I don’t know why it’s so hard for many to understand this. The engineers at Xbox had specific reasons for the decisions they made in order to hit specific cost and performance targets. You can’t honestly think you know better than they when playing arm-chair engineer.
8 Likes
why would you push the clocks to be variable, you do know working with a stabilized clock speed would be easier to optimize for and your targets will be standardized for the platform. Noise is one thing, heat generation is also a problem. The fan in the xbox series s is meant to work at 1.56ghz. Its all about keeping it constrained within a TDP of their choice and they have to hit that while providing a console that can last the full 7-8 years of its life cycle. Other issues can arise such as requiring the user to reapply thermal paste or the fan spoils because it was not meant to run at such rpm to keep the unit cool. Its very easy to say just increase the clock speeds without fully understanding the design goals of the consoles. There is a reason why Jason Ronald is in his position at xbox. The hardware team at xbox is second to none in terms of console design right now.
Also memory utilization will be solved when XVA is in play. Although the point can be raised if it would be adopted outside of XGS.
I think people should consider that Series S is barley in the “optimized” state of games -which doesn’t necessarily mean optimized as the word implies-, not “designed for” that we will see later in the gen, hopefully starting 2022. Games that take advantage of the new features and are designed for and with them in mind. Just think of how XVA will mitigate memory limitations, minimize CPU utilization for decompression. Or how the RDNA2 feature set will get more out of the GPU, and so on.
The thing is, Sereis S is not a brute force machine, so in the cross-gen period it’s not gonna shine to its potential. Just like we really haven’t seen the full potential of the Series X, but because it’s a really really powerful machine it brute forces its way much easier.
Because it would make yields worse, which means production is less cost efficient. The target demo for XSS does not care about tech graphics in games. They are mostly casuals or kids gaming on 1080p screens. Devs don’t like more optimization work, so sometimes XSS versions get the short end of the stick. It is not really about the console performance metrics and moreso about devs weighing whether to spend time/money/effort on optimizing for a target market that won’t notice or care in most cases.
Also, ppl here should recall that XSS is the top selling machine atm and at some point in the future many of those XSS owners will upgrade to XSX. It’s a brilliant strategic move on MS’s part to have it available at launch of a new cycle.
Sony cut costs big time across the rest of their machine and it sells for $200 more than an XSS does. MS has to balance between cost and performance. Higher frequency means lower yields and thus high costs. It doesn’t matter what Sony is doing as they are juggling their own economic decisions and those have consequences too. The XSS target demo doesn’t mind one bit about it being sold short on optimization during the cross gen phase.
1 Like
Another 2 console configurations to profile and test? The QA team hates you.
1 Like
Why would it make yields worse? xCloud already running 48 CU APU at higher frequency.
I am also not arguing on the potential and target audience of series S either. I want this to be the case for both consoles. Neither I am saying current consoles are under utilised.
I am making a case for something extra her. That’s all
You didn’t read my full explanation above… I have covered the QA testing and devs hassle part.
i dont get how you keep comparing xcloud server blades to a small home console
It’s simple… because the chip is same
Your ‘explanation’ (== just don’t test it) will never fly.
1 Like
You can be ignorant to this idea but BC games are prime examples where new consoles offer improved performance without devs even touching the code.
BC games are prime examples of thorough testing games on all hardware configurations. Nothing you get from the BC team is not tested, so how can this be an example for your ‘no testing shit’ policy? I dont get it.
2 Likes
I meant BC games of Xbox one generation running on Series Generation… Not the 360 or OG Xbox.
They had a big testing underway for this and spend their whole BC team for over a year to accomplish all that without issue.
3 Likes
Lets talk about a new topic that everyone can agree to…
Lumen in UE5 can now be accelerated using hardware acceleration… How cool is that
1 Like
We are one year in the new gen in epidemic ridden working conditions with the vast majority of games still being cross-gen (aka we haven’t seen shit from Series S’s and Series X’s capabilities and performance) and some of you discuss a potential overclock of the systems. 
We are talking about 300e and 500e systems people. I guess some will never be satisfied…even with powerful systems at great prices.
1 Like
Because some chips will be unable to run at higher frequency, those would need to be thrown out.
Companies like Intel can actually take what was intended to be a higher clocked part that failed and sell it as a lower clocked part (where it works reliably)
1 Like
Both the Series consoles have been engineered to have their full potential unlocked when the software side of things catches up with DX12u.
These systems weren’t made to be strong in cross-gen, they were made to shine when devs build their games utilizing the tools and features that no other console have.
Next year we should see this power on the first next-gen only titles, Halo infinite should also follow suit with their next expansions.
2 Likes
isn’t PS5D $400 Though ? i would argue you get better hardware for the money if you buy PS5D over XSS.
XSS selling point is not 900p-1080p nextgen console or anything like that, its seller is really gamepass.
it’s designed for GP and MS way to try gaining more ground in PS5 Dominant country