WYP
News Guru
The Xbox Series X will release for an eye-watering price.
Read more about Microsoft's alleged Xbox Series X pricing.
Read more about Microsoft's alleged Xbox Series X pricing.
Last edited:
Retail Insider claims that the Xbox Series X will cost $599
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
That's likely cheaper than it will actually be. That's probably their reaction price to Sony.
AlienALX
Well-known member
Yeah at $599 it seems awful cheap for the spec.
You could not even get close in a PC with that sort of spec *and* a NVME drive.
Obviously not and I doubt I will either but for the price if you have nothing right now or an old console that sounds like a deal to me dude. Like I say, spec up a $599 PC and see what you get. 4k? lmao yeah right.
I dont really know why you keep comparing console to pc. These are two different worlds in my eyes. Its like comparing apples to oranges. Its like me saying "great, but let me see you render videos in 10seconds on a console" PCs are not solely for gaming.
Of course you cant get the same specs in a pc. Even if you did by miracle, you still need speakers/headphones, mouse keyboard, controller, 99% chance a monitor since many Tvs are terrible for gaming even today, probably a desk, chair.. jeez many people dont even have space for a computer desk. Its just not feasible to put PC and Console in the same matrix table at all. Buy a console and you get all you need to game in the box minus a screen. Yes its much cheaper, but $599 is not remotely close to a decent deal in any scenario for the average person.
Throw in the fact that not every game created is available on every platform, and its simply no comparison. MMO gamers or space sim enthusiasts have no choice. Much like some gaming fans "had" very little choice for console exclusives.
AlienALX
Well-known member
How can I compare them when they pretty much run exactly the same games? dunno dude, lost on me
Is comparing RDR2 on PC to the Xb1x not apples to apples then, given it's exactly the same game? yet the XB1x can push out 30 FPS @ a reasonable 4k?
It's funny, because it's perfectly apt when all of these teewats on Youtube used to build their "console killers". Funny how when the XB1X the party stopped huh?
How can you compare them. LMAO because they are both pretty much the same hardware? Now more than ever?
The very fact that NZXT tried to knock this off and wanted £350 for the case PSU and cooler says it all. Now go ahead with your £150 and see how far that gets you on a CPU and GPU.
It's a AMD Ryzen CPU with a Navi GPU in. So again, I look forward to all of these "console killer $599 PCs" when it comes out. Only, opp ! there won't be any because to run 4k on a PC you have to spend around double that for 30 FPS.
Will I buy one at that price? no. Do I think the price is unreasonable? no, no not at all. Is it more expensive than any console for years? yup. However, given that power wise at launch it is over twice as fast as what is out there now I don't think it's bad value. And, if I had a kid and he was on my back for a gaming PC I would get him this, because as I said above there is no way a PC will even sniff it for that much.
Entry level PCs have sat stagnant for years now. Like I said, entry level GPU? RX 480. In 2016. Entry level GPU now. RX 580. In 2020. Wow, a whole 10% or so faster in four years.
Orsum, crap the mattress etc.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
They may be using similar hardware as in architecture, but the same hardware is clearly a wrong statement. Each die is a custom piece of silicon with heavy integration between every transistor.
You won't find anything close to it on PC.
I won't entertain the other stuff, but that one statement is very wrong. It's precisely the reason you cannot compare consoles to PC. Even with older generations like PS4 Xb1. They are different and that's exactly the reason they are developed differently. Even with the "same hardware"
You won't find anything close to it on PC.
I won't entertain the other stuff, but that one statement is very wrong. It's precisely the reason you cannot compare consoles to PC. Even with older generations like PS4 Xb1. They are different and that's exactly the reason they are developed differently. Even with the "same hardware"
AlienALX
Well-known member
Both X86 both running the same games. That was more my point. Of course this is custom yes, but AMD didn't invent anything for it they just let them use the technology to build what they wanted and then AMD fulfil the orders.
