Lockhart will almost definately be a 1080p console instead of 1440p. Most TVs are either 4K or 1080p, and I dont think 4 TFLOPs would be enough to sustain a 1440p res, if MS would target 1440p, a 6 TFLOPs console would make more sense
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Rumour: WindowsCentral - Inside the target specs of the next Xbox 'Project Scarlett,' 'Anaconda', and 'Lockhart'
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Lockhart in combination with Gamepass and Xcloud is going to be a holiday season sales monster.
Yup, I think 4TF with that CPU at 1080P would be more than enough to offer next gen games without a drop in quality....just resolution.
walriii314 Please stop with the double and triple posts, use the multi quote function.
On topic - I want an announcement soon, show me some games in action please!
On topic - I want an announcement soon, show me some games in action please!
From what people with insider knowledge are saying there will be an announcement VERY soon, so hoping for something early in January
DukeBlueBall
Can you tell me how rumoured Lockart's GPU will play with the scope of stuff like draw distance, LoDs for objects and shadows, shadow detail, AA, AF, SSAO, SSR when compared to the Anaconda/Scarlette? And would that not inherently affect the scope of a game to some degree?
Can you tell me how rumoured Lockart's GPU will play with the scope of stuff like draw distance, LoDs for objects and shadows, shadow detail, AA, AF, SSAO, SSR when compared to the Anaconda/Scarlette? And would that not inherently affect the scope of a game to some degree?
Yeah it really is.
Still I'd be lying if I said I wasn't really disappointed to hear it wasn't cancelled as I want the main focus for devs to be 100% maxing out Anaconda.
Now I'm confused. The way you describe it the Lockhart IS weaker tf wise?
Nevermind me, I'm going crazy here, don't mind me.
Last edited:
Isn't Lockhart rumored to be weaker than the XBox One X in terms of graphic card since it just aims for 1080p? That is the whole point of the argument.
Switch in docked mode right now is very close to the XBox One. It is like 3/4 of the power but newer architecture pushes them even closer. Plus the Switch revision that came out lately runs way cooler, so there is potential for even more right now. If Nintendo wanted the revision to increase power in docked mode, I would safely assume the original Xbox One and Switch output the same quality.
Right now, yes, but in 3-4 years? Since technology moves really fast right now and the Tegra is developed further mostly based on Switch, who knows. Switch currently is still based on Maxwell architecture and rather old CPU's (but who knows what is in the Light/Revision), a big jump is possible.
Maxwell was kind of an anomaly in recent years & i dunno if we will see that jump again, the GTX 970 was absolutely ridiculous for it's price & performance.
specs seem reasonable. it will be a good upgrade over current gen. it won't be eating PC for breakfast but i don't think anyone really thought it would. maybe low/mid range PCs that are out now but come this time next year the gap will be far wider.
i am really disappointed in the small amount of RAM. 16GB for me just doesn't cut it. again it'll be an improvement over current gen which is all that matters really but i had hoped they'd go a bit higher. oh well.
for me there's no reason to buy an Xbox. I already have what is essentially a next next gen Xbox.
i am really disappointed in the small amount of RAM. 16GB for me just doesn't cut it. again it'll be an improvement over current gen which is all that matters really but i had hoped they'd go a bit higher. oh well.
game pass is on PC. the library isn't bigger but it's still there.
for me there's no reason to buy an Xbox. I already have what is essentially a next next gen Xbox.
If you're going to make multiple responses in the same thread, within seconds of each other, combine them into a single post. This forum has a very useful quote feature.
Well, Tegra Orin, which is the newest Tegra after Xavier (currently only for cars) is rumored to have 7 TFLops. So potential is there, the question is if it can be used or if Nintendo wants to use it.
If the margins aren't in Nintendo's favor, I think it's safe to say they go for less.
Not that it matters too much in regards to this thread, but in what world? Doom switch on the latest patch has a res of 1080x720, targets 30 fps (and regularly drops below into the twenties), has reduced textures, cube maps instead of screen space reflections, lower quality ambient occlusion, and pulled in lighting. Xbox one (base) has a normal rendering res of 1472x828, targets 60 fps (dips into the 40s), and has higher quality textures, SSR, higher quality ambient occlusion than switch, and higher quality of lighting than switch.
The switch is mighty impressive for what it is, but it is not close to the performance of a base xbox one.
It's nowhere near 3/4. Only because the Switch can run the same games doesn't mean it's close. It's basically a generation of a difference and it shows when you look at the games. Doom, Wolfenstein and Witcher are the perfect examples. I don't think there's a chance a Switch successor is as powerful (or close to) as Lockhart. Although I would be all for it.
If someone doesn't care about the graphics and only has a 1080p TV, why should they have to buy the higher end machine to play the same games?
It's about giving options to the consumers.
All I wanted to say in the end is that the fact that Lockhart exists makes the gap between the new generation and a possible Switch successor way smaller, so it should be easier for third parties to develop for all platforms. This overall means more games for everyone, as it is easier adjustable.
Id be tepted to save a hundred on a 1080p ps5. The GPU in my gaming PC could push more but I don't bother. I like Graphics, but I'm more interested in effects and performance. After 1080p, I'd rather go for more/better anti-aliasing. It's cheaper on cycles and I don't like to spend a ton on gpus.
