Support NeoGAF

[Evilms]

3.5 GHz
4 Tflops
10 GB
No 4K Optical Drive

designed for 1080p

 

[Thirty7ven]

One X is a 4K console, and has 9 GB of usable ram for games. Lockhart outputting at quarter resolution could do with less than that, especially when Velocity Arch is helping conserve texture memory with sampler feedback and using high speed paged approach.

Machine with slightly lowered CPU clocks (similar to PS5 CPU clocks), 512GB SSD, 4+TF GPU, 10 GB RAM could be around $200-250 while still be able to give a great next gen experience at lower resolutions compared to XSX. And with DLSS 2.0 type upscaling, it could rival or even outperform PS5.

 

[mrBarrelNut]

Please, be more specific what was so silly in that?

 

[Coloress_Kafka]

Smart move on Microsoft to prey on poor Walmart shoppers. They now have the perfect next gen console to go with their dogshit $200 70 inch 4K tv!

 

[Evilms]

And with DLSS 2.0 type upscaling, it could rival or even outperform PS5.

outperform PS5

 

[iJudged]

I've been calling it for a month now, $199 and $399. I am sticking to my guns.

 

[Nikana]

This is the worst kept secret since PSP Go.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Please, be more specific what was so silly in that?

Honestly the price here is a complete pipe dream. If $200-$250 is the retail price then the BOM including retail cut and distribution as well the parts/build cost, would be around $150-$175.

That would be ludicrous for just the APU/RAM/SSD alone never mind all the other parts needed. Unless the parts costs for PS5/XSX BOMs are being grossly overestimated.

 

[JLB]

Good luck to devs willing to make games that will run to the best possible performance on both 7.5GB RAM and 4TF but also 13.5GB RAM, and 12FT. If this is true, MS are pretty much asking devs to make 2 versions of each game. Of course what will really happen is that they'll just make the higher spec version then quickly disable and lower stuff till it runs ok on Lockhart. So games are probably going to look like rushed Switch ports.

you mean like... pc? as always? crazy!

 

[FeiRR]

Please, be more specific what was so silly in that?

You.

 

[Rolla]

Why would they bring this to market???

 

[UnNamed]

199€ would kill the market. I doubt it will be so cheap, otherwise I would think to jump in the next gen at launch.

 

[TheContact]

I'm curious about the likely performance,
this should be a 1080/1440 console?

Wondering about the inclusion of an SSD too.

I would imagine it would be 1080p/60 target. Based on the rumored specs, it's unlikely to hit 4k with any kind of stable FPS. An SSD is given now--we aren't seeing HDDs in consoles anymore.

Why would they bring this to market???

Because if you have two consoles for sale, one of them is $500 and the other is $350, a lot of people who can't afford the $500 console will get the $350 one. A sale is better than no sale, plus it gets them in the Xbox ecosystem with Xbox live and their on demand services and whatnot. Companies always try to lessen the barrier of entry.

 

[Nikana]

Why would they bring this to market???

To sell.

 

[mrBarrelNut]

Honestly the price here is a complete pipe dream. If $200-$250 is the retail price then the BOM including retail cut and distribution as well the parts/build cost, would be around $150-$175.

That would be ludicrous for just the APU/RAM/SSD alone never mind all the other parts needed. Unless the parts costs for PS5/XSX BOMs are being grossly overestimated.

Its going to use one tiny chip, only 10 GB of ram, half the capacity SSD, no disk drive. And I would suspect it having a smaller and cheaper form factor, something like Xbox One S but smaller. 4TF GPU would not need the same kind of cooling capability like 12 TF GPU in XSX.

 

[BluRayHiDef]

Please, be more specific what was so silly in that?

I'm guessing it's the part where M mrBarrelNut says that Lockhart could rival or even outperform the PS5.

 

[Shmunter]

 

[Shodan09]

I don't understand the point of this. Doesn't it just lower the baseline for next gen games if it becomes a success? I can't get my head around how it won't be holding back games on Series X. Is there something I am missing?

 

[Rolla]

Because if you have two consoles for sale, one of them is $500 and the other is $350, a lot of people who can't afford the $500 console will get the $350 one. A sale is better than no sale, plus it gets them in the Xbox ecosystem with Xbox live and their on demand services and whatnot. Companies always try to lessen the barrier of entry.

