Support NeoGAF

[cormack12]

The Xbox Series S is equipped with an 8-core CPU based on AMD's Zen 2 which is the same as the Xbox Series X.
The operating clock for single thread is 3.8GHz for Xbox Series X, 3.6GHz for Xbox Series S, and 3.4GHz for the former 3.6GHz for multithreading.
Both are equipped with an 8MB L3 cache, and the CPU performance is said to be four times that of the "Xbox One S."
The SoC size of the Xbox Series X is 360mm2 (square millimeter), and the Xbox Series S is 197mm2.

When comparing the specs of the Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S, the biggest difference is probably the GPU. Both are equipped with AMD's custom RDNA2 GPU, but the Xbox Series X has 52CUs@1.825Ghz, while the Xbox Series S has 20CUs@1.565GHz. Therefore, the processing power of GPU is 12.15TFlops for the former and 4TFlops for the latter. Perhaps the emphasis was on keeping the refresh rate at 60Hz (up to 120Hz), the Xbox Series S only supports 1440p (2560x1440), which is equivalent to 2K, instead of 4K resolution (3840x2160).

 

[cormack12]

Mods, change title pls to Series S

 

[Three]

The price to performance for this thing is crap. Especially with such a small die size.

 

[Dr.D00p]

It's a shame Microsoft wont let AMD release these APU's for Laptops, they'd make awesome little gaming machines.

 

[Dr Bass]

The price to performance for this thing is crap. Especially with such a small die size.

Don't you mean "pretty good"?

What more do you want for 299?

 

[Three]

Don't you mean "pretty good"?

What more do you want for 299?

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

 

[Dr Bass]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

I guess that's true but I think the PS5 and SX are just "even better" values.

 

[M1chl]

The price to performance for this thing is crap. Especially with such a small die size.

That's always the case for bottom tier in IT and also in highest tier.

 

[ZywyPL]

I wonder if the marketed 1440p will be forced, or will it be possible to set the output resolution of the console to 1080p and therefore force lower rendering resolution of the games?

It's a shame Microsoft wont let AMD release these APU's for Laptops, they'd make awesome little gaming machines.

It bothers my mind how on earth AMD can offer up to 12TF APUs in consoles, but not even 2TF as their own offer for laptops/PCs, packing instead "MORE CORES!!!" that are completely useless, especially when paired with such weak GPUs, you ain't gonna game on a 8CU Vega, so why would you need a 8C/16T CPU paired with it? Hopefully Intel's upcoming lineup with Xe GPUs will push AMD to counter them with more console-like APU solutions for the PC/mobile market.

 

[Three]

That's always the case for bottom tier in IT and also in highest tier.

Not sure I agree with that to be honest. Sure there are differences but mass market (low end and mid) versions still offer better bang for your buck and usually you pay a big premium for getting the top of the line.

For example :

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

For XSS you're paying too much for the low end:

$299 XSS: $72/tf
$399 PS5DE: $39/tf

I get that the consoles are different to GPUs but comparing consoles to consoles the Series S is cheap but it's not good value for money. I'm sure the XSX and PS5 will also likely have more hardware features than the Series S too in addition to the GPU like better wifi, more ports, HDMI 2.1 etc.

 

[M1chl]

<snip>

I what way this sort of thing:

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

is bottom tier?! I was talking more about GTX 710 and shit like that, that's proper bottom tier.

 

[sinnergy]

Don't you mean "pretty good"?

What more do you want for 299?

He? PS5... performance is my guess.

 

[Three]

I what way this sort of thing:

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

is bottom tier?! I was talking more about GTX 710 and shit like that, that's proper bottom tier.

Oh, that's like comparing them to PS4 and Xbox One performance per price I guess. Yeah the PS4 and xbox one wouldn't fair much better. I meant budget, mid and premium tiers in a new product/gen.

 

[M1chl]

Oh, that's like comparing them to PS4 and Xbox One performance per price I guess. Yeah the PS4 and xbox one wouldn't fair much better. I meant budget, mid and premium tiers in a new product/gen.

XB1 and PS4 was more marketed as a mid tier, that why it has pretty fair price, you can argue about XB1 OG price that it was not fair, however it was not rip-off.

 

[megreotsugua]

$80 per teraflop garbage

 

[Skifi28]

I wonder if the marketed 1440p will be forced, or will it be possible to set the output resolution of the console to 1080p and therefore force lower rendering resolution of the games?

I really can't see any way this is a 1440p machine with 4tf when its big brother is 12tf for 4k. Unless we're talking about games getting major visual reductions or getting their fps cut in half, it's a 1080p machine. Even if it had the GPU Powe for 1440, the huge reduction in memory would still make more devs opt for 1080p.

 

[Three]

XB1 and PS4 was more marketed as a mid tier, that why it has pretty fair price, you can argue about XB1 OG price that it was not fair, however it was not rip-off.

My shitty english, "not fair much better" is "not fare much better" . As in the PS4 and Xbox one value for money now would also be pretty poor when looking at old gen stuff.

$299 PS4: $166/tf
$299 X1S: $213/tf

Not to mention you will be getting crappy HDDs, old wifi, old blu ray drive etc. The value for money sucks there too.

 

[Aidah]

Too bad they didn't just go with a $399 Digital only Series X instead of two specs. The $100 difference isn't worth all the trouble of having 2 specs. $399 is low enough especially at the start of a gen, and that would have actually been an extremely good value console, instead of Series S that is supposed to be a value console but is actually the worst value of all 4.

 

[M1chl]

My shitty english, "not fair much better" is "not fare much better" . As in the PS4 and Xbox one value for money now would also be pretty poor when looking at old gen stuff.

$299 PS4: $166/tf
$299 X1S: $213/tf

Not to mention you will be getting crappy HDDs, old wifi, old blu ray drive etc. The value for money sucks there too.

Don't worry I have shitty English too : ) Well i think that certainly something like PS4 wasn't a shit deal at all, because what you buy for 400 bucks in PC space? Whole PC is going to be shit at that price, not the mention being able to game on it. With the blu-ray drive, I actually thing it was really good deal.

And I am hard, since forever in PC space, I switched to game on consoles, because i was bored to work on PC and to game on the same machine.

 

[Three]

Don't worry I have shitty English too : ) Well i think that certainly something like PS4 wasn't a shit deal at all, because what you buy for 400 bucks in PC space? Whole PC is going to be shit at that price, not the mention being able to game on it. With the blu-ray drive, I actually thing it was really good deal.

And I am hard, since forever in PC space, I switched to game on consoles, because i was bored to work on PC and to game on the same machine.

I did the same, I agree console space is different and you get the whole package for the price. I agree with that, the PS4 and XB1 prices were fair.

I just wouldn't buy a PS4 or XB1 or even a Series S at the RRP today though because I don't think it's good value for money, even if it is $100 cheaper than a PS5 or $200 less than XSX. You get a lot less bang for your buck in my opinion with those consoles buying them now.

 

[M1chl]

I did the same, I agree console space is different and you get the whole package for the price. I agree with that, the PS4 and XB1 prices were fair.

I just wouldn't buy a PS4 or XB1 or even a Series S at the RRP today though because I don't think it's good value for money, even if it is $100 cheaper than a PS5 or $200 less than XSX. You get a lot less bang for your buck in my opinion with those consoles buying them now.

It's obviously always smart to wait, however some of us cannot do that, because you gotta have that latest shit. Me included by the way.

 

[Tchu-Espresso]

Not sure I agree with that to be honest. Sure there are differences but mass market (low end and mid) versions still offer better bang for your buck and usually you pay a big premium for getting the top of the line.

For example :

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

For XSS you're paying too much for the low end:

$299 XSS: $72/tf
$399 PS5DE: $39/tf

I get that the consoles are different to GPUs but comparing consoles to consoles the Series S is cheap but it's not good value for money. I'm sure the XSX and PS5 will also likely have more hardware features than the Series S too in addition to the GPU like better wifi, more ports, HDMI 2.1 etc.

Does your $/tf measurements take into account that an ampere TF is substantially weaker than a Turing TF? They are after all saying that the 3070 (20TF) is as powerful as the 2080Ti (13TF).

 

[Shmunter]

Not worth a dollar more than $199.......zoinks, I'm outta here

 

[Redlight]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

It's great value, what nonense is this?

You realise that your new metric, 'dollars per teraflop' makes the price of the PS5 pretty stinky? The PS5 is at least $80 overpriced, what a ripoff!

I have a new system to replace yours, it's 'dollar per CU'. Series X gives you 52 for $499 ($9.50 per CU), but the poor old PS5 only offers 36 ($13.86 per CU).

Now that's bad value, I'm sure you'll agree.

 

[Tiamat2san]

Even if I think it would be enough for my 2nd screen which is 1080p, with my wife we decided to buy 2 XSX instead of 1 XSX and XSS.
i don't know why but my guts are telling me it's the way to go.

 

[sinnergy]

I am surprised that DMC5 does ray-tracing in Series S, looking forward to those details.

 

[Riky]

It's pretty good value at £249, an Xbox One S is still more than that new at the moment and this is four times as powerful for less money. I think that's a good deal.

 

[Deleted member 775630]

Too bad they didn't just go with a $399 Digital only Series X instead of two specs. The $100 difference isn't worth all the trouble of having 2 specs. $399 is low enough especially at the start of a gen, and that would have actually been an extremely good value console, instead of Series S that is supposed to be a value console but is actually the worst value of all 4.

Are you only looking at the GPU to say it's the worst value?

 

[Panajev2001a]

The Xbox Series S is equipped with an 8-core CPU based on AMD's Zen 2 which is the same as the Xbox Series X.
The operating clock for single thread is 3.8GHz for Xbox Series X, 3.6GHz for Xbox Series S, and 3.4GHz for the former 3.6GHz for multithreading.
Both are equipped with an 8MB L3 cache, and the CPU performance is said to be four times that of the "Xbox One S."
The SoC size of the Xbox Series X is 360mm2 (square millimeter), and the Xbox Series S is 197mm2.

When comparing the specs of the Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S, the biggest difference is probably the GPU. Both are equipped with AMD's custom RDNA2 GPU, but the Xbox Series X has 52CUs@1.825Ghz, while the Xbox Series S has 20CUs@1.565GHz. Therefore, the processing power of GPU is 12.15TFlops for the former and 4TFlops for the latter. Perhaps the emphasis was on keeping the refresh rate at 60Hz (up to 120Hz), the Xbox Series S only supports 1440p (2560x1440), which is equivalent to 2K, instead of 4K resolution (3840x2160).

Is this a confirmation we have only one Shader Engine (two Shader Arrays... 12 DCU's and 6 DCU's per Shader Array)? It would be interesting to compare die for die and see how many non DCU's resources are shared in the same number across both (there are things beyond Compute Units).

Edit: no, on a second look, possibly still 4 Shader Arrays and 3 DCU per array, but it would be nice to know for sure:

XSS:

XSX:

geordiemp

 

[Three]

Does your $/tf measurements take into account that an ampere TF is substantially weaker than a Turing TF? They are after all saying that the 3070 (20TF) is as powerful as the 2080Ti (13TF).

Would it matter if what I listed are all Ampere and all the consoles are RDNA 2?

 

[Zoro7]

Are you only looking at the GPU to say it's the worst value?

The ram is pretty shocking too.

 

[Deleted member 775630]

The ram is pretty shocking too.

Not really. Should be enough

 

[RoadHazard]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

The console is not just a GPU.

 

[Three]

It's great value, what nonense is this?

You realise that your new metric, 'dollars per teraflop' makes the price of the PS5 pretty stinky? The PS5 is at least $80 overpriced, what a ripoff!

I have a new system to replace yours, it's 'dollar per CU'. Series X gives you 52 for $499 ($9.50 per CU), but the poor old PS5 only offers 36 ($13.86 per CU).

Now that's bad value, I'm sure you'll agree.

How so?

PS5 DE: 38.8 $/tf
XSX: 41.0 $/tf
PS5: 48.5 $/tf
XSS: 74.8 $/tf

Ok you want to do dollars per CU.

XSX: $9.5
PS5DE: $11.1
PS5: $13.9
XSS: $15

XSS Still the worst. I was doing teraflops because taking everything into account for the SoC (clockspeed and CU) it tells you some theoretical max capability of the machine. CU on its own doesn't but even then the XSS is the worst value.

The console is not just a GPU.

Agreed but we are talking about the SoC and comparing to other consoles. The other consoles would actually offer more features in addition to the better GPU too.

 

[The ninja farmer]

Enough for maybe 1080p, not sure about anything above

unless it's an Xbox 1 game. Then x1x ram (impacting again) considerations aside, 1440p should be mostly doable

next gen built games, well it could struggle a bit with the ram size being so low (I find it more interesting about the ram speed and how that will work with the differing speeds of the series X and scaling in games )

 

[Rockman33]

The Xbox Series S is equipped with an 8-core CPU based on AMD's Zen 2 which is the same as the Xbox Series X.
The operating clock for single thread is 3.8GHz for Xbox Series X, 3.6GHz for Xbox Series S, and 3.4GHz for the former 3.6GHz for multithreading.
Both are equipped with an 8MB L3 cache, and the CPU performance is said to be four times that of the "Xbox One S."
The SoC size of the Xbox Series X is 360mm2 (square millimeter), and the Xbox Series S is 197mm2.

When comparing the specs of the Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S, the biggest difference is probably the GPU. Both are equipped with AMD's custom RDNA2 GPU, but the Xbox Series X has 52CUs@1.825Ghz, while the Xbox Series S has 20CUs@1.565GHz. Therefore, the processing power of GPU is 12.15TFlops for the former and 4TFlops for the latter. Perhaps the emphasis was on keeping the refresh rate at 60Hz (up to 120Hz), the Xbox Series S only supports 1440p (2560x1440), which is equivalent to 2K, instead of 4K resolution (3840x2160).

2k is 2048x1080. Not 2560x1440.

 

[Rockman33]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

IF you can get a DE PS5. But considering it sounds like they have mad less than 10% of their overall stock DE I feel like that's going to be pretty difficult.

 

[Bernkastel]

Source:

“小さな巨人”「Xbox Series S」のテクニカルディテールが明らかに。開発者インタビューもお届け

Microsoftの次世代ゲーム機「Xbox Series X」の弟分となる「Xbox Series S」。光学ドライブを搭載しない“デジタル版”として，Xbox史上最小となる筐体に次世代要素を盛り…

www.4gamer.net

 

[BigLee74]

Not sure I agree with that to be honest. Sure there are differences but mass market (low end and mid) versions still offer better bang for your buck and usually you pay a big premium for getting the top of the line.

For example :

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

For XSS you're paying too much for the low end:

$299 XSS: $72/tf
$399 PS5DE: $39/tf

I get that the consoles are different to GPUs but comparing consoles to consoles the Series S is cheap but it's not good value for money. I'm sure the XSX and PS5 will also likely have more hardware features than the Series S too in addition to the GPU like better wifi, more ports, HDMI 2.1 etc.

Are you really comparing consoles to graphics cards in a TF power per price ratio? You are aware a console isn't just a graphics card in a box?

Anyway, despite what you say XSS will sell loads. Why? Because its still significantly cheaper than the rest. And that's all that matters for a lot of parents when Xmas rolls around.

 

[Bogroll]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

You can do this for a lot of things. For example. I can get a basic VW Golf for 23k. 115bhp basic spec. I get get a VW Golf R 310bhp, 4wd a shit load of extras over the basic model that come as standard on the Golf R. Cost 37k.

 

[CrysisFreak]

Don't worry I have shitty English too : ) Well i think that certainly something like PS4 wasn't a shit deal at all, because what you buy for 400 bucks in PC space? Whole PC is going to be shit at that price, not the mention being able to game on it. With the blu-ray drive, I actually thing it was really good deal.

And I am hard, since forever in PC space, I switched to game on consoles, because i was bored to work on PC and to game on the same machine.

Can u pls lrn 2 speak proper American language like us free people damn it...

 

[Andodalf]

It's a shame Microsoft wont let AMD release these APU's for Laptops, they'd make awesome little gaming machines.

Power limits. Even the series S will suck way more power than a reasonable laptop should, and it uses a huge thermal envelope. The series s APU would make for an unusably large and loud laptop.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

Not sure I agree with that to be honest. Sure there are differences but mass market (low end and mid) versions still offer better bang for your buck and usually you pay a big premium for getting the top of the line.