Comparing a Xbox 360 was hard because it wasn't X86. So PCs used to absolutely poo on it. Mostly because it was running some sort of crusty GT 8600. However, they are very similar now.
My point is the gaming experience. And I don't think you could get close for the same cash on PC.
How can I compare them when they pretty much run exactly the same games? dunno dude, lost on me
Is comparing RDR2 on PC to the Xb1x not apples to apples then, given it's exactly the same game? yet the XB1x can push out 30 FPS @ a reasonable 4k?
It's funny, because it's perfectly apt when all of these teewats on Youtube used to build their "console killers". Funny how when the XB1X the party stopped huh?
How can you compare them. LMAO because they are both pretty much the same hardware? Now more than ever?
The very fact that NZXT tried to knock this off and wanted £350 for the case PSU and cooler says it all. Now go ahead with your £150 and see how far that gets you on a CPU and GPU.
It's a AMD Ryzen CPU with a Navi GPU in. So again, I look forward to all of these "console killer $599 PCs" when it comes out. Only, opp ! there won't be any because to run 4k on a PC you have to spend around double that for 30 FPS.
Will I buy one at that price? no. Do I think the price is unreasonable? no, no not at all. Is it more expensive than any console for years? yup. However, given that power wise at launch it is over twice as fast as what is out there now I don't think it's bad value. And, if I had a kid and he was on my back for a gaming PC I would get him this, because as I said above there is no way a PC will even sniff it for that much.
Entry level PCs have sat stagnant for years now. Like I said, entry level GPU? RX 480. In 2016. Entry level GPU now. RX 580. In 2020. Wow, a whole 10% or so faster in four years.
Orsum, crap the mattress etc.
I ignored all those "console killers" videos because again. I refuse to compare them since they are not comparable unless you had a severely strict comparison test such as looking at RDR2 and ignoring the other 1000s of titles unavailable. I dont narrow my vision down to a title or two.
So... go run excel on your xbox and create some pivot tables for 50,000 lines of data.
Render your gopro 4k res 40min bike session on a playstation, then wind down with a nice afternoon of world of warcraft. Actually lets throw in a few hours rendering in solidworks or fusion 360. Since you want to pitch them together, ill use these examples. Its not a fair comparison. How about Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Total War. Are these on console?
Im not being argumentative for the sake of it, its just I think you have your small gamers circle in your head which is fine, but for me, i think much, much wider. I want something thats a jack of all trades. It certainly isn't a console, however, I have to accept that what I want costs a ton more cash.
Also when consoles are steamlined for one purpose, it makes the optimisation incredibly simple. There are no permutations of cpu X, with GPU y, whilst using Soundcard Z.
Now comparing the consoles with one another, Xbox X was released nov 2017 and priced at $499, three years later we have the series X priced at $599. In three years its just $100 which we would assume is decent but the 1X was overpriced in my opinion anyway, so we will have to wait and see.
KingNosser
Well-known member
While the new consoles might be more powerful the fact remains that by the time they both come out they will be mid range, afterall the newer cards are going to spank them not like anything has changed at all.
Prices are and have always been more expensive on PC for decades nothing has changed.
I don't mind cause the industry moves forward, but if i'm being real honest the PS5 is the better console not cause of power but because it will have better games halo looked bad even by current gen standards,
For me the best thing about PC is I have 1000's of games spaning a long time be it emulator or otherwise and no console can compete with that. add to that some of the creative minds that rework games and mod the hell out of them or enhance them they are two very different beasts. I think if you want to truely compare then for me I don't mind paying extra for everything a PC gives you, but the consoles are good for mainstream gaming and it's good that it all moves forward.
End of the day the new consoles are midrange they always have been.
Prices are and have always been more expensive on PC for decades nothing has changed.
