[Megathread] XboxOne Project Scorpio

Deleted · 2016-06-15, 08:19 AM

That kind of jump deserves to be called next gen, now they will have to hold back because of original X one, and promise of putting games on both systems and no exclusives to scorpio.

**Bristae** · 2016-06-15, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Sydänyö

Why is it called Scorpio. Why not Two.

You've got your Xbox...or Xbox 1...or "first Xbox"...then you should get your Xbox 2, but no, you get Xbox 3...60. Which is like, the same Xbox if you think about it; 360 degrees is a full circle. Oh well... So, then you might get an Xbox 720, cos, you know, 2 x 360 is 720 or something. But instead, you get Xbox One. So, well, the third Xbox is "One", the second Xbox is "Three...sixty", the first Xbox is just Xbox, and now the fourth is SCORCHIOO...Scorpiooo!

Screw you Microsoft.

It is a code name.... The original Kinect was called "Project Natal".. The Xbox One was "Project Durango" Don't stress out, when it is officially revealed it will have it's final name

**Tech614** · 2016-06-15, 05:55 PM

I was wondering where the OP got the whole MS claiming 60 fps in every game bologna from because I never heard it but went along and took his word for it.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/spenc...-4k-tv/0168577

If a game is 30 fps on the Xbox One it's not going to be 60 fps on the Scorpio as evidence by these very comments. Only games that are already 60 fps will.

He flat out says you're going to not get much benefit out of a scorpio if you're still using a 1080p display, which means settings are not going to be better, fps is not going to be higher. All that power is going to make the image native 4k or in the case of a very demanding game as close to 4k as it can get. Though I don't really think the specs they're talking about is going to have any issue running a Xbox One base settings game at native 4k.

**Torched** · 2016-06-15, 06:45 PM

Ye good luck with that native 4k/60fps if the price is under 800$, hell if it's under 1000$.

**Remilia** · 2016-06-15, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by Creepjack

Reviewed the forge video. There are 12 mem modules and we still don't know enough about Vega to really count out a variant of it which would work with "standard" mem. I'm siding with DigitalForge on this one:
- variant of Vega
- 12gb mem
- close to zero chances for Zen tech
- new tech for "upscaling graphics" to 4k

Unless the hardware included in the promo video was just a ruse...

Cause a 3D render mockup with no actual chip is as useful as... a 3D render mockup.

12 chip is either 6 or 12 GB RAM. Issue with that is compatibility between the two is even worse then. They can make it so it can't run on the Xbone but can on the Scorpio just due to memory configuration (see New 3DS exclusive games). 12 chips = 384bit for 320GB/s bandwidth is 6.666 (etc etc etc) Gbs. Now aside from the awkward number, I don't know where any configuration of that is.

Again, if you don't know that Vega is HBM, then you really haven't been paying attention for the past half a year to GPU tech... There is no reason to redesign a microarchitecture just to replace the HBM memory controller when you can use an existing one with the right memory controller and power asked. Not to also mention we know nothing about Vega performance wise and we know the general baseline of Polaris. If Vega is 6 TFLOP performance, then that's just fail for a smaller chip that can reach it already.
And yes, Polaris can reach 6 TFLOPs at 1300MHz theoretical which for a 14nm FinFET is completely feasible.
We know that 320GB/s 8 chip GDDR5X@10Gbps. There is lowest capacity for GDDR5X is 8Gbit. This is the easiest and most feasible answer to the bandwidth. There is no reason to go for a more complex expensive way just to reach 320GB/s bandwidth. The other way is GDDR5/DDR3+eSRAM which is completely fine especially for backwards compatibility. In fact it's more than likely better just for the sake of backwards compatibility.

Upscaling to _____ resolution is no new tech.

Deleted · 2016-06-15, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by Remilia

Again, if you don't know that Vega is HBM, then you really haven't been paying attention for the past half a year to GPU tech...

Nope. But I've done my homework now - and well.. fuck :/.

I agree with your previous posts. But it does saddens me a little bit - hoped for an epic jump in perf/tech...

