General Gaming In terms of graphics, performance, etc., have there been any games that set the X1X apart from the Pro yet?

[AbsolutSurgen]

17 hours ago, TomCat said:

LOL when the gen first started people were complaining  about a difference of 900p to 1080p   was a drastic enough that the Xb1  was a terrible console. The Meta argument for the first half of this generation was that the ps4 was more powerful.  MS fixed the power ratio by coming in more powerful then the pro.  Then all of a sudden the Meta Argument switched to MS has no games.   A person asks  if there is a BIG difference between pspro  and xb1 games and you guys are saying NOT really  When the Pixel count between the two systems is DRAMATIC.  Most pspro games are 1440p games checkerboared and upscaled to 4k.    Xbox games are coming in at Native 4k.

 

HELL YA THERE IS A NOTICABLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PLATFORMS.

1)  People have universally said there is a difference in resolution, and a visible difference between the two platforms (what thread were you reading?)

2)  There are declining benefits to increasing resolution.  IMHO, improving the IQ and/or frame rate goes much further in most living room settings than improving resolution.  Going from checkerboarded 4k to real 4k in most living room settings is hard to notice.

3)  The output from MS studios is notably below Sony/Nintendo.  Outside of Forza, they aren't releasing many top tier games.  And I don't see the purchasing of Compulsion Games, Ninja Theory or Undead labs changing that.  None of them have released a game that would compare to Zelda, Mario, Horizon, TLoU, God of War, etc.

[TomCat]

8 hours ago, mikechorney said:

1)  People have universally said there is a difference in resolution, and a visible difference between the two platforms (what thread were you reading?)

2)  There are declining benefits to increasing resolution.  IMHO, improving the IQ and/or frame rate goes much further in most living room settings than improving resolution.  Going from checkerboarded 4k to real 4k in most living room settings is hard to notice.

3)  The output from MS studios is notably below Sony/Nintendo.  Outside of Forza, they aren't releasing many top tier games.  And I don't see the purchasing of Compulsion Games, Ninja Theory or Undead labs changing that.  None of them have released a game that would compare to Zelda, Mario, Horizon, TLoU, God of War, etc.

1) Ummmmmm this one Quotes from this exact thread:  "Because I have yet to see it. Everything I have played across both consoles looks pretty much identical."      " I don’t think there has been any significant difference yet."   "Long story short, no not really."

 

2)pretty sure we all agree on that aspect thats why Hitting 4k next gen wont really be an issue.  We have enough horse power with todays tech to make next gen machines  Humm in the impressions department.  All they have to do is put in Ryzen cpu cores and a slightly upgraded gpu  and next gen games will have  DRAMATIC difference in performance. You guys are forgetting how fucking weak Jag cores are and the amazing things they are accomplishing with that weak shit.

 

3) MS does have a problem Releasing top tier games at the moment.  Looking at that list of games you promote for  top tier   Horizon is on that list.  You cant tell me that before Horizon Guerella Games (sp)  was a top tier dev.  In Fact they were lower tier and delivered a gem in Horizon.  Who's to say that the same thing wont or Cant happen with the new studios that MS has just acquired.  I can see Ninja Theory doing Great Great things now that they basically have an unlimited budget.

 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

15 minutes ago, TomCat said:

1) Ummmmmm this one Quotes from this exact thread:  "Because I have yet to see it. Everything I have played across both consoles looks pretty much identical."      " I don’t think there has been any significant difference yet."   "Long story short, no not really."

 

2)pretty sure we all agree on that aspect thats why Hitting 4k next gen wont really be an issue.  We have enough horse power with todays tech to make next gen machines  Humm in the impressions department.  All they have to do is put in Ryzen cpu cores and a slightly upgraded gpu  and next gen games will have  DRAMATIC difference in performance. You guys are forgetting how fucking weak Jag cores are and the amazing things they are accomplishing with that weak shit.

 

3) MS does have a problem Releasing top tier games at the moment.  Looking at that list of games you promote for  top tier   Horizon is on that list.  You cant tell me that before Horizon Guerella Games (sp)  was a top tier dev.  In Fact they were lower tier and delivered a gem in Horizon.  Who's to say that the same thing wont or Cant happen with the new studios that MS has just acquired.  I can see Ninja Theory doing Great Great things now that they basically have an unlimited budget.

