Monday, June 12th 2017

Xbox One X Hardware Specs Give Gaming Desktops a Run for their Money

Microsoft Sunday dropped its mic with the most powerful game console on paper, the Xbox One X, formerly codenamed "Project Scorpio." The bottom-line of this console is that it enables 4K Ultra HD gaming at 60 Hz. Something like this requires you to spend at least $1,200 on a gaming desktop right now. Unlike a Windows 10 PC that's been put together by various pieces of hardware, the Xbox One X is built on a closed ecosystem that's tightly controlled by Microsoft, with heavily optimized software, and a lot of secret sauce the company won't talk about. The console still puts up some mighty impressive hardware specs on paper.

To begin with, at the heart of the Xbox One X is a semi-custom SoC Microsoft co-developed with AMD, built on TSMC's 16 nm FinFET node (the same one NVIDIA builds its "Pascal" GPUs on). This chip features a GPU with almost quadruple the single-precision floating point compute power as the one which drives the Xbox One. It features 40 Graphics CoreNext (GCN) compute units (2,560 stream processors) based on one of the later versions of GCN (likely "Polaris"). The GPU is clocked at 1172 MHz. The other big component of the SoC is an eight-core CPU based on an unnamed micro-architecture evolved from "Jaguar" rather than "Bulldozer" or even "Zen." The eight cores are arranged in two quad-core units of four cores, each; with 4 MB of L2 cache. The CPU is clocked at 2.30 GHz.
The third major component of the Xbox One X SoC is the 384-bit wide GDDR5 memory controller, wired to 12 GB of memory. This memory is used both as system- and graphics-memory, and is the most ideal implementation of AMD's hUMA (heterogeneous unified memory architecture), where there's no visible partition between the system and graphics memory on the physical memory, and depending on the usage scenario, any amount of memory can be used by the CPU and GPU components. Developers are still forced to build their games under the assumption that the system only has 8 GB of memory; so that the remaining 4 GB is used as a kind of "guarantee" that 4K UHD @60 Hz runs smoothly. The total memory bandwidth available is a staggering 326 GB/s.

The SoC features an integrated audio CODEC with 7.1-channel output over HDMI, with support for Dolby Atmos, and HRTF, a new audio format Microsoft developed for the Hololens, which is optimized for VR.

A 1 TB 2.5-inch SATA hard drive comes standard on the Xbox One X. You can swap this drive out for larger HDDs, or faster SATA SSDs. You can also plug in external storage devices over the console's USB 3.0 ports. The console's operating system resides on a smaller eMMC chip that isn't accessible to end-users. The 1 TB HDD is used to store games you've downloaded from your online library à la Steam.

Microsoft switched from bulky external power bricks to internal PSUs with the Xbox One S, and the trend carries forward with the Xbox One X. Powering the whole thing is a 275W internal power-supply. A large fan-heatsink cools the SoC and GDDR5 memory chips.
Source: Eurogamer.net
Add your own comment

132 Comments on Xbox One X Hardware Specs Give Gaming Desktops a Run for their Money

#76
evernessince
Hugh MungusYes, it will and yes, someone has. It gives desktops a run for their money since it delivers 1070 performance at a lower price than that of a desktop with similar real performance.

Also, weren't controllers quite popular for fps at one point?
Why even argue controller vs mouse? A controller pans across the screen, a mouse points. With a controller you have to move the paddle all the way to the side until it starts panning at it's maximum speed and if that isn't fast enough you have to increase sensitivity which in turn reduces accuracy as the minimum number of pixels it can move is increased. Controllers have dead zones, mice don't. Issues with a controller that mice don't have.

Controllers were made to be good all around gaming devices. You can have people be good at FPS games with a controller but that will never overcome it's technical limitations. There's a reason aim assist is in nearly every console FPS and there's a reason Overwatch competitive on console is played and balanced differently.
Posted on Reply
#77
Darmok N Jalad
evernessinceI don't think you realize that console optimization hasn't been a factor since the Xbox One and PS4. Console optimization was only a thing when the additional obfuscation layers required on the PC played a significant burden on the CPU and GPU, something consoles didn't have. The difference now is that one: The overhead for these PC APIs is now such a small portion of modern CPUs and GPUs power that it is insignificant and two: PCs have had low level APIs for a decent amount of time now.
I thought the benefit was not from reduced overhead, but from being able to target a specific set of hardware? When developers know the hardware isn't a variable, they can control the experience with consistency, and they can test their content with some assurance that the result will be acceptable to the entire user base. I know that is less true with cross-platform titles, since they are targeting multiple platforms and software environments, so it would mostly be true for first-party titles.
Posted on Reply
#78
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Prince ValiantFor sure, though I'd say the importance of strategy varies game to game or even map to map.
I personally feel that a lack of strategy is still a strategy. Tactics are not strategy. Have you read the Art of War? I highly recommend it.
Darmok N JaladI thought the benefit was not from reduced overhead, but from being able to target a specific set of hardware? When developers know the hardware isn't a variable, they can control the experience with consistency, and they can test their content with some assurance that the result will be acceptable to the entire user base. I know that is less true with cross-platform titles, since they are targeting multiple platforms and architectures, so it would mostly be true for first-party titles.
100%. But it is not that they can get MORE, it's that it is EASIER because there are less variables.
Posted on Reply
#79
Nihilus
efikkanThere is nothing in gaming consoles making them perform better with the same class of hardware.
And BTW; GTX 1070 will only run the most demanding games in 1080p, not 4K. It's not nearly high-end, and this console is even slower.
Yet the PS4 pro runs all games at 1080p maxed and some at 4k with med settings. No optimization, huh?

