-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
XBox Series S & Xbox Series X Official Specs Comparison
- Thread starter RexNovis
- Start date
How do we not end up in a situation in a few years where games display much of the graphics of the series X, but struggle to maintain 30 fps in places.
But yeah, it could mean a return to the 4-year console cycle.
But yeah, it could mean a return to the 4-year console cycle.
Been saying this aswell. If they had the same storage size the S would be a steal but as is? Hell nah.
i meant in terms of raw tflops and bandwidth, and what that means for 1440p gaming since the PS4 pro is basically a 1440p current gen console. this is supposed to be a next gen 1440p console which is why 226 gbps might be enough.
That RAM speed looks pretty bad at first glance, I would have thought they'd match the speed of the XSX slow pool of RAM at the very least.
But it's worth remembering that the PS4 Pro usually targeted the same resolution and has slower RAM while also not having any of the new technologies of the XSS, as well as the fact that 336GB/S for CPU things was crazy fast anyway.
I'm sure that the Xbox engineers know much more than you or I know about game design and how to make things more scalable
But it's worth remembering that the PS4 Pro usually targeted the same resolution and has slower RAM while also not having any of the new technologies of the XSS, as well as the fact that 336GB/S for CPU things was crazy fast anyway.
I'm sure that the Xbox engineers know much more than you or I know about game design and how to make things more scalable
They said in the development of the machine they made sure bringing games down from X was as easy as possible. MS did a ton of R&D in regards to making things more efficient for devs, I doubt they fucked up here. Everything was meticulous designed and tested.
No.
This has been popping up in my head recently, and it doesn't get much attention. While the Series S is a fantastic price, it further solidifies the fact that the Series X and probably PS5 are making 4K a requirement rather than a suggestion. I know things have more or less pointed toward this for some time, but they pushed 1080p as a selling point all the way back to the 360/PS3 era and definitely didn't always hold themselves to it when graphical capabilities couldn't be met at that resolution (which was a good thing). But the Series S mere existence means that the more expensive machines are for 4K through and through, which means that other graphical advancements are essentially hamstrung. Luckily there are other great technologies like VRS and DLSS that will allow for cheaper ray tracing and other important enhancements like those shown in the UE5 demo.
But yeah, I just find it hard to come to terms with; 4K is a massive resolution jump that I personally don't care about, and it comes at a huge cost to other things that I do care about. 1440p upscaled with different methods should have been the standard for next gen, imo. I guess it just doesn't have the same ring to it. But what the hell do I know about this stuff.
Last edited:
The Era thing to do is wait for Digital Foundry to post their video, THEN we start to worry.
Good compromises. I can't wait to see how the performance scales from the X to the S. I'm going to assume linearly because otherwise they'd be saying more than just resolution differences.
Can not help to be curious if this will take more than a resolution sacrifice to run series X games . Then again if its slight differences like shadows from high to medium settings or something like that I don't people will really care. Feels like it will come down to can the game run Series X games at pretty much the same frame rate and perform similar .
Honestly not been paying attention lol. This pretty much confirms PS5 price as well as they will never go above what MS picked for their console.
Uh that's a much bigger change in ram speeds, and the CPU is a little slower than XSX? Why? I Would think that could easily stay the same and not shave any costs off.
have they confirmed how much ram is used by OS? Isn't it 2.5 or 3GB for XSX? So 7-7.5GBs for games in XSS? I am no expert by any means, and I don't want to upset anyone, but I really wish XSX was the base model. $499 and price reductions over time to $399 then $299 just like Xbox One would've been great.
I'm happy they have this option tho no disc drive kills it for me since Xbox has such good BC and I've got a lot of discs. I'll wait until XSX hits $400 or less in 2022-23
have they confirmed how much ram is used by OS? Isn't it 2.5 or 3GB for XSX? So 7-7.5GBs for games in XSS? I am no expert by any means, and I don't want to upset anyone, but I really wish XSX was the base model. $499 and price reductions over time to $399 then $299 just like Xbox One would've been great.
I'm happy they have this option tho no disc drive kills it for me since Xbox has such good BC and I've got a lot of discs. I'll wait until XSX hits $400 or less in 2022-23
You can't compare raw flops between the different architecture though.
its 10GB total
8GB for games
2GB for OS
Windows 10 already has insane boot times on current hardware with SSD's. 56GB/s will be easily enough for the system at 2GB since its not running as much as windows.
Someone explain like I'm 5 why the ''low RAM''(I don't know if there is a official name for this) between consoles have such difference in speed?
I'll raise my eyebrows about the ram speed but I get that it will be smaller textures etc but still interesting none the less. This is a little lower than I expected but should hopefully be fine. Just could be interesting in a few years though when series X and PS5 start pushing better graphics and lower resolution than 4k.
Storage capacity and optical drive is what I take it as- especially because they're pushing that it has ray tracing and variable rate shading etc.
In this video, they specifically say resolution will be the only difference, as the Series X is design for native 4K and the S 1440P.