 

 

1)  You're Cherry picking:

"yes plenty of games run natively at 4k on the XBX that only run at 2k on PSPro "

"Yes.  There are differences between PS4 Pro and XB1X games -- the biggest typically being resolution."

"The Witcher 3 seems to be the biggest. You get a much closer to 60 fps experience in 1080p performance mode, or a much more stable locked 30 4ps in 4k."

"The X1X's 30fps 4k mode is supposed to be slightly more stable than the PS4's checkerboarded 4k, which also has some LoD scalebacks."

"If you only consider performance, resolution, image quality, texture quality and filtering, then yes, there are examples of the X making a notable "

"Shadow of War.  The 4GB extra RAM allowed the X to showcase better textures.  The Pro version  got a big rez bump but was stuck with base textures."

"Seems like just about every game either looks or looks and performs better on the xbox one x, going by just about every digital foundry video I have seen."

"As said earlier, mostly Shadow of War, where the extra RAM gives the X a clear takeaway the PS4 can't even handle in textures. "

"Barring developer incompetence it should always be 

PC>XB1X>PS4P>PS4>XB1>Switch"

2)  CPU cores aren't the biggest/only problem with hitting 60Hz at 4k.  It's having a 6 GFLOP GPU.  Faster CPUs don't magically make your GPU better.

3)  Guerilla Games has been making some of the best "technically performing" games for years.  They were able to get the game design up to a consistent level.  Undead Studios and Compulsion Games are not currently AAA sized studios -- and have never even made a full priced game.  Big difference.

[number305]

@TomCatis right in this thread.  We are working with moving goalposts.  Which is fine because its natural.  Most people are owners of the Sony platform so they will obviously want to rationalize their purchase.  People on the MS side are rationalizing like hell too.

 

the X1X is hands down the most powerful console right now.  (PC will always be king).  That should be the end of the thread.  There is no arguing the specs.  X1X is more powerful than the Pro and if you go to a third party like digital foundry they will give you several examples of games looking and playing better on the X1X.

 

That does not mean the better games are on the Xbox.  But this thread is about power... so there ya go.

[TomCat]

38 minutes ago, mikechorney said:

1)  You're Cherry picking:

"yes plenty of games run natively at 4k on the XBX that only run at 2k on PSPro "

"Yes.  There are differences between PS4 Pro and XB1X games -- the biggest typically being resolution."

"The Witcher 3 seems to be the biggest. You get a much closer to 60 fps experience in 1080p performance mode, or a much more stable locked 30 4ps in 4k."

"The X1X's 30fps 4k mode is supposed to be slightly more stable than the PS4's checkerboarded 4k, which also has some LoD scalebacks."

"If you only consider performance, resolution, image quality, texture quality and filtering, then yes, there are examples of the X making a notable "

"Shadow of War.  The 4GB extra RAM allowed the X to showcase better textures.  The Pro version  got a big rez bump but was stuck with base textures."

"Seems like just about every game either looks or looks and performs better on the xbox one x, going by just about every digital foundry video I have seen."

"As said earlier, mostly Shadow of War, where the extra RAM gives the X a clear takeaway the PS4 can't even handle in textures. "

"Barring developer incompetence it should always be 

PC>XB1X>PS4P>PS4>XB1>Switch"

2)  CPU cores aren't the biggest/only problem with hitting 60Hz at 4k.  It's having a 6 GFLOP GPU.  Faster CPUs don't magically make your GPU better.

3)  Guerilla Games has been making some of the best "technically performing" games for years.  They were able to get the game design up to a consistent level.  Undead Studios and Compulsion Games are not currently AAA sized studios -- and have never even made a full priced game.  Big difference.