At those specs Lockheart is an anchor because exclusive games have to run on it.

 

[Sony]

Good luck to devs willing to make games that will run to the best possible performance on both 7.5GB RAM and 4TF but also 13.5GB RAM, and 12FT. If this is true, MS are pretty much asking devs to make 2 versions of each game. Of course what will really happen is that they'll just make the higher spec version then quickly disable and lower stuff till it runs ok on Lockhart. So games are probably going to look like rushed Switch ports.

So all the different graphics settings in PC games are all different version of games?

 

[Shmunter]

At those specs Lockheart is an anchor because exclusive games have to run on it.

I guess it matters not if Xbox vcr is in the ring

 

[TheContact]

At those specs Lockheart is an anchor because exclusive games have to run on it.

There were rumblings about developers allowing players to choose a target resolution/fps, so it's probable that the Lockheart will only run at 1080p while the XSX will go up to 4k

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Its going to use one tiny chip, only 10 GB of ram, half the capacity SSD, no disk drive. And I would suspect it having a smaller and cheaper form factor, something like Xbox One S but smaller. 4TF GPU would not need the same kind of cooling capability like 12 TF GPU in XSX.

I understand all this but I've done the maths and I can't make more than $150 in BOM difference over the XSX' $500+ BOM and that includes deleting the disc drive when, given the market Lockhart is presumably aimed at, a disc drive could be a requirement. Also I doubt Microsoft want a big loss on this SKU if they plan for it to sell a lot of units.

In saying all this *if* it is the case the BOMs are being exaggerated and in fact both XSX and PS5 can get down to $399 or close(er) to it, then all this is moot.

 

[Nikana]

I understand all this but I've done the maths and I can't make more than $150 in BOM difference over the XSX' $500+ BOM and that includes deleting the disc drive when, given the market Lockhart is presumably aimed at, a disc drive could be a requirement. Also I doubt Microsoft want a big loss on this SKU if they plan for it to sell a lot of units.

In saying all this *if* it is the case the BOMs are being exaggerated and in fact both XSX and PS5 can get down to $399 or close(er) to it, then all this is moot.

Isn't the secret to this being that the APU is going to be the same as the series X but chips that lost the Binned lottery?

 

[Kuranghi]

So all the different graphics settings in PC games are all different version of games?

I'd think of it more like a PS4 and XSX game being ported to Switch, not that extreme of course, but similar downgrades to fit the spec. So with your comparison its more like editing ini files to get down below the minimum settings in the games menus. Which isn't possible in most games, and even then you will still hit fundamental walls that some specs can't overcome, so the devs would need to put in extra work there.

 

[Insane Metal]

Thanks for the responses.

So XBox really is just a disguised pc then.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Isn't the secret to this being that the APU is going to be the same as the series X but chips that lost the Binned lottery?

No way. Unless Microsoft like throwing billions away. disabling half of a 360mm^2 chip sounds like a colossal waste to me. It surely has to be a discrete/unique SoC around 200mm^2 as I understand these things?

 

[Thedtrain]

BCpack and dLSS 2.0 makes this thing better than a ps5 so win win win

/s

 

[Rolla]

There were rumblings about developers allowing players to choose a target resolution/fps, so it's probable that the Lockheart will only run at 1080p while the XSX will go up to 4k

That doesn't sound convoluted to you?

I mean, devs have trouble sticking to release dates now. And what you're describing right now sounds like a lot of extra work. But that aside, my main concern is that games will have to run on that and I'm trying to go next generation. And not have games built to run or 7 year old or lockheart hardware. Some will disagree but I'm ready for next gen experiences unimpeded by legacy or lower hardware.

 

[Nikana]

No way. Unless Microsoft like throwing billions away. disabling half of a 360mm^2 chip sounds like a colossal waste to me. It surely has to be a discrete/unique SoC around 200mm^2 as I understand these things?

It's not throwing away billions if the chips aren't able to be used for series x.

 

[Thirty7ven]

No way. Unless Microsoft like throwing billions away. disabling half of a 360mm^2 chip sounds like a colossal waste to me. It surely has to be a discrete/unique SoC around 200mm^2 as I understand these things?

