Optical is basically redundant now with HDMI but my old amp doesn't have any HDMI inputs but then again that amp is over 10 years old lol.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Xbox Series X: A Closer Look at the Technology Powering the Next Generation
- Thread starter Deleted member 5028
- Start date
Code you never gave the PS4 Pro shit for excluding it?
This is worse than printers man, HDMI now forces you to have a a receiver or use the TV's pass through.
Based on reviews on Amazon, I think you might need to be a bit careful with cheap splitters depending on your setup. I've got a TV that supports freesync over HDMI and a receiver that supports Atmos (but won't pass freesync over HDMI through), but from what I've read, most splitters won't allow me to get both of these at once.
Optical is only used for digital sound but yes you are correct, not all HDMI cables are created equal.
I recently upgraded my home theater to a modern denon that supports 4k passthru from my favorite marantz, but it's so much more elegant now. I suppose you can get a splitter to peel off optical but HDMI handles all. I feel slightly embarrassed thinking of some old frankensetups I had. Using my 900g for tv(yttv)/streaming via HDMI arc and Xbox on the same port just back out has been very nice so I won't miss it on the xsx
I hate to waste a USB port, but I think the solution will end up being a relatively cheap USB to TOSLINK (if there isnt a giant CPU hit), or better, but more expensive and NOT using a usb port - an HDMI extractor that works with hdmi 2.1.
Ps4 ram wasn't 158% faster than Xbone because there was esram. That actual problem with the console wasn't raw speed but rather that it was so small 32mb.
For SX you could say the problem is similar in theory, only now you have 10GB of ram instead of just 32MB.
You are also not considering the system reservation on PS5 so instead of 6 it actually just has about 3 (3.5GB) of memory that is faster than the 3.5 pool on SX. However, as I said, there is memory contention on that pool.
As sony shows on PS4, that is an issue:
As you can see the problem is that as cpu uses bandwidth the total CPU+GPU bandwidth reduces. This still happens on Ps5, and likely to an even higher extent now that the cpu is significantly more powerful, and not on SX thanks to that elegant and efficient memory design Ms came up with.
I don't have a link other than the presentation. I watched it fully at once so I can't tell you exactly when he tells that as well, but he certainly does. He says something that going higher than that would make the inner logic of the chip to stop working.
The Esram was as you mentioned, only 32mb worth lol. 8GB's worth of the PS4's ram (eg pretty much all of it) was 158% faster. Add to that, the XO's paltry 32MB of Esram was only 16% faster than the PS5's 8GB of GDDR5 at peak. However you slice it, this gens bandwidth differences are considerably greater than they will be next gen.
Regarding your bandwidth chart, I don't think that's necessarily accurate to real world bandwidth post launch, since developers have actually tested the PS4's real world bandwidth in games and found it to be around 172 GB/s (or at least the CEO from Studio Just Add Water did).
Ultimately, the bandwidth figures given by manufacturers are often theoretical peak, the actual real world bandwidth is usually always lower, this goes for Sony and Microsoft. The Xbox Series X will not be unique in that regard, so I don't really know why you're claiming otherwise or why you think this is unique to Sony.
As an example, Xbox One's Esram's real world bandwidth was tested to be 140-150GB/s, and Digital Foundry actually found lower; "Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios, it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with certain ESRAM operations.", which is obviously a fair degree below the advertised peak 204GB/s.
As far as I know, the Xbox Series X's CPU and GPU still shares the same bus, so would have similar issues (as with every console) that could impact from peak theoretical bandwidth.
Finally, there's no need for you to link Cerny's presentation because I literally posted the transcript/quote of the exact segment you're talking about above in my earlier post lol.
Last edited:
You're making an unfair comparison, the GPU on both machines are much closer than that. And yes, the GPU still has to draw everything and yes Series X has an undeniable advantage there, but it doesn't mean it will have data fed to it's RAM as fast as PS5 will. You could imagine for instance a game that relies on teleportation, like a "Portal" but with transit between completely different scenes, it would be much harder to make it seamless if you can't have the scene change in a second (that you could have loading during a second long visual effect for exemple) but have to do it in 2 seconds. Or, you could have an open-world game with faster traversal while keeping the level of detail higher because GPU can tap into the RAM being refreshed faster with new assets.
This is purely imaginative from my end, I don't know more than you do in all honesty, just trying to conceptualize how this could make a difference.
An HDMI 2.1 splitter with low input lag though? Need my 4K 120Hz support, and I don't want a significant amount of additional latency.