1) Cherry Picking my Ass.  I said people in the thread were indifferent about the dramatic differenece in the games.  You said what thread I was reading; Like i was making a false notion So I then provided examples of what my reply was refering too

 

2) not sure where you learned your info from but Jag cores ARE THE BIGGEST problem in current gen systems.  Gpu has already proved that it can do 4k frame buffers with no problem.  The problem that the gpu is having is that the Jag core cant provide it with info fast enough to maintain that 4k image at an acceptable frame rate.  If you simply switched out the cores for ryzen cores  these games would hit 4k60 with no problem.   They are already doing it on the pc thats not designed to take advantage of a closed system.  Running consoles with jag cores   is like running a cpu system  that has a 980ti  and using core duo   as the  cpu

 

3) Guerilla Games performed well Technically because thier games lacked true gameplay and were basically techdemos  that show the power of sony systems.  I have confidence in Ninja Theory  I believe that they can execute in the same manner.  Hellblade  is a great looking game for such a small team to have put together.  dont know why you wouldnt expect them to do much better with full financial backing and a huge uptake in hiring new talent.  MS is also starting a HUGE new studio who's soul purpose is to produce those TOP TIER games you were refering to.   Phil is fixing the current "No Games" problem and the CEO is fully backing him something the xbox division didnt have at the start of this generation. In fact they were consolidating and destroying studios to save money

[stepee]

27 minutes ago, number305 said:

@TomCatis right in this thread.  We are working with moving goalposts.  Which is fine because its natural.  Most people are owners of the Sony platform so they will obviously want to rationalize their purchase.  People on the MS side are rationalizing like hell too.

 

the X1X is hands down the most powerful console right now.  (PC will always be king).  That should be the end of the thread.  There is no arguing the specs.  X1X is more powerful than the Pro and if you go to a third party like digital foundry they will give you several examples of games looking and playing better on the X1X.

 

That does not mean the better games are on the Xbox.  But this thread is about power... so there ya go.

 

Pretty much this. The average for third party games seems to be 1440p pro 1800p-2160p on X, or thereabouts. It’s a huge difference. The key thing is that X overall actually comes close to a 4k experience whereas pro does not hit the mark at all for the most part.  Of course there are exceptions, mostly Sony’s exclusives and there excellent use of checkerboarding, but only a handful of third party games use checkerboard. It’s easier to just set it to 1440p and call it a day.

[TwinIon]

1 hour ago, number305 said:

the X1X is hands down the most powerful console right now.  (PC will always be king).  That should be the end of the thread.  There is no arguing the specs.  X1X is more powerful than the Pro and if you go to a third party like digital foundry they will give you several examples of games looking and playing better on the X1X.

The question that started the thread wasn't "is the X1X more powerful than the pro", it was "have there been any games that set the X1X apart from the Pro yet?" You're absolutely right that there isn't an argument as to if the X1X is the most powerful console or not, but I think there is a very reasonable discussion to be has as to if that power is making a meaningful difference.

 

For the most part, the question seems to become "how much do resolution and framerate matter to you?" because it seems there aren't many (any?) examples of games that are obviously better looking on the X1X aside from those two factors. I know a lot of gamers really like to argue about minimal differences in resolution and framerate, but a whole lot of people either have a hard time distinguishing between something like checkerboard 4k vs "true 4k" or framerate problems if it stays ~30, or simply don't care. If you're one of those people (and my guess is that's the vast majority of people, if not necessarily those of us on a board like this), the answer to the OPs question seems to be no. If you have an eye for that kind of stuff, and there are certainly some folks around here that do, then yeah, the X1X is putting out meaningfully better looking games.

[AbsolutSurgen]

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

1) Cherry Picking my Ass.  I said people in the thread were indifferent about the dramatic differenece in the games.  You said what thread I was reading; Like i was making a false notion So I then provided examples of what my reply was refering too

 

"Then all of a sudden the Meta Argument switched to MS has no games.   A person asks  if there is a BIG difference between pspro  and xb1 games and a couple of you guys (who are in the vast minority in this thread) are saying NOT really."

So this is what you meant?

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

2) not sure where you learned your info from but Jag cores ARE THE BIGGEST problem in current gen systems.  Gpu has already proved that it can do 4k frame buffers with no problem.  The problem that the gpu is having is that the Jag core cant provide it with info fast enough to maintain that 4k image at an acceptable frame rate.  If you simply switched out the cores for ryzen cores  these games would hit 4k60 with no problem.   They are already doing it on the pc thats not designed to take advantage of a closed system.  Running consoles with jag cores   is like running a cpu system  that has a 980ti  and using core duo   as the  cpu

Do you actually believe any of this?  Or, are you just trolling?

The jag core is one of the biggest problems in this gen, the other being the fact that they are still not using SSDs. 