**Orangetai420** · 2016-06-15, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by McLovenIt

and if you take a look. You'd see that's exactly what these "consoles" have become. It's just a computer you plug into your TV.

Right - a mass produced and thus cheaper PC. Sure you can shop bargins and maybe piece together a comparable PC for the price but it wouldn't be easy and you would have to get lucky. (of course as a console gets older this gets easier).

**McLovenIt** · 2016-06-15, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by Orangetai420

Right - a mass produced and thus cheaper PC. Sure you can shop bargins and maybe piece together a comparable PC for the price but it wouldn't be easy and you would have to get lucky. (of course as a console gets older this gets easier).

building a PC to meet console standards wouldn't cost much at all if you know about hardware.

I think the huge difference for a lot of gamers is more the whole "mouse + keyboard, or controller?" type decision.

It's really not that expensive to maintain a high quality gaming PC when you build it yourself.

I myself used to play xbox a lot and rarely played PC, but I was a huge CS and Warcraft, than WoW player for years. so I finally decided to go back to complete PC. I am just so much better and so much more comfortable sitting in front of a keyboard and mouse, just feel like I have a significant amount of control compared to joysticks and triggers.

**grandpab** · 2016-06-15, 11:19 PM

What I don't get is now they're saying unless you have a 4k tv there's no reason to buy scorpion. If you have a 1080 tv the picture will look the same and the performance will be no different than the xbox one or xbox one s. I was actually warming up to the idea of upgrading too, but I guess there's no point to it now.

I have a hard time imagining that scorpio won't perform better on some games at some parts though. I can't really think of a good example, but I know Just Cause 3 runs like trash on consoles when there's a lot of explosions going on, so I would expect the game would run better on scorpio, but they'll still both be locked at 30 fps. I'm not sure JC3 was the best example since the poor performance could just be a port issue, but you get what I mean.

There's no reason for any game on scorpio to run at anything less than 1080. Speaking of JC3 that game also runs at 900p on XB1, so I just hope they don't start holding back scorpio because devs are still making games at 900p or lower on XB1. That might be inevitable though. Also no more reason to use dynamic resolution scaling I hope.

I'm really looking for a reason to upgrade, but if there's no difference without a 4k tv I don't get it. It makes me want to see what sony says about neo though. I just wonder if they'll do things differently.

**Rennadrel** · 2016-06-15, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by Remilia

Just a note @Jtbrig7390
cause lazy quote is not in me.

Console and PC differs from one thing, and it always has. It's a set hardware. What it means is that they can program to bare metal which means efficient use of hardware. You can quote pc and console being the same architecture but that doesn't matter cause it's always the software that matters. Saying console has the same hardware as pc is pointless because consoles have always been a 'pc', hell it's called Famicom for a reason. The requirements of a console has been the same as pc since inception. Cpu, gpu (ignore old old ones), memory, bios, etc. It's something that I wish people would drop because it's dumb.

What has always matter is software and PC is extremely inefficient at utilizing hardware. A console can program bare metal because it is one set of hardware. Having two sets of hardware compatible however means you either A. Have very similar hardware, architecture, including cache, latency, RAM, etc, or you add a layer of abstraction which allows for better compatibility but less efficient use of hardware.

I think that is an excuse more than anything. There are two GPU manufacturers and really, only one good gaming CPU manufacturer, optimizing games for even 4 (Intel/AMD, Intel/Nvidia, AMD/Nvidia and AMD/AMD and the first two are probably the most common options) combinations of hardware would not be all that inconvenient, developers are just too damn lazy to do it. And the Xbone at it's current, can't even do 1080p 60 FPS. In order to do 4K or VR, it would need a HUGE hardware boost. That AMD Jaguar processor just isn't fast enough due to the slow clock speed, 1.7 Ghz is not fast enough, the GPU needs to not only be faster, but have about 2-3 times as much VRAM dedicated to it in order to do VR or 4K properly. I just don't see it being feasible without the system being very expensive, and Microsoft will have to take a loss on it in order to produce it.