It will be a different APU. Binned XSX chips will be used in server blades for XCloud.

 

[Fake]

Is this strong than Xbox One X? So, how could be more cheap?

 

[TheContact]

That doesn't sound convoluted to you?

I mean, devs have trouble sticking to release dates now. And what you're describing right now sounds like a lot of extra work. But that aside, my main concern is that games will have to run on that and I'm trying to go next generation. And not have games built to run or 7 year old or lockheart hardware. Some will disagree but I'm ready for next gen experiences unimpeded by legacy or lower hardware.

I'm not a developer so I can't comment on how much work it would take to implement, but I imagine it shouldn't be too difficult to change resolutions? Nearly every PC game has an option to choose what resolution you want to run at.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

It's not throwing away billions if the chips aren't able to be used for series x.

I would hope yields weren't so bad I'd have enough bad ones to service a 10 million/yr SKU!

 

[LostDonkey]

I'd think of it more like a PS4 and XSX game being ported to Switch, not that extreme of course, but similar downgrades to fit the spec. So with your comparison its more like editing ini files to get down below the minimum settings in the games menus. Which isn't possible in most games, and even then you will still hit fundamental walls that some specs can't overcome, so the devs would need to put in extra work there.

It's nothing like that.

These are both the same system. Running the same OS, Same Software, Same game package.

Just one is more powerful. It will probably auto adjust and the devs won't need to do anything.

 

[Nikana]

I would hope yields weren't so bad I'd have enough bad ones to service a 10 million/yr SKU!

Fair point.

 

[mrBarrelNut]

I'm guessing it's the part where M mrBarrelNut says that Lockhart could rival or even outperform the PS5.

If indeed XSX and Lockhart are using the rumoured Direct ML based upsampling method similar to Nvidia's DLSS 2.0, its pretty easy to see that the 4 TF Lockhart could out perform the 10 TF PS5 while outputting at same resolution and same graphical fidelity.

For example, here a 2060 super (~7.2 TF) with DLSS 2.0 enabled is outperforming 2080 Ti (~13.5 TF) with DLSS 2.0 disabled, 42.9 FPS vs 25.8 FPS respectively.

It's basic math, not some weird magic.

 

[cireza]

So games are probably going to look like rushed Switch ports.

This is fine. There will probably be tech videos explaining that the way these versions run is absolutely miraculous.

 

[geordiemp]

If indeed XSX and Lockhart are using the rumoured Direct ML based upsampling method similar to Nvidia's DLSS 2.0, its pretty easy to see that the 4 TF Lockhart could out perform the 10 TF PS5 while outputting at same resolution and same graphical fidelity.

For example, here a 2060 super (~7.2 TF) with DLSS 2.0 enabled is outperforming 2080 Ti (~13.5 TF) with DLSS 2.0 disabled, 42.9 FPS vs 25.8 FPS respectively.

It's basic math, not some weird magic.

Its funny, when consoles do a perfect upscale from 1440p like UE5 and nobody can tell, PC gamers tell us its not native 4K.

When Nvidia do upscaling from 1440p to 4K using DLSS, its magic.

But its machine vs temporal therefore we are better - lol, does not matter, its the end result that matters no the algorithm to do it.

 

[martino]

I'd think of it more like a PS4 and XSX game being ported to Switch, not that extreme of course, but similar downgrades to fit the spec. So with your comparison its more like editing ini files to get down below the minimum settings in the games menus. Which isn't possible in most games, and even then you will still hit fundamental walls that some specs can't overcome, so the devs would need to put in extra work there.

so wrong.
compare xos to xox and you'll see how things compare.
difference in gpu power between xos and xox is bigger than between this rumored spec and xsx
cpu and memory difference will be in same ballpark.

it's like a downgraded refresh at launch but math make it believable it can do what xsx do at 1/4 the resolution with lower effects there and there.
but a key thing is it will need to have same ssd (or a little slower but enought to cover needs in those conditions)

 

[Allandor]

Is this strong than Xbox One X? So, how could be more cheap?