However, putting in a faster CPU doesn't make your GPU any faster.  A 970 can do a 4k frame buffer, but its going to run like shit -- even if it has an i9 giving it data.  What pc is "already doing it that's not designed to take advante of aclosethat's not a close system is maxing out 4k60?  A 980Ti can't do 4k60 with an i9 on most games on max settings (not even close)

 

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

3) Guerilla Games performed well Technically because thier games lacked true gameplay and were basically techdemos  that show the power of sony systems.  

That is objectively wrong and is pure trolling.

 

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

I have confidence in Ninja Theory  I believe that they can execute in the same manner.  Hellblade  is a great looking game for such a small team to have put together.  dont know why you wouldnt expect them to do much better with full financial backing and a huge uptake in hiring new talent.  

I never played Hellblade (nor DMC).  I have always thought they made very good (but not great) games -- I thought that Enslaved and Heavenly Sword were good fun.  "Full Financial Backing" is only one of the things that it takes to make great games.  And if they started when they finished Hellblade, we won't see anything until AT LEAST 2021.

 

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

MS is also starting a HUGE new studio who's soul purpose is to produce those TOP TIER games you were refering to.   Phil is fixing the current "No Games" problem and the CEO is fully backing him something the xbox division didnt have at the start of this generation. In fact they were consolidating and destroying studios to save money

Wow -- a "HUGE NEW STUDIO".  Because we all now what a great record "huge new studios" have with making great games.  Hell, the last 2 studios MS created made (the Coalition and 343 Industries) made Gears 4 and Halo 5 and they were ….  Pretty good.  New studios don't have a very good record of making great games their first time out -- even if they have buttloads of money.

[crispy4000]

On 7/30/2018 at 6:47 PM, TwinIon said:

The question that started the thread wasn't "is the X1X more powerful than the pro", it was "have there been any games that set the X1X apart from the Pro yet?" You're absolutely right that there isn't an argument as to if the X1X is the most powerful console or not, but I think there is a very reasonable discussion to be has as to if that power is making a meaningful difference.

 

For the most part, the question seems to become "how much do resolution and framerate matter to you?" because it seems there aren't many (any?) examples of games that are obviously better looking on the X1X aside from those two factors. I know a lot of gamers really like to argue about minimal differences in resolution and framerate, but a whole lot of people either have a hard time distinguishing between something like checkerboard 4k vs "true 4k" or framerate problems if it stays ~30, or simply don't care. If you're one of those people (and my guess is that's the vast majority of people, if not necessarily those of us on a board like this), the answer to the OPs question seems to be no. If you have an eye for that kind of stuff, and there are certainly some folks around here that do, then yeah, the X1X is putting out meaningfully better looking games.

 

Agreed.

I don't think it's just an argument out of (blissful) ignorance either.  You can find a similar ideology at work in how people judge visuals on a single platform.  Are the best looking X1X games typically the ones that hit the highest resolution and framerate benchmarks?

... That's the kind of question that illustrates the larger picture is in the domain of subjectivity.

[TomCat]

On 7/30/2018 at 7:27 PM, mikechorney said:

"Then all of a sudden the Meta Argument switched to MS has no games.   A person asks  if there is a BIG difference between pspro  and xb1 games and a couple of you guys (who are in the vast minority in this thread) are saying NOT really."

So this is what you meant?

Do you actually believe any of this?  Or, are you just trolling?

The jag core is one of the biggest problems in this gen, the other being the fact that they are still not using SSDs. 

However, putting in a faster CPU doesn't make your GPU any faster.  A 970 can do a 4k frame buffer, but its going to run like shit -- even if it has an i9 giving it data.  What pc is "already doing it that's not designed to take advante of aclosethat's not a close system is maxing out 4k60?  A 980Ti can't do 4k60 with an i9 on most games on max settings (not even close)

 

That is objectively wrong and is pure trolling.

 

I never played Hellblade (nor DMC).  I have always thought they made very good (but not great) games -- I thought that Enslaved and Heavenly Sword were good fun.  "Full Financial Backing" is only one of the things that it takes to make great games.  And if they started when they finished Hellblade, we won't see anything until AT LEAST 2021.

 

Wow -- a "HUGE NEW STUDIO".  Because we all now what a great record "huge new studios" have with making great games.  Hell, the last 2 studios MS created made (the Coalition and 343 Industries) made Gears 4 and Halo 5 and they were ….  Pretty good.  New studios don't have a very good record of making great games their first time out -- even if they have buttloads of money.

 

Now listen to what DF is saying about an improvement to the Jag cpu and tell me I'm still wrong simply moving to a ryzen cpu allows the games to jump to 60fps

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 hour ago, TomCat said:

 

Now listen to what DF is saying about an improvement to the Jag cpu and tell me I'm still wrong simply moving to a ryzen cpu allows the games to jump to 60fps

Those games aren't running at 4k.  They are running at 1080p.

[TomCat]

2 hours ago, mikechorney said:

Those games aren't running at 4k.  They are running at 1080p.

So what  its the same principle.   games that are running at a certain resolution getting a Frame Rate boost from simply changing the Cpu.  Something you said wasnt possible and I was Trolling when I said that

[AbsolutSurgen]

6 minutes ago, TomCat said:

So what  its the same principle.   games that are running at a certain resolution getting a Frame Rate boost from simply changing the Cpu.  Something you said wasnt possible and I was Trolling when I said that

No.  I said the Xbox1X GPU wasn't capable of doing 4k60/Ultra  on most games.  Because the games are GPU constrained.  

At 1080p, any game on XB1X running sub-60fps is likely CPU constrained. 

4k requires ~4x the amount of GPU power as 1080p -- but minimal extra CPU performance.

[Duderino]

There are plenty of X games with performance modes that drop the 4K target to hit higher frame rates.  The X’s GPU may not be as limiting as the CPU, but depending on the game, resolution can still obviously be a bottleneck after the rest of the work the GPU has to do.

 

Consider that the GPU is responsible for more than just pushing pixels.  Lighting, post processing, character deformation, foliage dynamics, cloth simulation, materials, transparency, tri counts, etc. it all has a role in. 

[HGLatinBoy]

1 hour ago, Duderino said:

There are plenty of X games with performance modes that drop the 4K target to hit higher frame rates.  The X’s GPU may not be as limiting as the CPU, but depending on the game, resolution can still obviously be a bottleneck after the rest of the work the GPU has to do.

 

Consider that the GPU is responsible for more than just pushing pixels.  Lighting, post processing, character deformation, foliage dynamics, cloth simulation, materials, transparency, tri counts, etc. it all has a role in. 

Well that goes without saying. I'd be surprised if a hexacore  intel pc with 2 Titan XP SLI could run new games at native 4K with max settings let alone an Xbox One X

[Spork3245]

11 minutes ago, HGLatinBoy said:

Well that goes without saying. I'd be surprised if a hexacore  intel pc with 2 Titan XP SLI could run new games at native 4K with max settings let alone an Xbox One X

 

People are doing it on a single 1080 Ti in most games afaik.

[AbsolutSurgen]

I think there are a lot of newer AAA games that a 1080Ti will fail to maintain a 4k minimum framerate of 60fps at the highest quality settings.  There are also, clearly,  a number of games where it can.)

[Spork3245]

5 minutes ago, mikechorney said:

I think there are a lot of newer AAA games that a 1080Ti will fail to maintain a 4k minimum framerate of 60fps at the highest quality settings.  There are also, clearly,  a number of games where it can.)

 

I said “most”.  

Are we including AA when we say “highest settings”? Because without intensive AA I’m pretty sure the majority of games can be “maxed” at 60fps on a 1080ti

[Spork3245]

8 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

I said “most”.  

Are we including AA when we say “highest settings”? Because without intensive AA I’m pretty sure the majority of games can be “maxed” at 60fps on a 1080ti

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/assassins-creed-origins-performance-guide/

1080ti pulls a 50+ fps average in 4k at the ultra defaults in AC:O, which I think may default to 4x AA (  ), cannot remember off the top of my head. AC:O is more-or-less the most demanding game currently out there.

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 hour ago, Spork3245 said:

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/assassins-creed-origins-performance-guide/

1080ti pulls a 50+ fps average in 4k at the ultra defaults in AC:O, which I think may default to 4x AA (  ), cannot remember off the top of my head. AC:O is more-or-less the most demanding game currently out there.

It has the 39 fps minimum...  And IMHO, the "minimum" is really what you are shooting for when you say 4k/60 (i.e. can it reliably maintain 60 fps).

https://www.tomsguide.com/us/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-benchmarks,review-4241.html

GTAV was about the same as AC:O

 

I take your point about AA not being as important as the rendering resolution gets higher.

