Arena Test I -- Dead, but being used to test things
Site
GTX0 AnnouncementsFeedbackHelp | SandboxNewest Posts | Replies | Hottest
Activities GTX0 Mafia | AutoMafiaGTX0 Adventure | NIFESpectator GamingThe Flowvamp
Topics
Communities NostalgiaAxemsDrunjkPointless
Communities RPG ChatTerraria & IndiesJedi SithCovenant
Entertainment Computer Help & ChatSports | Entertainment & MusicWrestlingCreative Outlet
Special Topics World & PoliticsReal LifeSpiritualityScience & Math
Games
Game Genres StrategyMario WorldPokémonFinal Fantasy/RPGs
Superforums Video Game News & DiscussionsLegend of ZeldaAnimated/JapaneseDueling Cards
Popular Games OverwatchSuper Smash BrosMass EffectHalo


Video Game News & Discussions

Is your body ready?

Note: Topics for games that have their own forum with be moved to the appropriate forum.

Moderated by Vandy
Digital Foundary: Xbox One X is $500 - How Much Will Next-Gen Consoles Cost?
Posted: Posted June 18th
Edited June 18th by ShadowFox08



Interesting take on the price and performance cost analysis of future game consoles!

There are 40 Replies

Since 2005 consoles have launched at a $400-$500 range.

Posted June 18th by Q
Q

Right, but console progression in specs have slowed down quite a bit since this generation as well. This generation could last as long as last gen.

Posted June 18th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08

It baffles me that Microsoft would create this beefy new console and not give it any exclusives.

Posted June 18th by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

They did miss a great opportunity to announce an exclusive for the new hardware. I thought they would at least announce a one year gamepass bundle or something. They fell flat on giving people good reasons to buy the X1X outside of 44444KKKKK.

Posted June 18th by Vandy
Vandy

"Right, but console progression in specs have slowed down quite a bit since this generation as well. This generation could last as long as last gen. "

Maybe it console progression has slowed a bit, but I think that's because hardware progression in general has slowed compared to the past.

"It baffles me that Microsoft would create this beefy new console and not give it any exclusives."

It shouldn't baffle you if you paid attention to what Microsoft has said about it. The Xbox One X is basically a more powerful X1 but still an X1. MS doesn't want to fracture its user base by making games only work on the X1X.

Posted June 18th by Q
Q

Like I get not wanting to piss off X1 and X1S owners but why am I going to upgrade and buy a 1000 dollar tv just to make forza 7 look marginally better? Forza 6 looks absolutely amazing.

Where is the selling point? Do they just assume I am a millionaire who is too stupid to make a PC?

Posted June 18th by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

(by exclusive I am referring to Xbox exclusive in general - not X1X exclusive)

Posted June 18th by Vandy
Vandy

It's a 1500 dollar investment to make a game I can already play look a little bit better. It's the same mistake Nintendo made by releasing Zelda for Wii u. They aren't giving me a selling point to buy the new hardware because I can already play the games.

And this holds back what Forza 7 could be if they didn't have to cater to older Xbox customers.


Posted June 18th by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

Its kind of funny.. Thhe jump from wiii u to switch is nearly identical to Xbox one to xbone x. Not CPU, but GPU and RAM power jump are pretty close.

Posted June 18th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08

They did miss a great opportunity to announce an exclusive for the new hardware. I thought they would at least announce a one year gamepass bundle or something. They fell flat on giving people good reasons to buy the X1X outside of 44444KKKKK.


Not sure what the problem is. The biggest seller of the ps4 was that it was the most powerful console of its time.

People want power. And they will pay good money for it even if they are playing the same exclusives that could be layed at 960p on a $100-200 device...


500 dollars is a really good price. Considering the ps3 launched at that price in 2006...


Individuals like red leaf are not the target demographic for the xbox one x. neither am I.


Edited June 19th by S.O.H.
S.O.H.
 