I don't mind cause the industry moves forward, but if i'm being real honest the PS5 is the better console not cause of power but because it will have better games halo looked bad even by current gen standards,
For me the best thing about PC is I have 1000's of games spaning a long time be it emulator or otherwise and no console can compete with that. add to that some of the creative minds that rework games and mod the hell out of them or enhance them they are two very different beasts. I think if you want to truely compare then for me I don't mind paying extra for everything a PC gives you, but the consoles are good for mainstream gaming and it's good that it all moves forward.
End of the day the new consoles are midrange they always have been.
AlienALX
Well-known member
Consoles have not always been mid range. They are usually low end, if that.
The 360 got laughed at by PCs then and so did the Xbone. The PS3 was a royal pain to code for and so on.
However.
Don't underestimate how powerful these new ones are as consoles. The 1x is a proper little beast, and these make it look like small fry. It is quite possible that the SeX could hit 4k 60. Which is unheard of on any mid range PC.
As I say, things have changed. Coding to the metal is a whole different ball game. The only thing worth having a PC for will be RTX, if Nvidia can get any one to make games for it. Sure the next gen Nvidia cards will be crazy, but you are forgetting about the crazy prices. They are going to be ridiculous.
Things have changed in the GPU world for the worst. Over and over again. The mid range is a total laugh now. Like I said, old cards that cost the same £ per perf now that they did when they launched. Real mid range? £400 now. That used to be top end and more.
And then of course you have the problem of demographics. Exactly who wants PC gaming machines now? kids. Where are they going? to a kid to play Fortnite and so on. So do they need a huge tank GPU? no.
Which brings me onto the next issue, progress. Graphically? IMO? there has been hardly any in over 5 years. I have not played a single game on my PC that made me go "Oh wow !" in ages. Long, long time. I had more surprises out of my Xb1x for the £300 I paid for each (I was that impressed I have two).
I mean yeah, Metro Exodus looked good cranked to the max with RT on ultra. However, there is some weird screen door stuff going on with RT. It looks kinda fuzzy and weird at times. So it is not perfect by any means.
In terms of price to performance? the Xb1x is the most exciting thing I have seen in years. Mostly because for £300 you get a console that can do 4k. Like, real 4k.
As game engines improve? the PC will need much more powerful graphics cards, and therein lies the problem. Who do you go to? Nvidia. How much do you pay? three times what the new consoles will cost just for the GPU.
And I can't see that changing any time soon. With the slow down of competitive behaviour from AMD comes Nvidia taking the pee big time and slowing everything down. Technology, progress, game progress, the whole nine yards.
Plus there is another crux to this too. The consoles hold everything back. No one has been brave enough to make a big boy real PC only game in years, as they care only about money and their licensing fees. Now sure, some of these console games are being released on the PC now (the exclusives) but none of them are true PC exclusives. That boat sailed many years ago, and has held back gaming for at least a decade. As soon as Microsoft went to consoles they put a choke hold on the PC.
It's a shame.
KingNosser
Well-known member
I do get your points, i got a 2nd hand PS4 boat load of games and sure i enjoy it when I play it, they look good for a mid range from 6-7 years ago.
But 4k60 while being amazing for console, in this gen coming for cards expect that on a 3060 or rdna2 equivilent not sure on their naming scheme just yet. These new cards are going to be real beef'ed up like even a 3070 is going to possibly have 16gb ram i'm hearing but there has been so many specs floating about and were closer to really knowning that i can't say it's fact yet.
Big PC games are becoming few and far between now but they do happen and most of them would not be aim'd at the console audience. Cyberpunk I feel will look good across the board it's pretty much a given that it will goto the consoles really on current and next gen with the bells and such.
As for gfx things haven't moved forward by much really and it is due to the consoles but things will now over the next 2 years. All the PC companies wanted the console money the industry is greedy like that, but while the consoles will do most things, they don't do all things and not always as well as a PC and for some 4k60 isn't the target they want higher fps even at 4k now let alone 2k 144.
like i said i don't mind paying the extra but i'll most likely see what exclusives come out on PS5 cause lets face it most xbox games will come to PC it's pretty much a given now.
