I’m going to preface this by saying TFLOPS aren’t the best way of describing a consoles power for reasons you can Google.
The one X is 6tflops, and Series S is 4tflops.
So, it’s surprising, then, that launch games like Falconeer, Gears Tactics, etc have the same RES/FPS parity.
So it would seem that the specs in the series S has at least 33% better architecture compared to the One X. This would mean people won’t need to panic about the whole 4Tflops fear mongering.
It’s such a nice surprise, then, that such a cheap and small console can rival what has been classed as a beast the last few years.
This will be an absolutely perfect console for those without a 4K display, as it will still be “next gen” just at a lower resolution.
On another note - the Series X is 8x is more powerful than the One S, however, with architectural improvements included in the maths, it will be closer to 11 times more powerful.
Feel free to take this data however you like, it’s just an observation. Will be interesting to see if other games follow the same RES/FPS between Series S/One X.
Yeah and note that Gears Tactics is running higher settings on series S than One X. People need to take into account that determining what it is capable of is more than just a res and frame rate number…
Since heaps of games use dynamic res, not all games fully tap out every system and so on its probably not wise to infer too much from these games without hands on analysis. The upper bounds are as we see here but it doesn’t tell us heaps without more info. Architectural improvements are never uniform, they’re per-workload so we couldn’t totally generalise even if one specific game saw a 33% improvement.
The CPU alone makes sure of that. Then you have the SSD and Velocity Architecture. And of course the architectural improvements in going from GCN fo RDNA2.