You're not wrong. But it would have added some oomph to the announcement if they had announced a big shiny exclusive alongside the X1X showing something you can get exclusively (in terms of graphical capabilities) with the new hardware.

Posted June 19th by Vandy
Vandy

Nowadays most hardware is fairly competent at 720p. The difference in new hardware is not so much how good your games look but at what resolution and final output. The upgrade to the Switch allowed Mario Kart 8 to run at 1080p 60f and Zelda: Breath of The Wild to run at 900p 30f. Not bad for mobile hardware.

As we approach the atomic limit for the size of a transistor at which point electrons will easily jump circuits, computing power will be much harder to improve upon, and the costs will grow exponentially more expensive. Only Intel and Samsung have enough financial resources for 10nm fabrication processes: everyone else has to pool resources together and share a machine across multiple companies, and they will be much slower to adopt. The best and most efficient tech (much to my chargin) is currently going in phones and laptops. Consoles and desktop computers typically use previous-generation processes because they have already become so efficient and there isn't a great demand. An Intel integrated processor today operates better than a dedicated mid-range video card 5 years ago.

However... when we DO get around to improving processes, the jump will be EXTRAORDINARY. I'm currently running a 22nm Intel i7 3770 Sandy Bridge, 8 threads at 3.4 Ghz. Not bad for a PC that's 5 years old. At 10nm you can easily double that computing power for the same amount of electricity and heat. if NVIDIA adopts 10nm, their graphics cards will be times and a half more powerful than they are right now. Instead of running at 900p or so, they'd run at a full 1080p. Instead of 1080p, with a little scaling back it can run 1440p.

Unfortunately, it's all an output war. Newer hardware doesn't necessarily make it possible to use newer technology. Current GPUs are already capable of DX 12 and Vulkan's low-level improvements and can certainly dish out tessellation and amazing polygonal detail at high resolutions. The final frontier will pretty much be dynamic indirect lighting. After that there is little else that more power can truly add, and we are seeing cards today with that capability. Your games' graphics certainly won't look much better (except when we eventually do standardize dynamic GI), so the resolutions and framerates will improve first. As well as heating issues and such.

Posted June 19th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

I think a lot of people are missing the point that the Xbox One X is a premium product for consumers who want the very best & have the money to make it happen.

It's not supposed to be something everyone buys. In fact it's a minority market, so an exclusive wouldn't be to their benefit because they just end up upsetting the majority.

It's very much in line with Microsofts comments in previous years about trying to grab the gamers who go PC to get the latest and greatest, they want those people buying their consoles instead.

Edited June 19th by Moonray
Moonray
 

It's kind of pretentious. If you want to be the Porsche of consoles why not make it as powerful as an ultra high end gaming computer then? And charge 3000 dollars.

Why make it hover just out of the reach of the poor?

Posted June 19th by Burrito Grand Master
Burrito Grand Master
 

Why does it matter? This is exactly why there are no exclusives on it, so that "the poor" don't have to buy it.

The illusion that people need to buy it is exactly the same logic that smartphones work on and why Apple has had such success selling iPhones to suckers who come back every year because they must have the latest model. When the reality is the one they have will last for years.

Posted June 19th by Moonray
Moonray
 

Moonray hit the nail on the head. I personally wouldn't buy it right now as the switch will be my next device for years to come but in 4-5 years down the line when it becomes cheaper and 4k TV's are cheaper I would pick it up over the budget console.

Posted June 19th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

I'm fairly certain MS is wanting to do away with the console generation model.

Posted June 19th by Q
Q

Microsoft made it big not too long ago when they released the Xbox 360 early. But now they're repeating mistakes Sony made in that same generation. Nobody will pay $500 for hardware when upgrading your PC can get you the same games at significantly better framerates, controls, and prices. I feel more and more potential console gamers are turning to PC because seriously, is there even a point to owning a console, anymore? Nintendo captured the console market with their exclusives, form factor, and party-friendly multiplayer push, but every game the Xbox whatever can play my 6-year-old PC with a 2-year-old graphics card can play better than the Xbox One X. The Compute Units increase from 12 to 40 (assuming all other architecture is kept the same is 3.33x more powerful than the Xbox One (together with the speed boost about 3.5 times more powerful), so it's 1 time-and-a-half the PS4's GPU and it's fairly close to the 960. $200 on a graphics card today gets you something much more powerful than that, and at the end of the year with NVIDIA's new line you will get even more bang-for-your-buck.