I'd expect a 3090 it be around 1500, 3080 more 800-900 and 3070 around 500-600 as for the amd cards they will be similar if slightly under but they will be a lot more powerful than either console, how that translates in gfx most likely very similar but fps wise higher. it's not like you can ask a PC to render something and it look totally different the main difference now is resolution and fps, i have doubts about how many top end console games will have 4k60 it's most likely going to be much more common to have 4k30 still with a lot better looking games gfx wise.
But 4k60 while being amazing for console, in this gen coming for cards expect that on a 3060 or rdna2 equivilent not sure on their naming scheme just yet. These new cards are going to be real beef'ed up like even a 3070 is going to possibly have 16gb ram i'm hearing but there has been so many specs floating about and were closer to really knowning that i can't say it's fact yet.
Big PC games are becoming few and far between now but they do happen and most of them would not be aim'd at the console audience. Cyberpunk I feel will look good across the board it's pretty much a given that it will goto the consoles really on current and next gen with the bells and such.
As for gfx things haven't moved forward by much really and it is due to the consoles but things will now over the next 2 years. All the PC companies wanted the console money the industry is greedy like that, but while the consoles will do most things, they don't do all things and not always as well as a PC and for some 4k60 isn't the target they want higher fps even at 4k now let alone 2k 144.
like i said i don't mind paying the extra but i'll most likely see what exclusives come out on PS5 cause lets face it most xbox games will come to PC it's pretty much a given now.
I'd expect a 3090 it be around 1500, 3080 more 800-900 and 3070 around 500-600 as for the amd cards they will be similar if slightly under but they will be a lot more powerful than either console, how that translates in gfx most likely very similar but fps wise higher. it's not like you can ask a PC to render something and it look totally different the main difference now is resolution and fps, i have doubts about how many top end console games will have 4k60 it's most likely going to be much more common to have 4k30 still with a lot better looking games gfx wise.
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
I'm not sold on Nvidia's supposed performance gains yet. They are once again failing to disclose exactly what their up to 30% or whatever it was means. DLSS? RTX? it could be anything. Just like the time they claimed the 980 was 30% faster than the 780Ti. It wasn't.
Right now you need at least a 2070 Super for any kind of 4k. Let alone 4k 60 and RTX. In fact, even the 2080Ti can struggle at 4k RTX even using DLSS. I have no doubt their new cards will be much faster at ray tracing, but tbh? they need to be because as I said right now it's pretty crippling. And even if they are waaaay faster at ray tracing what good is that with the three or so games we have to play?
So they are going to release cards that are much faster than what we have now. Why? so we can run non RTX games at 300FPS? My time with the 2080Ti has taught me that it absolutely mangles absolutely everything but 4k max RTX. And like I said, there are all of three or so games worth having RTX for.
How Nvidia have gotten away with their crap for so long is quite amazing. The amount of rubbish they have concocted (3d vision, the buy out of Physx) which they then use as a sales model and it amounts to..... Nothing.
So it's kinda funny that they are going to be pushing RT *really hard* in a couple of week's time and for what? Quake RTX? maybe this year if we are lucky some Cyber Punk? what then?
Come Christmas it will be all about the new consoles. Nvidia will go back to the shadows selling their expensive bucket loads of BS and so on.
Am I jaded? awfully. Had I not got my new PC pretty much for free? I would have been first in line for one of these new consoles hands down.
And yeah, Cyberpunk will go to the consoles. Of course it will. Because there is too much money there to ignore. For years? the PC wasn't even worth releasing on. There just wasn't enough money in all of the publishing and production of DVDs and booklets and instructions to make it worth it. What was the point? people would only pay £25 for a PC game then. That has all changed now. Instead of buying half priced buggy rubbish we now pay the same or more than the console version, buggy rubbish and all. Over the past year I bought two games I could not even play they were that broken.