Why would you possibly need in excess of 16GB of RAM when the SSD is fast enough to stream stuff in and out of RAM at speeds that would be beyond the average gaming PC.
As for reasons to get an Xbox well if it launches at 499 there is no PC you could build that can beat it.
Hell the cheapest RT card is currently 350+ dollars....add a processor to feed it and you are already looking at close to 600 dollars.
For someone building a pure gaming system the Xbox next makes a shit ton of sense.
If by giving options you mean finding ways of selling more hardware so more people can sub to my Gamepass service, then yeah. It is a console less powerful (gpu) than the predecessor.
Im not complaining btw, just saying that they are all in with the Game Pass thing for next gen.
It's a two way thing. It always is in business.
Microsoft is giving more options to the consumer, to make the consumers happier. Happy consumers spend more money on their products, which is the entire goal of Microsoft.
Assuming that Switch 2 will again be hybrid, hardly, because Nintendo would again need to think about battery life and heating in portable mode,
best we can hope for Switch 2 is power of around of base PS4, realistically somewhere between Xbox One S and PS4.
NVME SSD's are a lot slower than GDDR6 memory. the SSD isn't going to be free RAM or anything.
no it will be much more powerful. Much better CPU plus a SSD.
That's not how this works. RAM access is at least an order of magnitude faster than SSD access.
Even the gpu difference is not nearly what the flop count suggest because of superior architecture.
I'd argue that due to Game Pass and Xcloud, Xbox is a better compliment to PC. My Xbox and gaming laptop are great together. Some games I prefer to play on the big screen. Others with m/k. All available under one subscription.
This is a good response and I really wish more posters would actually understand this before jumping to conclusions
This is one instance where 4 > 6
Even if a developer tried to intentionally fuck themselves making a game for Anaconda that doesnt scale down to Lockhart, someone will scale it down.
Lots of NPCs doing shit on screen is CPU heavy. Can always scale down the detail. I can't imagine a dev not having a 4K version of their games running on Anaconda. Even if it's just an option once turning off ray tracing, hair and cloth physics, etc. I think we're trying too hard to create this hypothetical situation that wont exist in either this timeline or the alternative reality where Lockhart got shelved.
RE:Gen 8 vs Gen 9 TF comparisions
Woudn't it be simple to start referring to them as 8.14 and 9.12 going forth so even if someone wanted to compare and mislead the prefix-gen number is larger and easy to grasp at a glance which is more powerful?
If you HAD to go into more detail you could always go the Intel Processor bar chart route.
Woudn't it be simple to start referring to them as 8.14 and 9.12 going forth so even if someone wanted to compare and mislead the prefix-gen number is larger and easy to grasp at a glance which is more powerful?
If you HAD to go into more detail you could always go the Intel Processor bar chart route.
I agree. What I observed this gen, is the more casual consumers tend to follow what the more hardcore audience say.
I think it was what made the power difference between the x1 and ps4 a bigger issue.
Most casual gamers would not know or really notice the difference between 720/900p and 1080p, however they see headlines of digital foundry comparison, and they take away from the article that the ps4 version was better, even though they probably don't understand why and even if they did they would not be bothered with the difference.
More Casual gamers will see the media about next gen and they will make a judgement by what they see and what the media says about next gen. If they found out ps5/Anaconda is only double the X1X tflops I think they will be more influenced by the surrounding media of the next gen consoles rather then there common sense logic of "more tflops = more power"
I would quite like it though if Sony or MS did a few slides about how next gen tflops are better then current gen tflops.
It's not logical to anyone who has ever played a game on PC. It's FUD pure and simple. RDR2 is possibly the best looking game on either system and it wasn't held back by having to run on an Xbox One.
Your argument makes no sense. RDR2 might very well be the best looking game on either system... but that's only because there is no PC exclusive game that has the same dev budget as RDR2, and targets high specs. If there was such a game, it would look better than a multiplatform game.
Last edited:
Of course it is. Just pay close attention to what users this bs originates from and then do the math.
When this imaginary game that only targets high specs PCs that you just made up to try to support your argument comes out then maybe you'll have a point. Looking at actual real life things that exist RDR2 is proof enough that lower specced consoles will not hold back the graphical capabilities of games since devs already know how to scale games to different hardware configurations.
I'll also point out the best looking game I've seen is MS Flight Simulator and it will be coming to consoles. Lockhart holding games back is just FUD.
Your argument basically boils down to "you can scale up/down anything". While that might be technically true, it's not always realistic. Let's try this:
- A massive open-world game that showcases extensive ray tracing effects and things like SVOGI, running at 1080p / 30 fps on PS5/Anaconda.
This is a very viable scenario (at least for PS5). Please explain how you would scale that down so that it can run on Lockhart (25-33% performance).
Last edited:
Not to mention that most Gamepass games run on older PCs. And even the more demanding games run on midclass PCs when scaled down. So an Xbox might not be necessary for a lot of people.
Yeah I don't think that's happening next gen unless it is in a very very niche case. Don't hold your breath.