Hell, BUY A LAPTOP for pete's sake. The power of a modern gaming laptop is better than anything you saw in the last generation. $900 today gets you a laptop more powerful than the Xbox One X. Top-of-the-line integrated graphics should perform close to the Nintendo Switch.

We still need to wait a couple generations for computers to stop improving, only because the last few updates have been so hard to overcome. Microsoft jumped the gun and that will come around to bite them in the ass. Selling a console for $500 with stiff competition from PC's and income inequality? That's almost as much a death wish as Sony releasing a $600 beast of a disappointment that recovered its losses following an economic recession and price drop back in 2006.

Posted June 19th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

Nobody will pay $500 for hardware when upgrading your PC can get you the same games at significantly better framerates, controls, and prices.

This is not true at all. Console gamers play on consoles for a reason. they have no interest gaming on PC. sorry. The Xbox one X will sell as its the most powerful console in existance.

Your opinion is not fact son.

Posted June 20th by S.O.H.
S.O.H.
 

As someone who does 99% of their gaming on a PC, I still disagree with you Mariomguy:

Nobody will pay $500 for hardware when upgrading your PC can get you the same games at significantly better framerates, controls, and prices. I feel more and more potential console gamers are turning to PC because seriously, is there even a point to owning a console, anymore?


Except you're ignoring the fact that not everyone wants to open up their PC to put new parts.

I don't think I could make a PC (going by UK prices for parts) that is capable of 4K gaming with consistent FPS in all games for the same price as an Xbox One X either so it's cheaper to just get the console.

Cheaper + Simpler = Win?

Nintendo captured the console market with their exclusives, form factor, and party-friendly multiplayer push, but every game the Xbox whatever can play my 6-year-old PC with a 2-year-old graphics card can play better than the Xbox One X.


First of all, it's way to early to claim that Nintendo has "captured the console market". Still very much early days. It's looking good for Nintendo, but you cannot and should not make such a claim- especially as the other two consoles (and their variants) seem to be selling very healthily still.

I also do not believe your other comment here is true, at least at 4K resolutions it shouldn't be unless you have like a Titan X (or AMD equivalent). In which case you're conveniently ignoring price comparisons in order to create a biased argument.

The Compute Units increase from 12 to 40 (assuming all other architecture is kept the same is 3.33x more powerful than the Xbox One (together with the speed boost about 3.5 times more powerful), so it's 1 time-and-a-half the PS4's GPU and it's fairly close to the 960.


Again you ignore why a lot of people go console in the first place. They don't want to buy a new graphics card and open up their PC and stick it in.

You also really like to quote numbers & specs but ignore real world evidence. A GTX 960 cannot do 4K reliably, my GTX 980 struggles with 4K in about half the games I own. So even if the GTX 960 is "more powerful" it's still not going to get the same results.

Hell, BUY A LAPTOP for pete's sake. The power of a modern gaming laptop is better than anything you saw in the last generation. $900 today gets you a laptop more powerful than the Xbox One X. Top-of-the-line integrated graphics should perform close to the Nintendo Switch.


In my experience (with my own and family/friends/coworkers) gaming laptops deteriorate pretty quickly. They start off amazing and as you'd expect but soon after they become unreliable, unable to give the performance they once did, etc, etc.

Also can I just draw to attention that you're suggesting people spend $900 on a gaming laptop VS $500 on a console... Seriously? How is that a fair comparison? If they made a console for $900 I'm sure it'd be spectacular (and last longer).



Edited June 20th by Moonray
Moonray
 

I feel like if my calculations are correct, $500 is less than $900 by $400.