We are being held back by the consoles. There is absolutely and utterly no doubt at all. When the new consoles launch we will see the new dev cycle in about two years. Because as we established, no one is brave enough to make a game that will only run on a PC and hope the kiddies buy it. Especially if it's a meaty game that isn't suitable for kids.
Hopefully Sony will loosen their grip. They are stupid, because again they are turning down money. Even Microsoft realised this.
Everybody's Gone To The Rapture was the most beautiful, original and brilliantly crafted game I played this year on PC. I was very late to the party, because it totally whooshed over my head because it was a Sony exclusive and at that time I did not even have a PS, so I didn't even know it existed. Which is what happens when you lock something down to one format. Any one who doesn't own that format will go "Oh well, let's forget that one then!" and they will lose tons of cash.
With Death Stranding? TBH? I don't think they had a choice. The guy who made it spunked so much money they had to make it available on more platforms.
Not bought that yet either. I am not paying £50+ for a game on PC. The last and only full priced PC game I bought at launch was HL Alyx.
Right now you need at least a 2070 Super for any kind of 4k. Let alone 4k 60 and RTX. In fact, even the 2080Ti can struggle at 4k RTX even using DLSS. I have no doubt their new cards will be much faster at ray tracing, but tbh? they need to be because as I said right now it's pretty crippling. And even if they are waaaay faster at ray tracing what good is that with the three or so games we have to play?
So they are going to release cards that are much faster than what we have now. Why? so we can run non RTX games at 300FPS? My time with the 2080Ti has taught me that it absolutely mangles absolutely everything but 4k max RTX. And like I said, there are all of three or so games worth having RTX for.
How Nvidia have gotten away with their crap for so long is quite amazing. The amount of rubbish they have concocted (3d vision, the buy out of Physx) which they then use as a sales model and it amounts to..... Nothing.
So it's kinda funny that they are going to be pushing RT *really hard* in a couple of week's time and for what? Quake RTX? maybe this year if we are lucky some Cyber Punk? what then?
Come Christmas it will be all about the new consoles. Nvidia will go back to the shadows selling their expensive bucket loads of BS and so on.
Am I jaded? awfully. Had I not got my new PC pretty much for free? I would have been first in line for one of these new consoles hands down.
And yeah, Cyberpunk will go to the consoles. Of course it will. Because there is too much money there to ignore. For years? the PC wasn't even worth releasing on. There just wasn't enough money in all of the publishing and production of DVDs and booklets and instructions to make it worth it. What was the point? people would only pay £25 for a PC game then. That has all changed now. Instead of buying half priced buggy rubbish we now pay the same or more than the console version, buggy rubbish and all. Over the past year I bought two games I could not even play they were that broken.
We are being held back by the consoles. There is absolutely and utterly no doubt at all. When the new consoles launch we will see the new dev cycle in about two years. Because as we established, no one is brave enough to make a game that will only run on a PC and hope the kiddies buy it. Especially if it's a meaty game that isn't suitable for kids.
Hopefully Sony will loosen their grip. They are stupid, because again they are turning down money. Even Microsoft realised this.
Everybody's Gone To The Rapture was the most beautiful, original and brilliantly crafted game I played this year on PC. I was very late to the party, because it totally whooshed over my head because it was a Sony exclusive and at that time I did not even have a PS, so I didn't even know it existed. Which is what happens when you lock something down to one format. Any one who doesn't own that format will go "Oh well, let's forget that one then!" and they will lose tons of cash.
With Death Stranding? TBH? I don't think they had a choice. The guy who made it spunked so much money they had to make it available on more platforms.
Not bought that yet either. I am not paying £50+ for a game on PC. The last and only full priced PC game I bought at launch was HL Alyx.