Well, it could be. xbox one x is still some kind of GCN so RDNA 4tf should be able to be faster in most cases. But we talk about consoles. The weakness of GCN was always that it couldn't get all the performance it has out of the general code. But consoles get optimized code so here we got a problem in the calculation. It could be that 4TF RDNA(1 or 2) are as fast as 4TF GCN if the code is optimized enough. RNDA only allows it to use the flops more easily.

But I really hoped that xbox one x BC 4k patches would work on the smaller console. This doesn't look like it. Not without modified 4k patches.

 

[mejin]

outperform PS5

Oh come on, you have to appreciate the simplicity of the xbox fans. It's mean and pure.

XSX 12TF RDNA 2 = 4K60fps
LH 4TF RDNA 2 = 1440p60
PS5 10TF RDNA 2 = 1440p30

 

[oldergamer]

For all we know lockhart is a version of the console that is subsidized with a monthly fee instead of SXS with a few differences. It would make no sense for it to have less then 12GB of ram as that would put it lower than the 1X.

 

[Fake]

Well, it could be. xbox one x is still some kind of GCN so RDNA 4tf should be able to be faster in most cases. But we talk about consoles. The weakness of GCN was always that it couldn't get all the performance it has out of the general code. But consoles get optimized code so here we got a problem in the calculation. It could be that 4TF RDNA(1 or 2) are as fast as 4TF GCN if the code is optimized enough. RNDA only allows it to use the flops more easily.

But I really hoped that xbox one x BC 4k patches would work on the smaller console. This doesn't look like it. Not without modified 4k patches.

Can't be RDNA 1.0

 

[BigLee74]

Amazing concern trolling from the Sony camp.

Microsoft doing everything right here. The most powerful console for bragging rights, and the cheapest for all parents out there who want to get their kids a fifa/cod machine.

Classic pincer move, that should make some headway into the Sony/MS sold machines ratio.

 

[Kuranghi]

It's nothing like that.

These are both the same system. Running the same OS, Same Software, Same game package.

Just one is more powerful. It will probably auto adjust and the devs won't need to do anything.

While I do agree mostly, here is my problem: if devs design a game where there is a town with 100s of NPCs walking around in it, even if this "auto adjust" system reduces the texture/shadow/shader/etc resolution, decreases LOD/capsule distances, removes physics from clothes and the like in many cases the auto adjust system will need to make changes that need to be supervised by a human, its not an AI it can't make intelligent decisions about content like a human developer can, so just letting it cull models/detail/etc itself will not always produce the result devs want, requiring manual work.

I'm sure we'll see downgrades in terms of actual content rather than just fidelity if its 4TF vs 12TF, hopefully without affecting the XSX version. I do think it might impact development but not in a massive way.

 

[Thirty7ven]

I'd think of it more like a PS4 and XSX game being ported to Switch, not that extreme of course, but similar downgrades to fit the spec. So with your comparison its more like editing ini files to get down below the minimum settings in the games menus. Which isn't possible in most games, and even then you will still hit fundamental walls that some specs can't overcome, so the devs would need to put in extra work there.

Nah.

Of course it imposes limitations on developers, that's just basic common sense, but the limitations here are more superficial. CPU and SSD are really the main thing here allowing for new types of experiences, so as long as those perform more similar to XSX, it's a simple proposition.

 

[Kuranghi]

Amazing concern trolling from the Sony camp.

Microsoft doing everything right here. The most powerful console for bragging rights, and the cheapest for all parents out there who want to get their kids a fifa/cod machine.

Classic pincer move, that should make some headway into the Sony/MS sold machines ratio.

Ugh, I just like to comment on gaming in general, should we just not engage unless everything we have to say is positive? If Sony were doing this I'd be saying the same thing.

 

[TTOOLL]

$199?? looooool

 

[martino]

Its funny, when consoles do a perfect upscale from 1440p like UE5 and nobody can tell, PC gamers tell us its not native 4K.

When Nvidia do upscaling from 1440p to 4K using DLSS, its magic.

But its machine vs temporal therefore we are better - lol, does not matter, its the end result that matters no the algorithm to do it.

Did any of those imaginary pc gamer you build narrative with said dlls > native ?
because i think not.
the subject in your quote is performance, not IQ. Of course it comes at the price of it.
But you faill to understand the point to better move the goalspot.