• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Dec 31, 2017
1,430
It'll be a tricky move to make seeing as Sony appears to be waiting on what Microsoft announce on pricing. I think that Sony's plan is to come in cheaper no matter what Microsoft announces. I think the only way for MS to be sure of matching Sony on price is to come in at $399, which would mean a sizeable loss on every console sold.

$449 doesn't seem out of the question for me. I can't see Sony going much below $399, so an extra $50 for the most powerful console seems reasonable.

$499 vs $399 is where things get tricky. It doesn't feel like there's enough of a performance gap for that sort of price difference.
It won't happen though. There is no scenario where one company will bring its price down no matter what to be lower than the competition. Both will launch at whatever price it is they have planned for, no need for some far fetched scenario where Sony is playing the waiting game, because they aren't,m.
 

Iron Eddie

Banned
Nov 25, 2019
9,812
It won't happen though. There is no scenario where one company will bring its price down no matter what to be lower than the competition. Both will launch at whatever price it is they have planned for, no need for some far fetched scenario where Sony is playing the waiting game, because they aren't,m.
We have seen both Nintendo and AMD change prices either very quickly after launch (3DS) or just prior to launch (2 days before the 5700 GPU came out).
 

ThatNerdGUI

Prophet of Truth
Member
Mar 19, 2020
4,551
I wonder how much smaller PS5's APU is? Most people are commenting like everything between them is identical minus the difference in CUs, which is 56 VS 40. Assuming CUs take 50% of the area in XSX's APU, it would make PS5's APU 14% smaller.


How does the bus width factor into the price?
Bus width is just due to the number of RAM chips on the system. 10 chips at 32bit is 320bit bus.
 

SeanMN

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,187

While I expect the OS footprint to be fairly small, I'd expect system reservation to be quite large. On the XSX side, with quick resume targeting 3 XSX games minimum that's about 40 GB of dedicated space. The Xbox team has also talked about how each game gets access to 100 GB of virtual memory, so I'd assume that would also be reserved space. PS5 hasn't disclosed details on similar features yet. If this reserved space enables these features, then I'm fine with it, though I'll likely look to purchase an expandable storage card on launch.
 

Axel Stone

Member
Jan 10, 2020
2,771
While I expect the OS footprint to be fairly small, I'd expect system reservation to be quite large. On the XSX side, with quick resume targeting 3 XSX games minimum that's about 40 GB of dedicated space. The Xbox team has also talked about how each game gets access to 100 GB of virtual memory, so I'd assume that would also be reserved space. PS5 hasn't disclosed details on similar features yet. If this reserved space enables these features, then I'm fine with it, though I'll likely look to purchase an expandable storage card on launch.

I'd hope that the number of quick resume games are configurable, or that the save state simply gets deleted if you need to use the space for an install (potentially with a warning first).
 

JaggedSac

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,988
Burbs of Atlanta
Well, Sony went with a more expensive RAM and Flash storage setup (and maybe cooling?) while MS went with the more expensive GPU. Can those prices offset and the consoles end up similarly priced? The APU silicon will still be more expensive regardless. One thing I've heard is that MS have somewhat "subsidized" the Series X manufacturing cost with Xcloud so I guess we will have to see how everything plays out in the future.

Sony also went with a seemingly more expensive SSD. You aren't getting that extra bandwidth for free. Albeit the drive is smaller than the XSX's. With what appears to be an only slightly smaller APU, I don't foresee the prices being much different for these two boxes. Likely both $499.
 

Munki

Member
Apr 30, 2019
1,212
The "there's no way we get SSDs" comments were my personal favorites.
Yup, that was way back in Oct last year when those rumours began coming out, funny enough they were first associated with MS at the time. For that reason alone made many people doubted that SSD would be possible.
 
Last edited:

tusharngf

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,288
Lordran
I'm still in disbelief we're getting a 12.155 TF RDNA 2.0 gpu in this system :)
They really went all out this time. Now that 52cu 360mm is close to 2080super which is a $700 gpu. Imagine what big Navi would do to Nvidia. There is a rumor that 80cu big Navi is coming. If ps5 can clock at 2.23ghz that means rdna 2 can clock really high. AMD is going to put big Navi next which will be 40-50%faster than Nvidia2080ti. Hbm2e plus 7nm,550mm die will be fun to watch. Not to mention that Nvidia is coming out with ampere series which will be based on Samsung 8nm node. Things are about to get excited for gamers in upcoming days. I think 12tf will be mid range by 2021q2.
 

tusharngf

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,288
Lordran
I wonder how much smaller PS5's APU is? Most people are commenting like everything between them is identical minus the difference in CUs, which is 56 VS 40. Assuming CUs take 50% of the area in XSX's APU, it would make PS5's APU 14% smaller.


How does the bus width factor into the price?
300mm or lesser approx die size
 

RF Switch

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
4,118
This will be a very fanboyish take but I really believe a majority reason of the proprietary storage solution that Xbox is taking is to keep expanding storage costs down for the consumer rather than just profiting off being the only solution.
 

