That's entirely dependent on the types of games you prefer to play. For example, if you like sports simulations (and that's a big part of the gaming market), it's not a good combination.
I actually had a Wii U. A launch system too. I sold it because the 3rd parties were pulling out and downloads were still tied to the console. But if I had it to do over again, I would have kept it. My 13 yr old nephew has one and he loves it. He plays Splatoon almost religiously. I'm very envious. In the past, the best consoles always had bad sales because of fanboy driven BS. The PC Engine/TG-16 was probably the first causality. At the time, it was perceived as being underpowered, just like the Wii U. But it had some of the best games ever made. It doesn't look underpowered at all. I played the Genesis version of that Devil Crush pinball game and it looks way better on the TG-16. Looking back, I could just cry.
Sony just got owned. Xbox Scorpio is real. https://www.engadget.com/2016/06/13/microsoft-announces-a-new-super-powered-xbox-console-project-sc/ Microsoft showed off a video in which a number of developers touted the console's massive power -- it'll feature "true" 4K resolution, 6 teraflops of GPU power and will run at 60Hz. It'll of course be VR-ready, and Bethesda noted it'll run Fallout 4 in VR, as announced last night. While Microsoft didn't mention Oculus by name, the two companies have a partnership that was announced at last year's E3. So it seems highly likely that the Rift will be the headset of choice for Project Scorpio.
Yea from reading that, it's just a new console with backwards compatibility for xbox one software and accessories. Is 6Gflops enough? The gtx 1080 is 8.2Gflops and runs Doom at a solid 60fps in 4k and dips in the 50's when intense action happens. And that's just a current game. Scorpio is slated for q4 2017 so the newer games will even be more demanding.
The Xbox One S has additional power too. http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/13/11927732/xbox-one-s-performance-gears-4 Gears of War 4 employs a dynamic resolution system that tweaks the game's rendering resolution in both single-player and multiplayer to maintain its target frame rate in each mode (30 frames per second and 60 fps, respectively). According to Fergusson, the Xbox One S has additional raw GPU and CPU power compared to the Xbox One, and The Coalition's engineers have been able to take advantage of that to reduce the frequency of frame rate or resolution penalties in more demanding sections of the game. Let's have a look at that GW4 video again. If the S pulls that off at 1080p with zero frame drops, then the PS4 just completely lost their tech edge. But who's going to want to upgrade to the S when the Scorpio is coming in late 2017?
"Tweaks the game's rendering resolution" = not really 4K all the time. They're already prepping people for the inevitable "doesn't really run the games in 4K but can play 4K video".
It will be enough for the moment but probably not in a few years. Consoles don't have user defined settings so they can cheat a little bit on AA, draw distance and other things to get an extra 5-10% performance. The new Xbox will also use primitive discard accelerator which means the GPU might have less work to do in some heavy graphic situations. For example take a scene with 15 characters walking around in the filed of view. The current Xbox has to render all 15 all the time while in the FoV even if they can't be seen. The new Xbox would only render what needs to be seen. So if a character moves behind a wall or a bus it is no longer drawn until it becomes visible again. That's the theory anyway. I'd love to see a demo of that in action.
It sounds like with the Neo and Scorpio, we will finally have consoles that can comfortably pull off 1080p/60fps. 4K isn't going to happen with these specs.
That quote was about the Xbox One S, which is Microsoft's answer to the Neo. The S has a bump in power to push it up to 1080p and it has 4K video playback. On the other hand, Project Scorpio is a monster and it's going to smoke the Neo.
Scorpio is using a mid-range GPU by current standards. In 1.5 years when it launches, it will be entry-level, just like the Radeon 7790 derivative GPU in the X1 was in 2013.