**Orangetai420** · 2016-06-15, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by McLovenIt

I think the huge difference for a lot of gamers is more the whole "mouse + keyboard, or controller?" type decision.

It's really not that expensive to maintain a high quality gaming PC when you build it yourself.

I myself used to play xbox a lot and rarely played PC, but I was a huge CS and Warcraft, than WoW player for years. so I finally decided to go back to complete PC. I am just so much better and so much more comfortable sitting in front of a keyboard and mouse, just feel like I have a significant amount of control compared to joysticks and triggers.

You make very good points. I was an avid PC gamer and I agree that the control is unrivaled - I just got sick of the strain on my wrists and cramped legs. It is really nice to kick back on the couch and play some D3 or whatever. If I took gaming really seriously I would be PC all the way, in recent years I've taken a more casual approach so I pick the casual platform.

**Tech614** · 2016-06-16, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by grandpab

What I don't get is now they're saying unless you have a 4k tv there's no reason to buy scorpion. If you have a 1080 tv the picture will look the same and the performance will be no different than the xbox one or xbox one s. I was actually warming up to the idea of upgrading too, but I guess there's no point to it now.

I have a hard time imagining that scorpio won't perform better on some games at some parts though. I can't really think of a good example, but I know Just Cause 3 runs like trash on consoles when there's a lot of explosions going on, so I would expect the game would run better on scorpio, but they'll still both be locked at 30 fps. I'm not sure JC3 was the best example since the poor performance could just be a port issue, but you get what I mean.

There's no reason for any game on scorpio to run at anything less than 1080. Speaking of JC3 that game also runs at 900p on XB1, so I just hope they don't start holding back scorpio because devs are still making games at 900p or lower on XB1. That might be inevitable though. Also no more reason to use dynamic resolution scaling I hope.

I'm really looking for a reason to upgrade, but if there's no difference without a 4k tv I don't get it. It makes me want to see what sony says about neo though. I just wonder if they'll do things differently.

The thing is with them wanting full backwards and forward compatibility accomplishing that while trying to do more then boost the resolution is foolish and would be a nightmare for developers.

Most of us thought the same about Neo as well, resolution increase in games to make them look cleaner on 4k displays.

Could a game with dips below 30 fps be more stable on the scorpio? This is possible, but if a game is ever dipping below 30 fps constantly the developer is trash plain and simple. Will a game that targets 30 fps be 60 fps on scorpio or neo? Not a chance in hell.

**Remilia** · 2016-06-16, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by Rennadrel

I think that is an excuse more than anything. There are two GPU manufacturers and really, only one good gaming CPU manufacturer, optimizing games for even 4 (Intel/AMD, Intel/Nvidia, AMD/Nvidia and AMD/AMD and the first two are probably the most common options) combinations of hardware would not be all that inconvenient, developers are just too damn lazy to do it. And the Xbone at it's current, can't even do 1080p 60 FPS. In order to do 4K or VR, it would need a HUGE hardware boost. That AMD Jaguar processor just isn't fast enough due to the slow clock speed, 1.7 Ghz is not fast enough, the GPU needs to not only be faster, but have about 2-3 times as much VRAM dedicated to it in order to do VR or 4K properly. I just don't see it being feasible without the system being very expensive, and Microsoft will have to take a loss on it in order to produce it.

You don't optimize for one company, that's not how it works and for some reason it feels more like a common misconception now. I've heard it enough time that I've got to wonder if it's a group effort or willful ignorance. Let's take early Witcher 3. It's a heavily Nvidia optimized game cause of some gameworks stuff, however... when you take off gameworks stuff, Kepler cards were in the toilet relative to their counterparts (from both Nvidia and AMD). So what happened, Maxwell is running fine, it's optimized specifically Nvidia though, so it should clearly run fine on Kepler, but no it doesn't. You CAN'T optimize for one company and expect it to work for all.