Will Volta finally allow PC peasants to run 4k blu ray or will they have to wait for 6 core Ice lake running at 5 ghz and Windows 11?

4k Streaming argument in 3, 2, ......
Posted on Reply
#80
Ruru
S.T.A.R.S.
Looks kinda like the first generation PS2 and that's my favourite console by looks.
Posted on Reply
#81
Grings
I havent read many comments, but don't we get this "as/more powerful than pc's" thing every single time a new console is about to release, i'm still waiting for the death of pc gaming that the ps3 and 360 bought about

And remember how the cell cpu in the ps2 was hundreds of times more powerful than your home pc before it released...

I think a large part of the problem for console gaming is that game dev's are doing a really good job getting the most out of the gpu's nowadays(it has been roughly the same gcn backbone since the xb360 after all) and you dont get that improvement in quality across the lifetime of the console as you did on older generations as people learned to code for them better.
This is (part of) why we have mid-lifecycle .5 consoles coming out now
NihilusWill Volta finally allow PC peasants to run 4k blu ray
PS4 pro cant?
Posted on Reply
#82
Darmok N Jalad
PS4 pro can't play 4K discs, but it's not from a lack of power, it's from a lack of a 4K drive. A bit of a surprising move on Sony's part. I wonder if it was to hit that $400 price point?
Posted on Reply
#83
Prince Valiant
cadavecaI personally feel that a lack of strategy is still a strategy. Tactics are not strategy. Have you read the Art of War? I highly recommend it.

100%. But it is not that they can get MORE, it's that it is EASIER because there are less variables.
I skimmed the original English translation many years ago but never got to reading it.
Posted on Reply
#84
Nihilus
GringsAnd remember how the cell cpu in the ps2 was hundreds of times more powerful than your home pc before it released...

I think a large part of the problem for console gaming is that game dev's are doing a really good job getting the most out of the gpu's nowadays(it has been roughly the same gcn backbone since the xb360 after all) and you dont get that improvement in quality across the lifetime of the console as you did on older generations as people learned to code for them better.
This is (part of) why we have mid-lifecycle .5 consoles coming out now

PS4 pro cant?
I kind of feel like the ps4/xb1 was more of a late mid cycle. Reason being is that the XOX is more of an upgrade than XB1 was. Both 360 and XOX pushed the limits of Sensible gaming power (from a business sense). The XB1, not so much. XB1s was just a refresh.

No, ps4 pro can't play BR4k. Ironically, the 'last gen' XB1s can. Strange since Sony pushed blu ray and Microsoft pushed HDDVD yet MS is 1.5 generations ahead on BR4k
Posted on Reply
#85
Nihilus
BR4k will take alot sales from ps4pro just like Ps3 took sales from 360 because of BR.
Posted on Reply
#87
Nihilus
bobalazsTflops? How many?
GPU is better than 85% of what PC uses. Only half have quad core or better:
store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

PCMR: please clean up your own peasants before complaining that consoles are holding you back.
Posted on Reply
#88
bobalazs
NihilusGPU is better than 85% of what PC uses. Only half have quad core or better:
store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

PCMR: please clean up your own peasants before complaining that consoles are holding you back.
<--Excuse me, how does that answer MY question?
-whats the power consumption of the gpu of this beast console?
Posted on Reply
#89
Darmok N Jalad
bobalazs<--Excuse me, how does that answer MY question?
-whats the power consumption of the gpu of this beast console?
Specs at Anandtech have the entire system being powered by a 245W internal PSU. Not bad considering that is only 25W more than launch Xbox One.
Posted on Reply
#90
Nihilus
6

I figured there was an agenda there since it is such an easy Google search.