I also feel like that you cannot get a laptop for $500 that can match the X1X's specs.

Posted June 20th by Q
Q

I feel like if my calculations are correct, $500 is less than $900 by $400.


can we get EN or The Fly to double check this claim. I am no mathematician, and while that looks correct, I would like another opinion.

Posted June 20th by S.O.H.
S.O.H.
 

Except you're ignoring the fact that not everyone wants to open up their PC to put new parts.

It's easy. Buy a PC, pull the old card out, put the new one in. Plug the power cables right, get the wattage correct, and you should be good to go. Upgrading a GPU is easier than anything else on the PC.

I don't think I could make a PC (going by UK prices for parts) that is capable of 4K gaming with consistent FPS in all games for the same price as an Xbox One X either so it's cheaper to just get the console.

If you don't have a PC, you will need something dedicated. A GTX 1070 is capable of 4K gaming, but you can get by and wait for NVIDIA's new line scheduled to release later this year: the ~$200 60-series cards in the new line will be the equivalent of the Xbox One X's power. Assuming you have the rest of the PC already in place, this is cheaper. And since most people need to upgrade computers regardless for work, you can combine multiple functions and pool resources into a gaming laptop or desktop.

First of all, it's way to early to claim that Nintendo has "captured the console market". Still very much early days. It's looking good for Nintendo, but you cannot and should not make such a claim- especially as the other two consoles (and their variants) seem to be selling very healthily still.

I'm only saying Nintendo is still giving gamers a REASON to purchase a console as opposed to playing on PC. Nintendo's new games take advantage of new controls and form factors that PC gaming is not capable of. You can't exactly carry around a gaming computer.

I also do not believe your other comment here is true, at least at 4K resolutions it shouldn't be unless you have like a Titan X (or AMD equivalent). In which case you're conveniently ignoring price comparisons in order to create a biased argument.

You don't need a Titan X to play 4K gaming. I'm developing a game for a marine aquarium in 4K, 60 FPS (50 FPS stable) on a GTX 1070. This is an 8 megapixel image rendered every 16-20 milliseconds! It achieves 4K, 30 FPS on a GTX 1060, and it's using some of the most advanced rendering techniques (color grading, volumetric lighting, distance field and raytraced shadowing, procedural grass generation, advanced shaders) while achieving this impressive target. And this is while running Direct X 11. When DX 12 becomes supported it could hit this target even sooner.

You also really like to quote numbers & specs but ignore real world evidence. A GTX 960 cannot do 4K reliably, my GTX 980 struggles with 4K in about half the games I own. So even if the GTX 960 is "more powerful" it's still not going to get the same results.

1 - NEVER use a card that is generations old to handle newer rendering techniques. You will always be disappointed. The 900 series cards made serious improvements to handling of deferred rendering over the 700 series (which was rather pathetic at handling DX-11 specific techniques), but it's not completely future proof. The 1000 series cards are MUCH more efficient, and you should see a 50% boost using a 1000-series card within the same tier.

2 - Remember, 4K is an 8 megapixel image. You need a very large monitor to even notice these details. The more impressive the graphics and rendering techniques, the more exponentially difficult it is to render. When console manufacturers claim 4K gaming, they usually mean 30f for something halfway decent, 60f only for very simple 2D games. We are not yet at the point where 4K gaming is possible with high-end visceral graphics. I was able to closely achieve it through a LOT of crazy and aggressive optimizations, but it's a moonshot target for any developer to achieve for a large game.

Also can I just draw to attention that you're suggesting people spend $900 on a gaming laptop VS $500 on a console... Seriously? How is that a fair comparison? If they made a console for $900 I'm sure it'd be spectacular (and last longer).