Kepler vs Maxwell. For example, a Kepler SM has 192CC per, and Maxwell has 128CC per. That also means the shared resource between each SM is different, thus performance is different. That also means that handling a wavefront of graphics command is going to be different. For GCN it's 64SP per CU, so optimally you would send a wavefront of 64 width, so every SP gets populated and kept at work at the optimum level. For Nvidia, you have GM107, 206, 204, 200, GP104, GK110, 104, etc, all with different specifications and some cut down due to defects or just reasons. Then you have Pitcairn, Hawaii, Tahiti, Fiji etc, etc XT/Pro for each (full / cutdown) and then in particular for Fiji you have a completely different memory set up with HBM. Kepler and below has been dropped as legacy for a long time actually. VLIW and below have been dropped as legacy also. So, if I was a game developer for a high profile game, would I go through the time to optimize for every potential hardware set up? Fuck no. That's time consuming and extremely pointless.

And seeing as how you're using clock speed as a measure of speed I imagine you don't really know how much architecture makes a difference...

**aevitas** · 2016-06-16, 01:20 AM

I really don't care if Scorpio is able to run 4k at 60 fps.

However, I want to know if it will downsample to 1080p or even 1440p if I use such a monitor.

Because if it downsamples to 3440x1440 (resolution on my monitor) I will buy this box day one. I however am getting the impression you either display 4k or regular 1080p, as Phil Spencer said it will "just be a regular Xbox One without a 4k TV).

How likely is it they will actually pull that off? Why would they NOT want it to downsample? Is it because it's additional work for DEVs? If I'm right, MS could achieve this by simply putting it in the video options of the Scorpio..

Incase some people don't know, this is downsampling.

If they drop the ball on this and basically go "scorpio is the future IF you buy a 4k monitor/TV" then I may have to consider what Neo offers..

----

On the flip side just to join this discussion, I'm really seeing Scorpio the Xbox One way. 1080p 60 fps yada yada, eventually runs most games at 720 or 900p and sometimes even at 30 fps. I can see the same happen to Scorpio really..

**Slaughty8** · 2016-06-16, 01:57 AM

Yeah, this whole "What I don't get is now they're saying unless you have a 4k tv there's no reason to buy scorpion. If you have a 1080 tv the picture will look the same and the performance will be no different than the xbox one or xbox one s. I was actually warming up to the idea of upgrading too, but I guess there's no point to it now." info totally throwed out of the window the idea of buying Xbox Scorpio. They just ruined themselves, I bet PS Neo will have downscaling and again win the market. Huge shame. I mean, really Microsoft...all that money and you can't simple make it work in 1080...
If Scorpio doesn't run 60fps @ 1080 I will not buy it. I don't care about 4k.

So...probably PlayStation wins again.

**Edge-** · 2016-06-16, 02:41 AM

So, the more I'm hearing Microsoft talk about it...the Scorpio is just so games can run natively at 4K? Or at least that's their goal for it? Their goals I'm hearing in interviews seem confusing and kinda pointless, similar to that totally rad dude that's running quad-SLI Titans because epeen and stuff.

**Slaughty8** · 2016-06-16, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Edge-

So, the more I'm hearing Microsoft talk about it...the Scorpio is just so games can run natively at 4K? Or at least that's their goal for it? Their goals I'm hearing in interviews seem confusing and kinda pointless, similar to that totally rad dude that's running quad-SLI Titans because epeen and stuff.

Exactly. Add to that "no Scorpio exclusives" information, which is also shocking and disappointing. Also, it feels like forcing console users to buy 4K TVs to speed up the market of these, because many people (including myself) still prefer to stay with 1080p TVs.
They should really make Scorpio a NextGen instead of "premium Xbox One version for 4k", especially because of the 4.5 times better performance.

Now I honestly hope for Sony to say "PS Neo has 4k and 1080p full power gaming + some exclusives" and we can celebrate again

I think M$ should fire alot of it's decisive people, as they clearly lack vision and proper planning.

**Edge-** · 2016-06-16, 03:48 AM