Gpu is similar to an rx 580, so whatever that is.
Posted on Reply
#91
efikkan
Claiming a gaming console is more value for the money is a faulty comparison. People don't consider buying a desktop computer or a gaming console, but rather buying a computer + a gaming console or a more powerful computer.

You can take any cheap quad core i5 (or even Ryzen) and throw in a $200 GTX 1060 and it will outperform a $500 Xbox One X, or you can buy a $500 GTX 1080 which will perform >75% better. And even better, two-three years down the road you can spend a few hundred bucks more and get something that's good enough to play newer games, making your computer a great investment.

~10 years ago people were predicting that the PC gaming market were doomed, but instead the consoles have stagnated and then declined, while the PC gaming market keep growing. The only selling point for consoles are their exclusives, but that's also their hard selling point for the general public. Most buyers get very few console games, which makes the actual price of the console games very high, and buying multiple consoles gets ridiculously expensive. For those who are not fans of specific series, PCs remains the superior choice for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#92
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
Prince ValiantHas anyone strolled into an FPS tournament with a controller and won?
I mean there are Halo and CoD console tournaments and those guys are insane!
Posted on Reply
#93
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
efikkanClaiming a gaming console is more value for the money is a faulty comparison. People don't consider buying a desktop computer or a gaming console, but rather buying a computer + a gaming console or a more powerful computer.

You can take any cheap quad core i5 (or even Ryzen) and throw in a $200 GTX 1060 and it will outperform a $500 Xbox One X, or you can buy a $500 GTX 1080 which will perform >75% better. And even better, two-three years down the road you can spend a few hundred bucks more and get something that's good enough to play newer games, making your computer a great investment.

~10 years ago people were predicting that the PC gaming market were doomed, but instead the consoles have stagnated and then declined, while the PC gaming market keep growing. The only selling point for consoles are their exclusives, but that's also their hard selling point for the general public. Most buyers get very few console games, which makes the actual price of the console games very high, and buying multiple consoles gets ridiculously expensive. For those who are not fans of specific series, PCs remains the superior choice for gaming.
Computers don't function with just GPUs.....
Posted on Reply
#94
BiggieShady
cadavecaAnd while I hate to say it, I game on PC pretty much exclusively, but one of my kids has a PS4, and the quality of the image in many games, for me, beats PC.
Oh please, this is purely subjective, so it's totally understandable that you hate to say it :) probably you just gotta connect the PC to the same display and adjust yourself some gamma and digital vibrancy
Posted on Reply
#95
mroofie
BiggieShadyOh please, this is purely subjective, so it's totally understandable that you hate to say it :) probably you just gotta connect the PC to the same display and adjust yourself some gamma and digital vibrancy
not only that his world wont be so vibrant as the pc alternative
Posted on Reply
#96
medi01
efikkanYou can take any cheap quad core i5 (or even Ryzen) and throw in a $200 GTX 1060 and it will outperform a $500 Xbox One X
Uh, no it most likely won't, on the opposite, Xbox will likely wipe the floor with the mentioned build, being the platform developers actively target.
The slower CPU would not be an issue, GPU's are on par AND console is actively targeted.
Check Doom's benchmarks to see how it gets reflected in actual performance.
Posted on Reply
#97
efikkan
medi01Uh, no it most likely won't, on the opposite, Xbox will likely wipe the floor with the mentioned build, being the platform developers actively target.
The slower CPU would not be an issue, GPU's are on par AND console is actively targeted.
Check Doom's benchmarks to see how it gets reflected in actual performance.
That's 100% BS.
As mentioned, there is nothing making the consoles perform better per theoretical performance. It's the same type of hardware running the same APIs.
Targeting on consoles is about fine-tuning the load to hit a certain frame rate, making the rendered image look different from desktop, not about better performing hardware.
Xbox One X still uses an old Jaguar CPU, a 3 GHz i5 will probably be nearly twice as fast.
Posted on Reply
#98
Nihilus
efikkanXbox One X still uses an old Jaguar CPU, a 3 GHz i5 will probably be nearly twice as fast.
Does anyone even know the IPC of Jaguar? 3ghz Kaby quad = '12 ghz'. 2.3 ghz jaguar octo = '18.4 ghz'. For the i5 to be nearly twice as fast or '36 ghz of jaguar' it would need 3x the IPC.
Posted on Reply
#99
EarthDog
NihilusDoes anyone even know the IPC of Jaguar? 3ghz Kaby quad = '12 ghz'. 2.3 ghz jaguar octo = '18.4 ghz'. For the i5 to be nearly twice as fast or '36 ghz of jaguar' it would need 3x the IPC.
Wait...wut???
Posted on Reply
#100
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
EarthDogWait...wut???
He doesn't quite understand the term. :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 21st, 2024 09:12 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts