• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox Series X hands on previews are live

1000-802= 198

512-198= 314

314 GB of usable space on Series S, unless there are things in the Series X overhead not needed for Series S.

r/theydidthemath.
Then that Expansion is almost gonna be mandatory.

May as well just get a PS5 or Series X at this point if only for the sake of value.
 

Neo_game

Member
Gta 4 60fps is some kind of an impressive benchmark for the new gen now? Am i not getting something here?

This is what many PC gamers actually do since they cannot afford decent rig or game on laptop. They play some 5yrs old games. Many gamers will be playing Cyberpunk 2077 some 5yrs from now. Crysis, FS2020 etc to name few. It is funny but true. It is strange for console gamers to do this. That too GTA4. lol
 
Last edited:

jaysius

Banned
Then that Expansion is almost gonna be mandatory.

May as well just get a PS5 or Series X at this point if only for the sake of value.

Or developers will have to learn how to OPTIMIZE or COMPRESS assets better... looking at you COD MW.

314gb isn't a ton of room to play with though, you're right there.
 
Last edited:

Cyborg

Member
ONLY BACKWARDS COMPAT AND SYETEM LEVEL FEATURES ALLOWED TO BE DISCUSSED DURING THIS PHASE OF THE EMBARGO.

Learn to read ffs
I know but my point still standa. We are weeks of the launch you should be able to see some XSX games in action. How longer are they gonna wait till they show next gen games? I doubt we will get the same results in loading etc.
 

Chiggs

Gold Member
I love how the backwards compatible improvements are present, even if the games aren't modified for it. Hallelujah!
 

xion4360

Member
I know but my point still standa. We are weeks of the launch you should be able to see some XSX games in action. How longer are they gonna wait till they show next gen games? I doubt we will get the same results in loading etc.

Microsoft probably wants to emphasize this particular aspect of the system right now...it may not get as much attention if they talked about next gen games as well...also help to give those games more time and perhaps be shown running on final hardware.
 

ChoosableOne

ChoosableAll
games optimized for Series X need to be on the internal SSD or the external seagate SSD...so the answer is yes. also it has to be patched first (have the badge)



its not designed to use the SSD....good luck running a series X game off an external SSD.
Am i missing something?


In that video, after 10:08, he plays that game on usb external ssd? Are you saying next gen games wont work on it?
 

xion4360

Member
Am i missing something?


In that video, after 10:08, he plays that game on usb external ssd? Are you saying next gen games wont work on it?


nope...games built for series X have to use internal SSD or the Seagate expansion SSD...that external SSD via USB is naturally affected by USB transfer speed...ok for BC games but not good enough for games meant to use the velocity architecture
 

ethomaz

Banned
.

Going to have to disagree on this point.

As somebody with nearly 1000 hours on my PS4 copy of Destiny, these loading screens for the X1X seem very comparable though ymmv. Depends on a lot of stuff beyond internet connection like fireteam or solo, server, etc.
I will post a video soon with the actual PS4 experience... I checked before ask if it was a Xbox issue.
The menu is smooth and not take that much time like the gif shows.

Load times? Yes it takes time to load.
 
Last edited:
20200922_113530-1440x1080.jpg



This is what I've been saying. I can deal with nearly any plausible console width in horizontal mode, it's the height that becomes limiting first. I'm not as convinced as others the X wins on size, it's a very smart design but the tallness would limit me before the PS5's wideness laid flat.
I have the exact same TV stand and it was bad in terms of airflow even for the ps4 pro. it sounded like a jet engine inside and once i put it on top it was silent. The hot air stays inside the cabine. You dont have that problem with it?
 

ZywyPL

Banned
1000-802= 198

512-198= 314

314 GB of usable space on Series S, unless there are things in the Series X overhead not needed for Series S.

r/theydidthemath.


Ouch, 314GB for a digital-only console won't cut it, even with 30% reduced game sizes. I guess that's why MS is already prepared with a solution to expand the storage from day one.
 
Last edited:

NEbeast

Member
Probably im going to get a PS5 because of my backlog, because of my friends and other stuff....

But man this dude is doing things wrong.
One Example is the "remaster of Spiderman", why to charge again for a game launched on 2018 and not optimize the game like xbox is doing.
Some people got mockups of of Series X and S months ago....PS5 nothing.

I could go on and on.

Really, Xbox is doping things right to reach Sony position, Sony on the other side....bad, really bad.
Hell I don't even know which ssd i need to buy in order to forget that the console has 800 gb in capacity

What are you talking about? All that was shown today was old games that have a performance mode, they will work the same way on ps5. Not one of those games has been remastered for next gen.

Instead of complaining about the SSD, why not thank Sony for putting a cutting edge one in the ps5? Manufacturers are just starting to catch up and release SSDs that are in the ballpark of being fast enough.
 
Last edited:

Grinchy

Banned
1000-802= 198

512-198= 314

314 GB of usable space on Series S, unless there are things in the Series X overhead not needed for Series S.

r/theydidthemath.
That's not how it actually works though, is it? I'm asking here, not telling.

I thought it was that they advertised in bits but actually had bytes or some kind of shit. Something about the logarithmic scale. So like a 750GB drive only really has 698GB. So it wouldn't be that 512 was losing 198 GB. It would "lose" whatever amount mathematically translates to the fake advertised 512GB number and then whatever the OS and system takes up. Theoretically, it should be losing much less than 198 GB.

Is that right? It's been forever since I looked at how stupid it is that we advertise drive spaces one way when they're realistically used in another.
 
Last edited:
These previews are kind of boring. I realize they've only had the consoles for a week and Microsoft put a lot of restrictions on them, but I hope Digital Foundry can do better if they have one soon.
 

pawel86ck

Banned
Then that Expansion is almost gonna be mandatory.