Just wait until early November, there's going to be tens of hours of content of Digital Foundry scouring over every visible pixel on all consoles for comparisons. What you read here is all speculation, mostly if not all from people who have zero clue themselves.
Yep, this. Series S is cheap and good for now but Series X is the much better buy if you really want an xbox console.
It will be interesting. It even has a hardware upscaler while the Pro had the checkerboard acceleration. I just wonder what will make for the 'next-gen' push, the architectural gains of the GPU? the SSD? the CPU? Probably all those. I hope it delivers good as it will be the next-gen baseline.
imagine the PS5 be 499 and DIGITAL 399. Only 100 bucks difference but more than double the power. Probably wont be 399 though...
Your own post shows that is not what was said?According to Microsoft that's the only difference between the 2 consoles.
"The primary difference between Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S is in resolution."
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21866059/XboxSeriesS_HERO.jpg)
Microsoft reveals Xbox Series S specs, promises four times the processing power of Xbox One
The Xbox Series S has a different GPU than the Series Xwww.theverge.com
to sum up:
Ram speed is lower but that was expected. Above PS4 Pro but with lower expected render targets.
SSD speed is unchanged so the SSD here will feel like the PS5. Going to be quick AF.
CPU core speed reduced which by my rough math would mean devs just lose access to one core but that is assuming nothing is changing from the system overhead from XSX to XSS... but still an absolutely massive upgrade over this gen.
Ram speed is lower but that was expected. Above PS4 Pro but with lower expected render targets.
SSD speed is unchanged so the SSD here will feel like the PS5. Going to be quick AF.
CPU core speed reduced which by my rough math would mean devs just lose access to one core but that is assuming nothing is changing from the system overhead from XSX to XSS... but still an absolutely massive upgrade over this gen.
There is a chance for PS5/PC only releases that push actual graphics forward, since PS5 will have massive userbase, but yeah majority of titles will have to keep Series S in mind sadly...
😢
CPU and GPU speed that they come up with is probably already tested heavily to keep the heat in check. It's 60% smaller than the XSX after all.
I just wonder how much they limit on it. We already spent half the gen on xbox stuck in basically 900p hell.....I really do not want to go back to that just to get 120fps.
Although scaling techniques have improved by insane margins in the last 3-4 years.
Can't they just scale it down for the S? Like a medium setting on a PC game.
Yeah, they probably did a lot of clock tweaking with the system to get thermals in a place where they didn't need an expensive cooling solution. That small CPU clock speed loss might seem pointless on its own, but in conjunction with the rest of the system it will help bring down heat.
Oh for sure 226gbps will be enough.
The console only has a third of the GPU performance of XSX, but over a third of the bandwidth. It actually has a little leg room.
It also doesn't need as much VRAM due to the lower resolution frame-buffer and (no doubt) textures will automatically be scaled down to accommodate the lower memory (like they are in PC games at lower settings).
It's really a non-issue. But I'd think of this as a 1080p box rather than a 1440p box. Can't imagine the big next-gen AAAs hitting 1440p on this thing, but plenty of smaller titles.
But that's sort of the issue; the Series S has to run all games that the Series X can run throughout the whole generation. Like dmix90 said, Series S is essentially the baseline for next gen. The stark difference in power shows how much more it takes to hit 4K; 2/3rds of them Tflops for a little extra sharpness is not a very favorable way to spend all those resources, imo.
The entire point of the paired down specs is to run the games at lower resolutions. Series S won't hold Series X and PS5 back any more than the 3070 will hold the 3090 back. The Xbox engineers aren't dumb, a fuck load of R&D went into this, they know what they're doing.
I know $200 means alot to many people, but the value is much better in favor of a Series X in my opinion. Twice the storage, 3x the performance, ability to play disc based games and UHD discs. Even if you don't need a 4k capable console right now, that might not be the case in 2-3 years. If you hold onto the same console for an entire generation, then it might pay to be more forward thinking.
plus XSS ain't hitting 4K native or checkerboard and the system has it's own RAM pool
so relatively speaking, it's quite a bit faster than the PS4 Pro pool for intended content.
Not always.
For me that "not always" is enough to consider it as potential roadblock for creativity or image quality progress.
Will see how it goes i guess... nothing we can do about corporation market penetration plans and console itself is revealed already.
On PC you can choose your resolution/graphics settings though. It's not a fair comparison. And PC hardware requirements change; a PC that is fine at the beginning of a gen can be rendered more or less obselete by the end, requiring an upgrade. The same cannot be said for these consoles.
Yeah we'll see how much the S will drag down the X hardware...
Yeah, for how beefy these things seem to be microsoft has priced these really aggressively, good for us! I remember a lot of people saying there was no way it wasnt going to be 600 us dollars.
Logically the numbers would have been decided according to performance requirements. So typical 4k usage should scale down to those XSS figures.
Having said that, the memory bandwidth does look surprisingly low. My understanding was that ray tracing is largely dependent on bandwidth, so I wasn't expecting that type of difference with the XSS.
Having said that, the memory bandwidth does look surprisingly low. My understanding was that ray tracing is largely dependent on bandwidth, so I wasn't expecting that type of difference with the XSS.