Definitely worried about this. If I had an optical port on my TV, would that work the same? Can I get Dolby 7.1 virtual surround sound with my Astro A50 like I can using the optical port on my Xbox One X?
Again, what are you talking about? From my experience (I'm replaying W2 right now) you are hard pressed to notice any quality degradation in Wolfenstein even with "Performance" VRS preset. The game is also fairly light on shading in general so it's not a good case for measuring savings you'd get from VRS.
Wolfenstein doesn't use any tier since it's a Vulkan game where there are no VRS tiers.
But if you want to describe its VRS usage in DX terms then it's definitely tier 2.
Of course I've seen it in real time. There is hardly any difference in perceivable quality.
I know you're just guessing...but gaining a second of load time with that kind of speed advantage makes it sound like Sony made a priority mistake.
Well, only actual games will show if it was a mistake or not, it is for sure a conscious and specific decision, so they have an intention to make use of it. It's an interesting take for sure. Both MS and Sony are betting on SSDs to be a huge boost regardless, so this will be an important next gen feature.
I think there is a misconception about how SSD helps though (for both consoles), I think we are still too much focused on "loading" in the sense we have seen this gen whilst it is much more critical to have a continuous stream of data during gameplay. Loading screens only existed to compensate the huge drawbacks of HDDs and to have an "initial" fill-up of the RAM. This will completely change with this gen and this is very exciting, can't wait to see how both consoles make use of it.
Because they're a detriment to the controller as years go by. It's easier for you buy your own rechargables and swap them out once they inevitably lose thier potency/charge capacity.
Well, at least, it makes the controller last longer, you don't have to change controller once your battery is dead. I appreciate both approaches, but the the AA solution is a good long term approach.
If you plug your consoles into your tv with HDMI and then use the optical out port on your TV to plug into your Astro mix amp then yes that will work. If you're using a mix amp you're probably using it's built in Dolby processing anyways. As long as it's getting a digital source it will process that into digital surround sound.
but yes, HDMI can pass through audio to optical.
Buy a play and charge kit, let those of us with Eneloops continue to use them. Or just buy yourself some Eneloops, save yourself some money in the long term and do the planet a favour.
That gives me peace of mind. I was worried there was a specific format the optical port had to output for the mixamp to do its thing and that it might be different when sent to the TV over HDMI rather than directly from the Xbox. As long as you're sure about that, that's great.
Still sucks if I want to use my monitor though. But I'll probably be buying an LG C9 and using my Series X with that the vast majority of the time. Probably.
Because a rechargeable declines in capacity over time.
Just buy a couple of Eneloops rechargeable batteries and you are settled for the whole generation.
I agree with you. putting your own batteries in a controller should have died with the 360.
I don't see the issue with an internal battery like the PS controllers. My launch DS4 works perfectly fine. In fact, even my two DS3 controllers from the PS3 days work fine.
XSX's actually has better compression silicon than the PS5. The PS5 is using Kraken, while XSX is using both zlib and BCPack which combined provide better compression. Sony mostly has more raw throughput, we will need to hear more about both controllers to know which features each has.
MS is also promoting streaming data as the character moves on XSX, they just did it more quietly in their GDC streams. Right now the biggest difference between Sony's announcement and Microsoft is that Sony went into great detail for the "average" person while MS kept things very technical. What's important to know is that the XSX is as custom as the PS5.
Yeah, so let's use 3DMark as a good example to real-world performance :D
VRS in the lowest settings is visible in W2, and in youngblood too. 12% performance gain for youtube like artifacts, not exactly what VRS should be.
Can you provide a link to back that up, that says Wolfenstein is able to control VRS during the creating of the frame? I've looked, couldn't find anything.
Seriously? Hardly any difference? No, it's VERY visible. And taking a predetermined benchmark of a feature like VRS as anything related to what will happen in actual games is just plain wrong.
They could just provide the rechargeable battery pack with the controllers instead of selling these separately though...
Why? That would obviosuly increase the cost to everyone. many already have their own rechargeable batteries that are univeral with other things like remote controls.
Would it though? Xbox controllers are the same price as PS4 ones but don't have gyros or internal batteries. In a fair world, it would eat into their profit margins and not the final cost of the controller
We don't know the price of anything yet.
The biggest cost saving is simply using the controller you already own.
I quite like knowing that the battery pack can be swapped out for another one, they do only last a finite amount of time, I've been through 2 battery packs this gen, but I still had the controllers. I do however like the really high capacity built-in battery that the Elite has, the play time is by far the most important thing for me.