Really? Cause what I'm reading puts the Scorpio right between the GTX 980 & the GTX 980 Ti. http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-gtx-1080/ Those are the release dates and a few core specs, along with pricing. Nvidia didn't talk too much about the GTX 1070, but the GTX 1080 will feature 2560 CUDA cores that provide a total of 9 TFLOPS of performance. To put that into perspective, a GTX Titan X is only rated at 7 TFLOPS (with GPU Boost), while the 980 Ti is capable of around 6.5 TFLOPS—and the "lowly" GTX 980 does around 5.3 TFLOPS. The 7790 was a mid range card that was competing with the GTX 650 Ti. http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/?gid=1637&graphics=Radeon HD 7790 Performance Radeon HD 7790 competes with GeForce GTX 650 Ti and its performance is slightly above it. That's really on the weak side dude. But you already know that.
cmdr is talking about in a year and a half from now. by that time, the 980 and 980ti will be 2 generations behind.
When the XB1 came out, the 7790 was only $150. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6837/...w-feat-sapphire-the-first-desktop-sea-islands Are you saying that on Christmas 2017, the AMD equivalent of the GTX 980 Ti will be $150? Cause, that would awesome.
980 level performance will be available for $200 this month with the RX 480. The 980 Ti is a bit faster, but I absolutely believe 980 Ti performance will be available for $150 by Q4 2017. That's a long time from now in the world of GPUs. And the 980 Ti is already a year old, and 980 is almost two years old. MS will be doing exactly what they did with the XB1: using GPU hardware that's already several years out of date.
I looked up the RX 480 and, I"m surprised -- you're right about the price. It'll launch later this month at $199. But this is very far from what MS did with the XB1. This time, the tech isn't years out of date. It's more like, AMD's new tech is leap frogging Nvidia by a large margin. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...ngs-true-amd-has-hit-a-home-run/#17f10cab440b Paired with an Intel Core i7-4770, the Radeon RX 480 is achieving a 3DMark P-score of 14,461, which puts it above a “VR-Ready” PC. That means that under DirectX 11, it’s performing on par with or better than the Radeon 390 and GTX 970. That’s obviously not the entire story, though, because it’s twice as power efficient as the Radeon 390 and clocks in for significantly less dollars. For people who’ve been put off by the high cost of VR gaming, this is fantastic news, and it indeed slides right into the narrative AMD is weaving with its Polaris architecture. But even if you’re not interested in virtual reality, this significantly lowers the barrier to entry for high-end 1080p and potentially 1440p gaming (the benchmark score is nipping on the heels of a baseline 4K gaming PC). Now the question should be: Why isn't Sony doing this too? They're still being left in the dust.
Not sure what you mean about leap frogging. The 1070 and 1080 are much faster than the RX480. AMD is not competing at the high-end. They are competing in the mid-range segment to offer a card that's a better value.
I agree that they're following the same formula. But I was under the opinion that the XB1 performance was considered "high end" back in 2010. That's 4 years before the XB1 came out. The tech in the Scorpio was considered high end about a year ago. That'll make it 2 years old - or 2 1/2 years old - on launch. I could be wrong about that, but AMD seems to be upping their game considerably. Let me put it another way: I'm betting that this thing will outperform the GTX 1060 when it launches. The 7790 didn't come close to outperforming the GTX 660.
Even by 2010 standards, the 7790 was not high-end. It's just slightly faster than a GTX 460, which was a mid-range $200 card in 2010. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html Radeon 7790: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/592091 GTX 460: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/482173 When we say MS went with really dated and underpowered hardware, we are not exaggerating. Things are a little better this time around. Console gamers will get what was a high-end experience in 2014/2015 in Q4 2017.
I bought an xfx double d radeon 7770 back in 2012 because I wanted some cheap quiet junk to replace my jet engine radeon 4870 from back in 2009. when MS announced the specs for the xbox one, i thought it was a mistake because those numbers were barely better than the radeon 7770, a midrange card from 2012. I really shouldn't care about the situation in consoles at all since i haven't had any interest in owning any since the xbox/ps2/gc generation, but the problem here is that alot of developers start with the console versions in mind and port from that. it leaves alot to be desired when they get carried over to pc. there has been alot of hot garbage releases in the last few years because of this.