Most people already need a computer for work or school. A typical laptop is a bit more than half the cost of a decent gaming laptop/gaming rig, so instead of having multiple devices to do different things, just get one device that does everything. Laptops have better efficiency, but desktops have more power, customization, and longevity. If you're smart about it you can build a really strong gaming PC for less than $1,000, especially if you can salvage parts from your old one like the disk drive, the hard drive, and the power supply. A GTX 1160 paired with an i7-7700, 8GB DDR4 RAM, and salvaged parts can not only best the Xbox One X, it can also run Microsoft Office and play blu-rays. The parts I listed cost exactly the same as the console. You will need a motherboard and case and some cables, but the end result is a machine that can actually do it all. There is a sweet spot with hardware after which the price jumps exponentially and you do not reap much benefits. If you stick to that sweet spot you will be surprised with what you can find.

I will agree with you on one thing: consoles get better pricing because they buy in bulk quantities. But you have to buy everything all over again: the power, the CPU, the GPU, the RAM, the hard drive, the motherboard, everything has to be purchased all over again. Some parts last longer than others.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

It's easy.

Not as easy as buying a console, plugging it in and being able to play all modern games for 5-7 years hassle free. I think you are missing the point on how convenient it is to game on a console. Not surprising. There is a reason why the NES classic sold so well when one could emulate those games for free on their PC. It's easy to use and convenient.

Posted June 20th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

I would have no idea how to get the wattage sorted out.

Posted June 20th by Red Leaf
Red Leaf

Well, for starters, the NES classic is an official Nintendo-licensed product with 30-something games built-in. It's portable, it's retro, and it works well. But when the best-selling console titles are games like Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Assassin's Creed, The Witcher, and Overwatch, games that are better on the PC, there becomes less and less of a reason to purchase a console every generation. Most console devs and pretty much all indies/small dev teams now release on PC, and the PC also has free and reduced-cost games like Epic's Unreal Tournament and Undertale as well.

In terms of giving people a reason to buy a console, Nintendo has this in spades. They focus on creating local multiplayer experiences that PCs are not good with, and custom controls with exclusives like Splatoon. The competition has not been so keen on this. The exclusive really died last gen, from Rayman Legends getting a multiplatform release to PC support for GTA:V. Steam Summer Sales are coming, and most of the games you'll want to buy will be available for a steep discount. The more expensive consoles go, the more difficult it will be for a gamer to justify the price.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

I was going to type a reply to this but you're so condescending and ignorant that I deleted everything I was typing and just decided it's not worth the effort to continue because the alternative is getting annoyed and becoming rude toward you.

I wish you the best of luck in this conversation with other people though.

Posted June 20th by Moonray
Moonray
 

I would have no idea how to get the wattage sorted out.

Nowadays most CPUs have such low wattages (i7s for 67 watts!) you can just use NVIDIA's recommended wattage for whatever GPU you purchase. Go on their website, search for your GPU, and at the bottom of specs it will tell you.

If you want the actual formula take the TDP of all your parts (CPU, GPU, consider ~20 watts for the drives and RAM) and multiply it by 1.5: this will be an ideal range. Titanium is best (but not available at sane wattages), Platinum is second best (smallest I've seen is 400), Gold is pretty much the standard for everyone now. Most PCs only need 300-400 watts: 300 for integrated graphics, 400 for a dedicated card. Truth be told there is a lot of leeway with this: you really don't need to worry until you get to spending several hundred dollars for a monster GPU. These numbers are only a recommendation for energy efficiency.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

And yet console sells arent dying down any time soon this generation has a combined total of 90-95 million consoles sold (microsoft and sony combined) thats 30 millon and 60 million respectively for each company. And thats only 4 years into their life cycle.

Where as the PS3 and 360 have 84 million life time sells each after 10 years.


Consoles are selling like hotcakes for a pretty simple reason that you cant grasp.

Its like trying to bash open a coconut on the sand. Its not going to happen. Im out.

Posted June 20th by S.O.H.
S.O.H.
 

I was going to type a reply to this but you're so condescending and ignorant that I deleted everything I was typing and just decided it's not worth the effort to continue because the alternative is getting annoyed and becoming rude toward you.