EvilBoris

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest
Verified
Oct 29, 2017
16,686
This will be a very fanboyish take but I really believe a majority reason of the proprietary storage solution that Xbox is taking is to keep expanding storage costs down for the consumer rather than just profiting off being the only solution.

I think it's just about consistent experience. On day one you can buy the memory and it will 100% function as intended. The other solution unfortunately has a degree of variability
 

PianoBlack

Member
May 24, 2018
6,647
United States
Yeah it obviously wasn't a wellplanned purchase, she essentially just impulse bought the console at a sale after remembering that we had talked about it at work, might not have payed attention to the X at all, then came to work proud about finding it at such a low price. :p
She bought an X too later on though. So Yay MS!
/s

Seriously now, personally I think the naming for Xbox consoles are crap. And having Xbox One X and Xbox Series X on the shelf the same time will be hilariously bad for less informed customers. Both probably has some "Most powerful" slogan on the box.

I think the chances of Xbox One X and Xbox Series X being on the shelf at the same time are extremely low. They've already been clearing stock with X1X sales down to $199 standalone and $299 with pack in.

The form factor will also be a big help here. Even if they haven't completely cleared the channel by launch, no one is going to confuse a $299 flat console with a $499+ mini PC tower.
 

Scently

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,464
I think the chances of Xbox One X and Xbox Series X being on the shelf at the same time are extremely low. They've already been clearing stock with X1X sales down to $199 standalone and $299 with pack in.

The form factor will also be a big help here. Even if they haven't completely cleared the channel by launch, no one is going to confuse a $299 flat console with a $499+ mini PC tower.
Yep. I think they will phase out 1X. They might even phase out the normal X1S for Lockhart and leave the SAD as the cheapest entry point into the ecosystem.
 

StudioTan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,836
Again, Sony are definitely trying something different. They are trying to achieve and balance 4 things in the following order of priority: scope change in terms of game design and interactivity, accessibility, high performance, and reasonable price.

I think MS is prioritizing visual fidelity and high performance at the top of their list at the expense of price and to a lesser but somewhat significant degree game design / interactivity scope and accessibility.

I'm sorry but I keep seeing the bolded stated over and over but I'm very doubtful that there will be any game designs on the PS5 that won't be possible on the XSX as well. Just because the drive is slower than the PS5s doesn't mean it's slow in the slightest. Assuming you're getting maximum speeds if something takes 1 second to load on the PS5 it will take 1.8 seconds to load on the Xbox. What game changing mechanic is going to materialize between those 800 milliseconds?

This is what the Xbox blog said about the storage in the X:

Enter Xbox Velocity Architecture, which features tight integration between hardware and software and is a revolutionary new architecture optimized for streaming of in game assets. This will unlock new capabilities that have never been seen before in console development, allowing 100 GB of game assets to be instantly accessible by the developer. The components of the Xbox Velocity Architecture all combine to create an effective multiplier on physical memory that is, quite literally, a game changer.

Instantly accessible. How much faster do you need things to be than available instantly? Yes, initial loading of the game will be faster on the PS5 but I can't see how the in game asset streaming will allow new "game design and interactivity" that isn't possible on both machines.
 

nullZr0

Alt account
Banned
Mar 2, 2020
240
If we're to guesstimate that Xbox One's final LTD will be somewhere in the 50-55 million range I can see next gen Xbox (Series X and whatever else comes) as being in the 60-70 million range if they are able to nail it on games. Lockhart could be a major factor too, especially with the recession. If PS5 is 499 and Lockhart is 349 or lower that could actually result in some market share gains for Xbox.
The Xbox 360 did close to 70 million in sales. The Xbox One was managed by a bunch of idiots and MS barely had a first party this gen. With a stable of AAA 1st party studios and the most powerful console, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Xbox 360 gamers came back home and pushed the Xbox series of consoles to the 70-75 million. If Lockhart is a thing, you can bump that up to 15-20 million more units.
 

litebrite

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,832
The Xbox 360 did close to 70 million in sales. The Xbox One was managed by a bunch of idiots and MS barely had a first party this gen. With a stable of AAA 1st party studios and the most powerful console, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Xbox 360 gamers came back home and pushed the Xbox series of consoles to the 70-75 million. If Lockhart is a thing, you can bump that up to 15-20 million more units.
Xbox 360's lifetime sales is actually over 84 million.
 
Oct 25, 2017
7,987
México
Got $400 USD for a settlement (Nexus 6P fiasco), and I will use that money for an XSX! I was undecided between an XSX and PS5, but MS has regional pricing for their digital services/games in my country (Sony doesn't).

Just let me throw my money to your hands, Microsoft.
 

Fatmanp

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,438
The Xbox 360 did close to 70 million in sales. The Xbox One was managed by a bunch of idiots and MS barely had a first party this gen. With a stable of AAA 1st party studios and the most powerful console, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Xbox 360 gamers came back home and pushed the Xbox series of consoles to the 70-75 million. If Lockhart is a thing, you can bump that up to 15-20 million more units.

This gen was the wrong one to entirely cock up due to the digital lock in.
 