For example :

$500 RTX 3070: $25/tf
$700 RTX 3080: $23/tf
$1400 RTX 3090: $42/tf

For XSS you're paying too much for the low end:

$299 XSS: $72/tf
$399 PS5DE: $39/tf

I get that the consoles are different to GPUs but comparing consoles to consoles the Series S is cheap but it's not good value for money. I'm sure the XSX and PS5 will also likely have more hardware features than the Series S too in addition to the GPU like better wifi, more ports, HDMI 2.1 etc.

These are full systems (CPU, storage, case, power supply, memory, controller motherboard, whatever else).
I would be curious to see how it stacks up against the very cheapest PC you can put around the 3080.

 

[Matsuchezz]

If we were living in 2013 were 4k tvs were expensive AF xss would make sense. 4k tvs are dirt cheap nowadays, i really do not see value in xss. People playing on 1080 screens with the latest console is kind of dumb, i know that not everyone can or are willing to spend more money on a new tv.
And i believe you need a new tv to run 120 fps games or i am mistaken or you can run 120 fps games on an 1080p tv?

 

[BootsLoader]

So as far as I understand MS will make more money selling the Series S compared to the Series X.

 

[Redlight]

S

How so?

PS5 DE: 38.8 $/tf
XSX: 41.0 $/tf
PS5: 48.5 $/tf
XSS: 74.8 $/tf

Ok you want to do dollars per CU.

XSX: $9.5
PS5DE: $11.1
PS5: $13.9
XSS: $15

XSS Still the worst. I was doing teraflops because taking everything into account for the SoC (clockspeed and CU) it tells you some theoretical max capability of the machine. CU on its own doesn't but even then the XSS is the worst value.


Agreed but we are talking about the SoC and comparing to other consoles. The other consoles would would actually offer more features in addition to the better GPU too.

How so? Really? You're serious about this?

Your metric is idiotic. The $ per CU was simply meant to illustrate this. Why not $ per square inch of surface area? PS5 might win that one.

The Series S allows you to play next gen games on a 1080p TV for $299. It's fantastic value. Your sad scramble to prove otherwise with comedy metrics is only convincing to yourself.

To everyone else it looks like distilled desperation.

 

[chonga]

Don't you mean "pretty good"?

What more do you want for 299?

No they mean the opposite. It isn't about "what more do you want", but instead they're comparing to the other options.

Besides, $299 is a very expected price point I still don't understand why people think it is an amazing price.

In my country it is going to retail for a little bit less than the One X was selling for before being discontinued. But this thing has a massively smaller die size meaning massively reduced costs and no disc drive meaning even more reduced costs, it also has less RAM and whilst GDDR6 it is lower-end. So really the only additional expense is the SSD. So overall with the cuts made, the efficiencies found I think the price is to be expected.

And when I watch the DIRT 5 gameplay footage from the Series S I can't help but agree with Jim Ryan that in a couple of years the Series S is going to look very tired.

 

[SportsFan581]

I mean bad. It's cheap but price to performance is bad. Its performance is very weak. It's near $80 per terraflop for the Series S. The XSX and PS5 DE are half the cost per Terraflop at $40 per tf. You get a lot more bang for your buck with the other machines.

If you get a PS5 DE at $100 more you are getting more than double the performance of a series S for 1/3 of the price.

There is a baseline of cost for the basic components (MB/RAM/SSD/Cooling/MB/Case). Any additional dollars spent over the baseline will start to increase performance on a sharp curve if the money is spent on the CPU/GPU. Use a PC part picker and build a $300 PC, than add $200 and watch what that does to the performance of the PC that can be built.

 

[Aceofspades]

3.4 Ghz with SMT? Lol
Didn't Tom warren embarrass himself by saying XSS has stronger CPU than PS5?

 

[Aidah]

Are you only looking at the GPU to say it's the worst value?

Overall hardware. Series S makes major cutbacks in GPU, RAM amount and bandwidth, storage space, on top of being digital only. Hardware wise, it's not good value relative to the others, it's just the cheapest.