I used to game on consoles back when it made a lot of sense to. I'm just mentioning that nowadays it really doesn't. Most games are already available on PC at a fraction of the cost. The age of exclusives and hardware always improving is coming to a close. How would you feel about the future paying $500 for a console, and then another 5 years from now $500 for a marginally better console, and then another $500 5 years from that? This doesn't make much sense to me. Buy a gaming computer now, upgrade the video card later, reap the benefits of Steam sales and an amazing workstation/media player. When the parts go bad or get outdated, just replace the parts, not the entire hardware. Then when it's time to change the computer you can salvage the case, power supply, drives, and/or GPU and upgrade the CPU, motherboard, and RAM whenever you're ready. You can salvage all the parts and pieces of a PC and build something new like a LEGO set.

In the future, this might be a more viable option for people than console upgrades IF Sony and Microsoft keep trying to push the envelope with more expensive consoles and less exclusives/specific features. Multiplayer is the last saving grace for consoles as ideal gaming hardware. But this is not 1996 or 2006 anymore: Guitar Hero and DDR are no longer cool, and console graphics can no longer impress like they used to. I personally believe the future of gaming is PC. And once we reach the atomic limit, probably gaming laptops. Awesome power, portability, and usefulness for the price of a console.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

Guys, you are trying to use reason and logic on Mariomguy. That won't work. I have had this exact argument with him and it lead no where. Let him live in his fantasy world, it won't hurt anything in the real world.

Posted June 20th by Q
Q

Think about it: you're paying for the console, controllers, online subscriptions, retail pricing for games, and the end result is a device you can't use reliably for work and once it gets outdated you need to buy the whole thing all over again. You can get a computer capable of work AND gaming for a significantly reduced cost in the long term, all things considered. And since PC hardware is so good, chances are you'll be much better off.

Consoles are good for simplicity, multiplayer, custom controls, and exclusives, but Nintendo is really the one taking advantage of the controls and exclusives. Most people just get consoles for a plug-and-play device. These are the truths. If I'm saying anything wrong let me know and I'll make amendments.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

"If I'm saying anything wrong let me know and I'll make amendments."

Lol

Posted June 20th by Q
Q

How do you expect me to use my comfy recliner while playing on a laptop or desktop?

Posted June 20th by Vandy
Vandy

Use an Xbox one controller?

Posted June 20th by Red Leaf
Red Leaf

Technically you can use a PS4 controller also. But make sure you get your game loaded before reclining, and try not to get bored and want to change games.

Posted June 20th by Q
Q

Steam could fix this by letting you navigate it with a controller.

Posted June 20th by Red Leaf
Red Leaf

How do you expect me to use my comfy recliner while playing on a laptop or desktop?

Uh, plug it into your TV? Every laptop and graphics card nowadays has HDMI output, just like a console. Bluetooth controllers like Sony's Dualshock and even Nintendo's Wii Remote can be configured for PCs with bluetooth, or you can use Xbox's wireless controllers. You can also use a wired controller and USB extension cords like the good old days.

It's not the most ideal setup to have a PC if you'd rather game on a big screen TV with a dedicated machine, but PC has a lot of advantages now that hardware upgrades are slowing to a crawl.

Posted June 20th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

Steam could fix this by letting you navigate it with a controller.


Steam has "Big Picture Mode" which has full controller support. It was designed specifically for couch gaming on a TV but can be used on a regular monitor too.

I have a cheaper 2nd PC hooked up to my TV, but I also take it around to friends houses for couch party games (Steam has a surprisingly good selection of these) and Big Picture Mode works perfectly for this. I also got myself a motion controlled mouse/keyboard remote thing so that I can easily swap between Steam, Origin, Emulators, etc. Very happy with how it all turned out, wouldn't quite say I'd swap to it as a main gaming system (which is another PC) but it gets a lot of use.

Edited June 21st by Moonray
Moonray
 
Reply to: Digital Foundary: Xbox One X is $500 - How Much Will Next-Gen Consoles Cost?

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on