News Xbox Series X Finally Gets a Price Drop: Microsoft Reveals $499 Price Tag

JarredWaltonGPU

Senior GPU Editor
Editor
Feb 21, 2020
587
477
760
0
I really want to know full specs on the Xbox Series S. I assume AMD/MS is using harvested chips with fewer CUs on the GPU ... but how many CUs are left enabled? Guess we'll know soon enough.
 

nofanneeded

Notable
Sep 29, 2019
846
127
1,070
4
This Xbox S is a direct threat to Nintendo switch at this price ..

Nintendo will lower its switch price , and should act fast and release a new console . looking at Xbox S and the size of it, I think Nintendo will make a similar console maybe similar hardware as well.
 

hotaru.hino

Prominent
Sep 1, 2020
577
184
590
9
I really want to know full specs on the Xbox Series S. I assume AMD/MS is using harvested chips with fewer CUs on the GPU ... but how many CUs are left enabled? Guess we'll know soon enough.
The Series S was posited as a FHD console no? My guess is anywhere between 50%-66% of the CUs were left.

This Xbox S is a direct threat to Nintendo switch at this price ..

Nintendo will lower its switch price , and should act fast and release a new console . looking at Xbox S and the size of it, I think Nintendo will make a similar console maybe similar hardware as well.
I don't think Nintendo has anything to worry about until one of the two giants tries a portable console. The Switch's biggest competitor really is the mobile space.

People who are invested in Nintendo really don't care about the technical aspects of gaming.
 
Reactions: Shadowclash10

JarredWaltonGPU

Senior GPU Editor
Editor
Feb 21, 2020
587
477
760
0
The Series S was posited as a FHD console no? My guess is anywhere between 50%-66% of the CUs were left.
TheVerge apparently got info saying 20 CUs. That's a massive drop from 52 CUs. It's for 1440p gaming supposedly, but I suspect 1080p might be a better fit. I mean, 20 CUs and 4 TFLOPS is actually a step down from the Xbox One X (though architecture may end up making it a bit faster still).
 

hotaru.hino

Prominent
Sep 1, 2020
577
184
590
9
TheVerge apparently got info saying 20 CUs. That's a massive drop from 52 CUs. It's for 1440p gaming supposedly, but I suspect 1080p might be a better fit. I mean, 20 CUs and 4 TFLOPS is actually a step down from the Xbox One X (though architecture may end up making it a bit faster still).
That'd put it in line with the PS4 Pro, which at least keeps it in the spirit of "last gen's top tier for less"

Though 1440p (or variable 1080p-1440p) with upscaling to 4K would make sense.
 

timbozero

Distinguished
May 31, 2009
29
0
18,530
0
TheVerge apparently got info saying 20 CUs. That's a massive drop from 52 CUs. It's for 1440p gaming supposedly, but I suspect 1080p might be a better fit. I mean, 20 CUs and 4 TFLOPS is actually a step down from the Xbox One X (though architecture may end up making it a bit faster still).
Whilst you’re premise is correct, don’t forget the 52CU Series X is 4K (approx 8 million pixels) and the Series S with its 20CU is 1440p (approx 4 million pixels).
With just that simple fact the S would only need 26 CU to equal the X, and that’s doesn’t consider the exponential load increase as resolution rises for things like ray tracing and other shader effects.
As the article said, better to compare it to the One S which has 1.4 or approx half the power of series s once you take higher resolution and new effects etc into account
 

timbozero

Distinguished
May 31, 2009
29
0
18,530
0
That'd put it in line with the PS4 Pro, which at least keeps it in the spirit of "last gen's top tier for less"

Though 1440p (or variable 1080p-1440p) with upscaling to 4K would make sense.
Yeah it does which is concerning. Hopefully the cpu and new gpu features will be a ‘game changer’ is such a comparison
 

gggplaya

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2011
1,083
88
19,390
18
Whilst you’re premise is correct, don’t forget the 52CU Series X is 4K (approx 8 million pixels) and the Series S with its 20CU is 1440p (approx 4 million pixels).
With just that simple fact the S would only need 26 CU to equal the X, and that’s doesn’t consider the exponential load increase as resolution rises for things like ray tracing and other shader effects.
As the article said, better to compare it to the One S which has 1.4 or approx half the power of series s once you take higher resolution and new effects etc into account
Have to keep in mind that the Xbox One X is based on much older GCN architecture. You can only directly compare teraflops in the same architecture. With different architectures, the frame rates will not scale the same with teraflops. The much newer NAVI architecture will get higher frame rates with less teraflops.

Also on the xbox one x, the jaguar CPU was the bottleneck on that console. Most games could never live up to the full potential of the GPU. With Ryzen in the new consoles, we should see much much less cpu bottlenecks.
 

JarredWaltonGPU

Senior GPU Editor
Editor
Feb 21, 2020
587
477
760
0
Whilst your premise is correct, don’t forget the 52CU Series X is 4K (approx 8 million pixels) and the Series S with its 20CU is 1440p (approx 4 million pixels).
With just that simple fact the S would only need 26 CU to equal the X, and that’s doesn’t consider the exponential load increase as resolution rises for things like ray tracing and other shader effects.
As the article said, better to compare it to the One S which has 1.4 or approx half the power of series s once you take higher resolution and new effects etc into account
I know from testing PC GPUs that going from 1440p to 4K (2.25X as many pixels) typically drops performance around 40% (provided you don't run out of VRAM). RTX 2080 Ti averages 122.6 fps at 1440p ultra and 164.5 fps at 1440p medium across eight games; it drops to 73.4 fps at 4K ultra and 98.0 fps at 4K medium. So that's 40.1% slower at ultra and 40.4% slower at medium. The 2080 Super (which is slightly more GPU bound) gets 143.7 fps at 1440p medium and 82.8 at 4K medium (42.4% slower), and 106.1 fps at 1440p ultra vs. 61.8 fps at 4K ultra (41.8% slower). Or if you prefer the reverse, 1440p runs 70-75% faster than 4K.

That's keeping the GPU performance completely the same. But the problem is that the Xbox Series X/S isn't even remotely the same on the GPU front. Going from 52 CUs at 1.825 GHz (12.15 TFLOPS) to 20 CUs at 1.565 GHz (4 TFLOPS) is a massive drop. It's also 10GB of VRAM for the GPU with 560 GB/s bandwidth to 8GB of VRAM with 224 GB/s, and 6GB vs 2GB for the system.

I think the Xbox Series S will still perform okay, but it looks much more like a 1080p 60 fps gaming system that will become outdated very quickly. Unless MS has game devs actually change other settings besides resolution? That could work, but I'm not sure console gamers will like it if they discover the $300 version not only can't run as fast, but also looks worse while running slower.

Nvidia just announced GPUs with 20 to as much as 36 TFLOPS. Even if the real-world usable TFLOPS is more like 14 to 25 (and it is, relative to Turing), that's still a big difference. And a big difference in price, obviously, but the Xbox Series S isn't even going to match an RTX 2060. Maybe that's a better comparison of what I was hoping to see.

RTX 2060 is a $300 GPU, RTX 2070 Super is a $500 GPU. The 2060 is 25-30% slower for that price drop, not potentially 66% slower.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS