One X?

 

The CPU differences would put them in different generational families.  They’ll keep selling One X’s as long as they do One S’s.  And at some point, perhaps, try to ensure future compatibility using xCloud.

[Mr.Vic20]

As many have said, I think the CPU/SSD, and the additional RAM will, long term, effect the ability to design a game that works well across the generational divide. But in the first 12-18 months of the XSX's launch, I think the X1X will see most games that the XSX will see. 

[Duderino]

5 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

The 1X is a different thing. It was marketed as a high end thing mid-generation for a demographic they knew was going to be there. 
 

Head to head to start a new generation, I believe MS is still going to care about getting an established base going with their new hardware that isn’t just the people willing to shell out $500. Price and narrative were huge swings in each of the last two console generations. 
 

It’s not going to blow me away if I’m wrong - I don’t have strong convictions about it. 

Agreed that this is a different situation. An expensive high-end mid-gen refresh is a tougher sell than an expensive premium next-gen console.  If the X could sell well at $500, the Series X certainly can too, especially to early adopters so long as the added value is there.  (where the PS3 and Xbox One launches failed)
 

Lockheart will in all likelihood be their broader market solution.

[HardAct]

Personally I want it to be as powerful as possible and be under 600, so I'm all-in day one at 599.99. I'm sure that at this price point though they will have to have a lower 399.99 console to gather momentum and numbers, but I love high end stuff, its in my nature . . .  

[SimpleG]

41 minutes ago, Duderino said:

 If the X could sell well at $500, the Series X certainly can too,

Is there an actual link that gives sale figures for the x1x cause I cant find any?

[Nokt]

14 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

Is there an actual link that gives sale figures for the x1x cause I cant find any?

I couldn't find anything either. Just general Xbox sales overall and reports that the One X out sold the PS4 Pro.

[Duderino]

12 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

Is there an actual link that gives sale figures for the x1x cause I cant find any?

The closest you’ll find is an NPD rep’s comments back in 2018:

 

Quote

Xbox One sales show the highest growth of the three major hardware platforms in the U.S. this year, and the Xbox One X in particular has been performing phenomenally... year-over-year growth like this at this point in the cycle has never been seen before, driven by launch of the Xbox One X and new content delivery efforts. It's a mid-generation turnaround the market's never seen before. This qualifies as phenomenal, even if not market leading.

In other words Microsoft saw a big turnaround with the introduction of the X.

[Dodger]

48 minutes ago, Duderino said:

The closest you’ll find is an NPD rep’s comments back in 2018:

 

In other words Microsoft saw a big turnaround with the introduction of the X.

the 1x is an impressive piece of hardware, and the Xbox X looks to be as well. Plus Spencer says the new X will be as quiet as the 1x. Glad to see it’s helping them turn things around.

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, Duderino said:

An expensive high-end mid-gen refresh is a tougher sell than an expensive premium next-gen console.  

No it’s not. It’s much less risky. 

[crispy4000]

8 hours ago, Duderino said:

The CPU and SSD are a big enough bump to limit what games moving forward can be back ported.  I agree though about that first year, we’ll see many cross gen titles.

 

Yup.  It’ll be a generational divide, like any other, with the X (and Pro) on the old side of the fence.  

 

Cross gen will still be a thing for a short while. How long probably depends on the pace of PS4 hardware sales in 2020 more than anything.

[Duderino]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

No it’s not. It’s much less risky.

Neither come close to the risk Microsoft took with packing the Kinect in with the Xbox One.  

$500 for a powerful new console in 2020 is not all that far fetched. (Assuming 500)

[Paperclyp]

17 minutes ago, Duderino said:

Neither come close to the risk Microsoft took with packing the Kinect in with the Xbox One.  

$500 for a powerful new console in 2020 is not all that far fetched. (Assuming 500)

I don't think packing in Kinect was really all that risky. They made a lot of poor decisions with the launch of it. 

 

But I agree I don't think $499 is outlandish or unbelievable. As I said before, I don't have a lot of confidence in forecasting what they're gonna do. But I do think they care what Sony is doing and that the PS5's pricing will dictate on some level what they're gonna do. 

[legend]

9 hours ago, Duderino said:

Depends on who you ask.

 

The data shows its not dead. If I had to guess I’d speculate he makes comments like those because we are reaching the point where plans need to be changing.

[Nokt]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

I don't think packing in Kinect was really all that risky. They made a lot of poor decisions with the launch of it. 

 

But I agree I don't think $499 is outlandish or unbelievable. As I said before, I don't have a lot of confidence in forecasting what they're gonna do. But I do think they care what Sony is doing and that the PS5's pricing will dictate on some level what they're gonna do. 

I miss the kinect. Get home, "xbox on", change my clothes, sit down and my xbox is already up and running. "Xbox launch" if I'm looking away, but hear a notification for an invite. "Xbox record" instead of having to do home button twice + X. Would have continued to use it had they not removed the port from the X1X.

 

I'd like to see the capabilities come back built into the Xbox.

[XxEvil AshxX]

8 hours ago, Nokt said:

I miss the kinect. Get home, "xbox on", change my clothes, sit down and my xbox is already up and running. "Xbox launch" if I'm looking away, but hear a notification for an invite. "Xbox record" instead of having to do home button twice + X. Would have continued to use it had they not removed the port from the X1X.

 

I'd like to see the capabilities come back built into the Xbox.

 

At least the controller will finally have a share button. I used to use the programmable buttons on the chat pad but then i got a charging dock. Thus, the chatpad came off and stayed off. Plus the passthrough for the headset on the chatpad is shite and introduces a ton of white noise.

 

It'll be nice to have a dedicated button finally, since both the PS4 and Switch already do. Even though i never use the PS4's cuz it's a laggy piece of crap that always misses the moment.

[Duderino]

22 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

I don't think packing in Kinect was really all that risky. They made a lot of poor decisions with the launch of it. 

 

But I agree I don't think $499 is outlandish or unbelievable. As I said before, I don't have a lot of confidence in forecasting what they're gonna do. But I do think they care what Sony is doing and that the PS5's pricing will dictate on some level what they're gonna do. 

I agree with Phil Spencer’s take:

Quote

We launched a box that was underpowered compared to the PlayStation, and more expensive because of the inclusion of [motion-sensing camera] Kinect in every box. Underpowered and overpriced was ... not the right model for us.

The gamble on Kinect hampered their ability to deliver a competitive console in terms of power and price.

 

Going by the X and the numbers being tossed around, my guess is power will continue to be Microsoft’s priority with the Series X.  Like with 4K and the X, I can’t see MS comprising on their vision with the Series X to match whatever the PS5 will cost.

[Paperclyp]

28 minutes ago, Duderino said:

I agree with Phil Spencer’s take:

The gamble on Kinect hampered their ability to deliver a competitive console in terms of power and price.

 

Going by the X and the numbers being tossed around, my guess is power will continue to be Microsoft’s priority with the Series X.  Like with 4K and the X, I can’t see MS comprising on their vision with the Series X to match whatever the PS5 will cost.

It appears you agree with half of what Phil said lol. He said the XB1 was underpowered and...another thing. 

[Nokt]

11 hours ago, XxEvil AshxX said:

 

At least the controller will finally have a share button. I used to use the programmable buttons on the chat pad but then i got a charging dock. Thus, the chatpad came off and stayed off. Plus the passthrough for the headset on the chatpad is shite and introduces a ton of white noise.

 

It'll be nice to have a dedicated button finally, since both the PS4 and Switch already do. Even though i never use the PS4's cuz it's a laggy piece of crap that always misses the moment.

I had not heard that about the controller, thats a good inclusion.

[Duderino]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

It appears you agree with half of what Phil said lol. He said the XB1 was underpowered and...another thing. 

I agree that the Kinect added to their costs and that the Xbox one was underpowered.  

 

I do believe with a more focused approach from the get go they could have delivered a more competitive Xbox One at $399 or a much more compelling system at $499.

[crispy4000]

Packing in the Kinect was always a risk.  Any dollar it added to the MSRP of the platform would have been a dollar too much.  Microsoft did a poor job selling their hardcore base on Kinect in the 360 era, and it kept that stigma going into the XB1 announcement, with that base paying the most attention.  It was always going to be seen as a bad compromise.

 

Casual gamers don’t typically buy $500 consoles.  They would have needed to go in a Nintendo-like direction for that move to make any sense. 

 

[Rodimus]

I think MS is crazy if they release 2 versions of the next console. I say this because it seems clear that developers would have to make all the games for the lowest denominator and that would greatly hurt the higher end model. I know there are Pro and One X out there and I expect them to show up in a couple of years. I think out of the gate though will still have developers set the bar low to work with the lower end model.

[Duderino]

8 hours ago, Rodimus said:

I think MS is crazy if they release 2 versions of the next console. I say this because it seems clear that developers would have to make all the games for the lowest denominator and that would greatly hurt the higher end model. I know there are Pro and One X out there and I expect them to show up in a couple of years. I think out of the gate though will still have developers set the bar low to work with the lower end model.

 

Or vise-versa.  If the PS5 is the worldwide market leader and becomes the primary dev platform for many,  Lockheart ports could very well receive the least care and consideration.  The console would have to sell exceptionally well for it to make more of an impact.

[JPDunks4]

Engines these days do most of that work for you already.  Fortnite is playable from high end PC's down to Mobile Phones or Switch on the Unreal Engine.

 

With the number of updates they push out almost daily to all these platforms, I think its pretty clear the work is largely being handeled by the engine itself to properly scale.

 

Making versions of games to play on both versions of the next gen console won't be the same as porting games to different consoles.

 

* I also don't know shit about developing games, but based off a lot of what I've read the past few years, it sems to be the direction everything is going.  Scalable engines with hardware that is ready to utilize them.

[Duderino]

19 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

Engines these days do most of that work for you already.  Fortnite is playable from high end PC's down to Mobile Phones or Switch on the Unreal Engine.

 

With the number of updates they push out almost daily to all these platforms, I think its pretty clear the work is largely being handeled by the engine itself to properly scale.

 

Making versions of games to play on both versions of the next gen console won't be the same as porting games to different consoles.

 

* I also don't know shit about developing games, but based off a lot of what I've read the past few years, it sems to be the direction everything is going.  Scalable engines with hardware that is ready to utilize them.

 

UE4 has been a mixed bag this generation in terms of scalability, at least as it relates to performance.  On one hand Fortnite, Gears 5, MK11, and others seem to scale well.  On the other, you have Jedi: Fallen Order, PUBG, State of Decay 2, We Happy Few, and many more that struggle on the base Xbox and/or PS4.  It's not just Unreal either, look at Anthem, Control, etc.

At least the Lockheart rumored CPU should be less of an issue but we're still looking at a GPU that is closer to the Pro or X.  Even with a target resolution of 1440p, higher poly counts, increased shading complexity, and more demanding games in general are likely going to result in Lockheart requiring special considerations and optimizations.  Possibly even separate lighting solutions from the Series X or PS5.

[JPDunks4]

12 minutes ago, Duderino said:

 

UE4 has been a mixed bag this generation in terms of scalability, at least as it relates to performance.  On one hand Fortnite, Gears 5, MK11, and others seem to scale well.  On the other, you have Jedi: Fallen Order, PUBG, State of Decay 2, We Happy Few, and many more that struggle on the base Xbox and/or PS4.  It's not just Unreal either, look at Anthem, Control, etc.

At least the Lockheart rumored CPU should be less of an issue but we're still looking at a GPU that is closer to the Pro or X.  Even with a target resolution of 1440p, higher poly counts, increased shading complexity, and more demanding games in general are likely going to result in Lockheart requiring special considerations and optimizations.  Possibly even separate lighting solutions from the Series X or PS5.

 

I agree, but when Xbox One and PS4 were initially developed, I don't know if they were made with the same mentality of being able to handle these scalable engines.

 

A big messaging point around the One X was that they went to developers and took all the biggest game engines being used at the time, and looked at bottlenecks and other issues that come up, and built the hardware in order to best accommodate those engines to better be able to scale and make life as easy as possible for the developers.  

 

I think this is why my thinking is, when developing these new consoles, they will be accounting for their limitations more-so than they were back in 2012/2013, and try to make them better able to handle the inevitable mid gen refresh and constant improvements to PC tech.  

 

I just don't believe MS would be handicapping their powerful console.  Their entire messaging the past few years is to have creators create what they want to create.  If news came out that developers are being hamstrung by being forced to support the weaker console and its affecting their ability to build the games they want, that'd just shoot themselves in the foot.  

 

But who knows.  We don't even know of Lockheart even exists at this point.