May as well just get a PS5 or Series X at this point if only for the sake of value.
XSS SSD should be enough for around 3-5 games, but you can always buy cheap external HDD (I bet most gamers already have one anyway), and copy your downloaded games there. It's not optimal solution, but it's cheap :p.
 
Last edited:
That's not how it actually works though, is it? I'm asking here, not telling.

I thought it was that they advertised in bits but actually had bytes or some kind of shit. Something about the logarithmic scale. So like a 750GB drive only really has 698GB. So it wouldn't be that 512 was losing 198 GB. It would "lose" whatever amount mathematically translates to the fake advertised 512GB number and then whatever the OS and system takes up. Theoretically, it should be losing much less than 198 GB.

Is that right? It's been forever since I looked at how stupid it is that we advertise drive spaces one way when they're realistically used in another.

Sort of, 512 GB is actual 476.

MS has the O/S and probably some space reserved for file swapping or whatever these people do.

I'll predict 376(or 2 Call of Duty games) usable
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Rage Bait Youtuber
Digital Foundry:

"Xbox fans will be pleased to hear, you will have plenty of time to read game hints, and look at weapon models"


PS5 loads in 2s, but RDR2 takes over a minute


game fucking over :lol:

If people have to provide proof of a certain teraflop number with the PS5 or get banned, this guy should have to provide proof that RDR2 loads in 2 seconds on the PS5.
 

TeKtheSanE

Member

A good read
Would anyone here honestly be putting drinks or food near their xbox? Let alone a drink on top? I don't live with children, but that's about the only demographic I would assume would put something on top of the series X.

But then again, my IT friend has many horror stories regarding computer tech and things that should be obvious so I guess it is good the article mentions these warnings.
 

Ballthyrm

Member
I wish we are going to get the option between getting the 4k game and not.
Most of the giant file size are just the 4k texture needed for high rez gaming.

Uncompressed textures are faster to load and run.
Now with the new SSD speed maybe we will return to compressed texture and reduce games sizes.

Well with PBR and Ray tracing , there is a good chance that it will also reduce the number of textures needed by replacing them with really good materials instead.

I remember modding Skyrim to have it run at 4k and the sizes got really big really fast !
 

MastaKiiLA

Member

Why does Richard switch to the percentage readout during the toughest framerate test of the video, in Hitman2? Framerate drops into the mid-40s for an extended part of the suburbs scene, but that's the only section in the whole video that gets a percentage readout, as opposed to the actual framerate. It's stuff like that that probably leads some people to question the reliability of the outlet. I have DF subbed on YT, and can overlook stuff like this, but that's clearly some dubious work on Rich's part. Don't open that scene by saying it's the toughest test for the GPU, and then switch up the performance display during the toughest portion of that scene. That's not coincidental.
 

BigLee74

Member
I said it before in another thread to salty PS fans a few weeks ago, and I'll say it again here.

Do you really think RDR2 is gonna load instantaneously on the PS5?

HINT: the answer will be no.
 

Robins

Member
I think it's a shame there are no real next gen games being showcased.

Especially when the rest of the package is much better this gen.
 

Nvzman

Member
Probably im going to get a PS5 because of my backlog, because of my friends and other stuff....

But man this dude is doing things wrong.
One Example is the "remaster of Spiderman", why to charge again for a game launched on 2018 and not optimize the game like xbox is doing.
You do realize this statement is completely wrong right? The reason why the whole complaining about "why is spider-man ps5 paid for" is ridiculous to begin with is because its not just "ticking up the settings to ultra equivalent on PC and unlocking the framerate to 120fps" like Xbox Series X is doing with Gears 5, Spider-Man PS5 is completely upgrading ALL of the assets and adding in a 60fps mode with raytracing. Its a graphical upgrade using new assets. why the fuck should it be free? I agree that it shouldn't be required with a $70 edition and should be a separate $20 purchase, but thinking it should be free is all kinds of wack. Especially considering how well it sold, how the hell would sony make any money off of it? They would just lose money.

I'm going off of what insomniac and journalists officially said, so assuming its true, its not just going to be a slightly prettier 4K version (like what BC is looking like on Xbox rn), its going to be kind of a massive graphical upgrade. Its getting really annoying seeing people complain about this. The funny part is im not even planning on getting the PS5 at launch or a SeX, but the completely unjustified shit getting flung at sony is kinda nuts.


Also, can we talk about how Sony did this last gen when they were in their "good guy sony/friend to consumers" phase with the Last of Us Remastered which was double the price ($40) and absolutely nobody gave a shit? It came out only about a year after the PS3 version too.
 
Last edited:

jaysius

Banned
That's not how it actually works though, is it? I'm asking here, not telling.

I thought it was that they advertised in bits but actually had bytes or some kind of shit. Something about the logarithmic scale. So like a 750GB drive only really has 698GB. So it wouldn't be that 512 was losing 198 GB. It would "lose" whatever amount mathematically translates to the fake advertised 512GB number and then whatever the OS and system takes up. Theoretically, it should be losing much less than 198 GB.

Is that right? It's been forever since I looked at how stupid it is that we advertise drive spaces one way when they're realistically used in another.

What you're talking about is raw unformatted space of an unformatted harddrive.

What you're getting at is that the math isn't exact, and yea, it's not you never get 1TB from a TB HD by the time you format it. With this in mind, that advertised 512GB of Series S could be EVEN LESS than the possible, accounting for it's overhead and still the OS size seems to be quite big this time around. I'm sure they've got it more around 400 gb free space for that other drive, we won't know until we get a real world test.
 
Top Bottom