Scently

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,464
Running the chip at those clocks increases the requirements for binning, means lower yields and higher costs. Not a scenario I would personally support.
I think besides that, they don't have a need to even if its possible. They were able to do it the last time around because they had the wiggle room in their oversized cooling for the X1, but more importantly, they did it because they were really short on compute and this was the only way to reduce the gap. This time around they don't need to.
 

More Butter

Banned
Jun 12, 2018
1,890
With the world in the midst of a horrible pandemic, trying to reveal your new gaming hardware is currently incredibly foolish and shortsighted.

Sony will have plenty of news cycles to itself. There is no need to rush.
I was thinking about Xbox Series X today and this post came to mind again and I laughed a little bit.

I can't wait to see some real dev demonstrations of the Velocity Architecture and see games running on next gen consoles in general. I know it takes time to organize these things, and the pandemic makes it damn near impossible but it will be interesting to see how each platform approaches their "E3" conferences. Have both stated that they will have a direct like presentation?
 

ImaginaShawn

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,532
If anything I'd prefer MS overclock the CPU and the RAM bandwidth. If they overclock the GPU it won't be anything major, maybe 50mhz.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,695
I'm sorry but I keep seeing the bolded stated over and over but I'm very doubtful that there will be any game designs on the PS5 that won't be possible on the XSX as well. Just because the drive is slower than the PS5s doesn't mean it's slow in the slightest. Assuming you're getting maximum speeds if something takes 1 second to load on the PS5 it will take 1.8 seconds to load on the Xbox. What game changing mechanic is going to materialize between those 800 milliseconds?

This is what the Xbox blog said about the storage in the X:



Instantly accessible. How much faster do you need things to be than available instantly? Yes, initial loading of the game will be faster on the PS5 but I can't see how the in game asset streaming will allow new "game design and interactivity" that isn't possible on both machines.
Again, there are more tightly knit custom hardware components up and down Sony's I/O pipeline. MS's solution is good. Sony's is better. Sony's solution should give us ROM Cart like level of instant access to data. MS's won't be far behind. Again, it's not just about the SSD...it's maximizing i/o throughput and coherency in conjunction with minimizing bottlenecks along the entirety of the I/O pipeline. There is also a difference in terms of (near)real-time and 2 or 3 seconds of load time in terms of game design flexibility and interaction possibilities. Streaming, LoD, and draw distance capabilities are also impacted in the same sort of way.There is a tipping point / threshold where certain new possibilities are possible.

MS will have a clear advantage in terms of APU (CPU, GPU) and to a certain degree RAM bandwidth. But Sony's solution won't be far behind. But maybe this means that Sony needs to utilize a more hybrid lighting model approach for leveraging ray-tracing, and therefore lighting models in XSX will clearly have an edge. Same with framerate.

These machines are both competent. That is not what I'm arguing. I'm saying that Sony's SSD and I/O pipeline solution gives it real advantages in certain areas. This strength shouldn't be downplayed. We are not talking apples to apples in terms of an SSD and I/O pipeline implementation you'd see even in a high powered PC today. This is clearly different, and both consoles will have an advantage over that sort of PC implementation.

In fact, I'd be more concerned if XSX didn't have a good competent solution, as it would make it much less likely that devs would spend time working on systems to take advantage of all this custom SSD and I/O pipeline hardware.
 
Last edited:

DukeBlueBall

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,059
Seattle, WA
Some more Lockhart prediction:

3.0-3.5ghz. Lower than Xsx due to less robust cooling and less demand to feed the GPU.
10GB GDDR6, 6GB at 288GB/s, 4GB at 192GB/s
26CUs, 32ROPS at ~1353mhz, ~4.5TF, VRS, RT. Half the Xsx's GPU in size.
1TB SSD
$249.99

If anything I'd prefer MS overclock the CPU and the RAM bandwidth. If they overclock the GPU it won't be anything major, maybe 50mhz.

RAM bandwidth is maxed out on the chips they have. They'll need to upgrade to 16gbps chips and that might be too expensive, and it might not even work if the SOC and mobo wasn't designed with that headroom.
 

ImaginaShawn

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,532
Some more Lockhart prediction:

3.0-3.5ghz. Lower than Xsx due to less robust cooling and less demand to feed the GPU.
10GB GDDR6, 6GB at 288GB/s, 4GB at 192GB/s
26CUs, 32ROPS at ~1353mhz, ~4.5TF, VRS, RT. Half the Xsx's GPU in size.
1TB SSD
$249.99



RAM bandwidth is maxed out on the chips they have. They'll need to upgrade to 16gbps chips and that might be too expensive, and it might not even work if the SOC and mobo wasn't designed with that headroom.
Gddr6 can be overclocked by boosting the supply voltage. Don't need a new chip for that.
 

Bobbyleejones

Banned
Aug 25, 2019
2,581
I have a question is it better for a developer to have a fixed or variable clock speed? I've been seeing some responses that state variable is the better situation (which doesn't seem right). Also if we have two consoles using the same RDNA2 structure, why are people discrediting the comparison of TFs (this is from the playstation 5 OT)