Oh I don't mean they should switch to internal batteries, I mean they should give the external battery packs that plug into the socket that batteries go in. You can recharge them just like internal batteries and you can swap these out when they die out and everybody wins. Right now though you have to buy them separately.
XSX memory setup actually doesn't solve the CPU problem because there are no separate pools, it's all a single big memory pool, so the CPU will still cause problems. What does help the problem is using more pipes, that's why HBM can completely eliminate the problem. XSX does have a 320-bit interface while PS5 is using a 256-bit interface, 25% more data pipes, so it will remedy some of the problems compared to PS5, but it will still exist.Ps4 ram wasn't 158% faster than Xbone because there was esram. That actual problem with the console wasn't raw speed but rather that it was so small 32mb.
For SX you could say the problem is similar in theory, only now you have 10GB of ram instead of just 32MB.
You are also not considering the system reservation on PS5 so instead of 6 it actually just has about 3 (3.5GB) of memory that is faster than the 3.5 pool on SX. However, as I said, there is memory contention on that pool.
As sony shows on PS4, that is an issue:
As you can see the problem is that as cpu uses bandwidth the total CPU+GPU bandwidth reduces. This still happens on Ps5, and likely to an even higher extent now that the cpu is significantly more powerful, and not on SX thanks to that elegant and efficient memory design Ms came up with.
I don't have a link other than the presentation. I watched it fully at once so I can't tell you exactly when he tells that as well, but he certainly does. He says something that going higher than that would make the inner logic of the chip to stop working.
Doesn't virtual headphone surround sound just take a stereo output and, for lack of a better term, simulate surround sound? It's possible that my understanding is just wrong.
It depends, but usually, they take the 5.1 data and apply the filter to that to make it sound directional. That's how the system I had used previously has worked
That's just being obtuse. Surely you can see how most people would want the simplicity of charging against having to purchase batteries regularly or having to take rechargeable batteries out of the compartment to recharge separately.
I'm not so sure if it's 'most' people having read the responses to this thread from the start. I've seen far more people defending swappable batteries than asking for an internal one.
But I'm not talking about an internal one... it's still replaceable which is the argument for AA batteries (which can still use if you want to might I add)
Apologies - i might well be mis-reading the conversation.
I just wanted to flag that the Xbox has sound settings and output format, explicitly for headsets, as well as one for the "main" hdmi channel going to an amp or whatever.
In turn within that headset setting there is a tick box to tell the xbox whether you have a "boring"headset that is just stereo, or a "fancy" headset that has it's own surround sound amp/mixer.
If you tell it you have a boring headet, it uses windows sonic, or Atmos, to send a virtual surround sound output to the stereo headphones. If you tell it you have a fancy headset then it sends the original 5.1 (or 7.1 or whatever) signal to the headset, to let it figure it out itself.
It's an important box to tick or untick because the wrong option will mess things up.
Aren't Xbox controllers usually the cheapest out of all 3 companies though?
You can understand how most people don't want their controllers longevity dictated by the battery. People would rather just use rechargeable batteries that can be quickly swapped without being tethered to the console. This is a cheaper and better solution and don't call me Surely
It seems to be a small minority of asking for this so it strikes me as a waste of resources, both financial and natural, to provide these to everyone.
Can we all agree that moving to USB-C over microUSB on the controller end is the best change in a decade? F microusb breaking and falling out piece of crap connector arggghh
found this article about DX12 Sampler Feedback which seems related to the SFS mentioned by your quoted text
I'm confused about this. The videos with the magnetic components (the ones showing DF and others "putting together" a Series X console) show no optical port on the back. But a few days later, the Series X console that they had on the Game Stack presentations did have one.
For now, it's safe to assume that it does not, but I'd like some official confirmation either way.
Edit: Also, that leaked photo of the Series X lying on someone's carpet floor had an optical port as well. So there's no clear answer as to whether retail units will actually have one or not.
I think the answer is no, as theres official communication about how the xsx will support the astro gaming headset/mixer.
This is incorrect. We actually know all three relevant numbers for both platforms. XSX listed first, raw read speed is 2.5GB/s versus 5.5. Real-world average rate is 4.8Gb/s versus 8.5. Theoretical max is 6GB/s versus 22.
Yes. Decompression is done by dedicated hardware on XSX, not by the CPU.
The gap will be there, XSX is more powerful. Whether it's going to be obvious or not is up to your eyes.
The thoretical max of the decompression block seems to be overkill on the Sony side, I wonder why they made that choice, the PS5 seems a well balanced system overall.