KingNosser
Well-known member
Last big game I played was Doom Eternal loved it to bits, and while all points are valid the way i see it is, yes consoles hold back graphics but so many developers are working on engines and tools and learning new things and pushing the limits of what they can, that by the time the hardware catches up we have 2 years of massive performance gains. Then they go back to creating and learning and such.
tech isn't something created quickly software wise it can take many many years so i try not to purely blame one side or the other PC's and consoles work together more than apart the VS debate is old and it will always be there, but consoles are not bad by any means and sure PC's cost more but the results we get to play are the important thing.
I really really want amd to blow it out of the water but i feel they will only just catch up and if they do just that I will go rdna2 cause i don't like nvidia atm same kind of reasons as yourself, nvidia know this as they asked me for details in a massive question session so I made sure to tell them
Raytracing performance like it or not is the current future and it'll be far more widely used now due to the consoles RTX is just nvidias buzzword end of the day it's DXR or DXR ultimate it don't matter what they call it but perfromance on that front is a big need but it's not like we haven't had new ways of doing things before give it 5 years and some new tool will come out to cripple cards.
tech isn't something created quickly software wise it can take many many years so i try not to purely blame one side or the other PC's and consoles work together more than apart the VS debate is old and it will always be there, but consoles are not bad by any means and sure PC's cost more but the results we get to play are the important thing.
I really really want amd to blow it out of the water but i feel they will only just catch up and if they do just that I will go rdna2 cause i don't like nvidia atm same kind of reasons as yourself, nvidia know this as they asked me for details in a massive question session so I made sure to tell them
Raytracing performance like it or not is the current future and it'll be far more widely used now due to the consoles RTX is just nvidias buzzword end of the day it's DXR or DXR ultimate it don't matter what they call it but perfromance on that front is a big need but it's not like we haven't had new ways of doing things before give it 5 years and some new tool will come out to cripple cards.
Last edited:
I think RT will not be the future at all. Life works in cycles. To me, we have returned back to the Frames race and having the highest FPS is king. Why else would we be releasing pointless refresh rates on monitors?
GPUs will then adapt to this pushing all games to high frames of smoothness. Devs will take advantage, and we can use Doom Eternal as an example. Once we hit these targets it will be back to mainstream 200hz but this time at 4k, 240hz at 1440p, 300hz at 1440p...
Then its going to be Raytracing or similar once again. When that performance starts to catch up, we start on the HDR1000 mainstream, or maybe back to the frames. I dont think we ever see all of these pushed together in unison. Asus tried it with the pg35vq but its not gone down well. I finally got to see the monitor in person, and there are so many limitations its not worth it.
At least with a console and its unified optimised environment, they can push all features, but just slowly. 4k at 60hz? whoopdy doo... I left 60hz refresh behind back in 2010. Also couldnt give a damn about 4k, I'd take smoothness over resolution any day of the week.
GPUs will then adapt to this pushing all games to high frames of smoothness. Devs will take advantage, and we can use Doom Eternal as an example. Once we hit these targets it will be back to mainstream 200hz but this time at 4k, 240hz at 1440p, 300hz at 1440p...
Then its going to be Raytracing or similar once again. When that performance starts to catch up, we start on the HDR1000 mainstream, or maybe back to the frames. I dont think we ever see all of these pushed together in unison. Asus tried it with the pg35vq but its not gone down well. I finally got to see the monitor in person, and there are so many limitations its not worth it.
At least with a console and its unified optimised environment, they can push all features, but just slowly. 4k at 60hz? whoopdy doo... I left 60hz refresh behind back in 2010. Also couldnt give a damn about 4k, I'd take smoothness over resolution any day of the week.
Last edited:
VladyCzech
New member
Gamers
Gamers will buy Playstation 5 anyway for better games. Who cares about Xbox and mediocre games from MS Xbox Studios?
Gamers will buy Playstation 5 anyway for better games. Who cares about Xbox and mediocre games from MS Xbox Studios?
Similar threads