 

[Spork3245]

23 minutes ago, mikechorney said:

It has the 39 fps minimum...  And IMHO, the "minimum" is really what you are shooting for when you say 4k/60 (i.e. can it reliably maintain 60 fps).

https://www.tomsguide.com/us/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-benchmarks,review-4241.html

GTAV was about the same as AC:O

 

I take your point about AA not being as important as the rendering resolution gets higher.

 

 

I find most minimum fps to be misleading as it's often just a short hitch as assets load early in the benchmark.  

GTAV also 100% defaults AA to a fairly high level on both world and reflections, it also uses one of the more demanding AA types by default instead of FXAA and the-like.  

[TomCat]

@mikechorney is still incorrect. First I never said that the x gpu would be able to do games at ultra settings at 4k60.    What i said was the gpu in the X is perfectly capable of doing games at 4k60.  There are examples of that.  I then said that the jaguar core is the weakest component in the X1X.  I then stated that if you replaced the jaguar cores with Ryzen cores that games would EASILY hit 4k60.     Lets use  the Witcher 3 as an example.  IT's runinning at 4k on the 1x with a varible framerate up to 60fps.   If you simply just replace the Jag cores with Ryzen cores that game would run at a STEADY 4k60 all of the time.   Thats all I said and you said if I believed that then I'm just trolling the thread

[Keyser_Soze]

It's ok you can say whatever you want because there's no way to fact check what you said previously.

[TomCat]

7 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

It's ok you can say whatever you want because there's no way to fact check what you said previously.

everything I've said is in this very thread

[AbsolutSurgen]

On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 4:46 PM, TomCat said:

2)pretty sure we all agree on that aspect thats why Hitting 4k next gen wont really be an issue.  We have enough horse power with todays tech to make next gen machines  Humm in the impressions department.  All they have to do is put in Ryzen cpu cores and a slightly upgraded gpu  and next gen games will have  DRAMATIC difference in performance. You guys are forgetting how fucking weak Jag cores are and the amazing things they are accomplishing with that weak shit.

 

 

On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 5:50 PM, TomCat said:

2) not sure where you learned your info from but Jag cores ARE THE BIGGEST problem in current gen systems.  Gpu has already proved that it can do 4k frame buffers with no problem.  The problem that the gpu is having is that the Jag core cant provide it with info fast enough to maintain that 4k image at an acceptable frame rate.  If you simply switched out the cores for ryzen cores  these games would hit 4k60 with no problem.   They are already doing it on the pc thats not designed to take advantage of a closed system.  Running consoles with jag cores   is like running a cpu system  that has a 980ti  and using core duo   as the  cpu

 

2 hours ago, TomCat said:

@mikechorney is still incorrect. First I never said that the x gpu would be able to do games at ultra settings at 4k60.    What i said was the gpu in the X is perfectly capable of doing games at 4k60.  There are examples of that.  I then said that the jaguar core is the weakest component in the X1X.  I then stated that if you replaced the jaguar cores with Ryzen cores that games would EASILY hit 4k60.     Lets use  the Witcher 3 as an example.  IT's runinning at 4k on the 1x with a varible framerate up to 60fps.   If you simply just replace the Jag cores with Ryzen cores that game would run at a STEADY 4k60 all of the time.   Thats all I said and you said if I believed that then I'm just trolling the thread

What are you saying then?  

 

For the record, The Witcher 3 can run at 60fps on X1X -- at ~1300p (not 4k)  a faster CPU won't increase the resolution back to 4k -- it's GPU constrained.  But, if they lower the graphical settings (AA, shader quality,, LOD, shadow quality, polycount on models, etc) they could hit 4k60 if they wanted to.

 

But as, @Keyser_Soze said, no one can "fact check you" because there is no XB1X with a Ryzen 2 CPU in it.

 

[crispy4000]

By the time Ryzen comes to consoles, we'll have a new generation, and games that demand much more of the GPU and CPU.

I don't know if you realize it @TomCat, but you're actually looking at this in terms of a future console's backwards compatibility.  Not what we'll actually see out of new big budget games next-gen.

No one should be surprised if sub 4k resolutions and sub 60 framerates are still a thing in the next cycle.

[HGLatinBoy]

Or for the next 10 years.