Xbox Scarlett Will Use Zen 2 and AMD Next-Gen GPU Technology, Targeting 4K/60 FPS

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
Microsoft insider Brad Sams is reporting that Microsoft’s next Xbox console, codenamed “Scarlett,” will feature Zen 2 and AMD’s next-generation GPU technology. The hardware will purportedly be capable of running games in 4K at 60 FPS. If previous reports hold true, “Scarlett” will be joined by additional, weaker versions of the console that would run titles via the cloud.

All of this information has not been confirmed officially, so we have to take it with a grain of salt for the time being. If the console is indeed coming in 2020, we will finally hear more about it sometime next year, possibly at E3 2019; after all, Microsoft already announced the Xbox One X console a year and a half before it actually shipped.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
I don't see 4k at 60fps for most games happening on this.
They're excuse will be future titles will run at 4k/60fps, current ones will be stuck at
30fps, it takes dev's a while to lower the detail to hit that 60fps mark.
Really? So, you already know what the hardware is going to fully be and therefore, you did not pull this stuff out of your backside? ;):D Sorry but, consoles always can be optimized to reach a target. (No, not optimized as in reducing setting, either.)
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Really? So, you already know what the hardware is going to fully be and therefore, you did not pull this stuff out of your backside? ;):D Sorry but, consoles always can be optimized to reach a target. (No, not optimized as in reducing setting, either.)
There's such a thing as making shit up v. educated guess. The latter are based on past evidence and reasoning. Here's what led me to the conclusion:

-Consoles have a history of overselling their marketing. The Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One X were supposed to be capable of 4k gaming if you believe the marketing. They're generally not. They do checkerboarding, upsampling, and other tricks.

-AMD doesn't have a card NOW that can hit 4k @ 60fps. So basically, they're claiming this will be more powerful in the console than the fastest card they've produced for the PC. That would be surprising, since profit margins for them are lower on console than compared to the PC market. If they DO have that, they're losing money not having it now.

-Let's be generous and say they DO have a card that can deliver that kind of performance. The latest generations have shown us console makers don't put the biggest, baddest GPUs into their consoles due to cost, power consumption, and heat. So even if they CAN make something comparable to top of the line Nvidia cards today, it's unlikely they'll include that as an integrated GPU meant to sell wholesale with less demanding power requirements.

-AAA Games aren't moving backwards in terms of fidelity. The average consumer is still at 1080p, so that's the skew that devs will aim for. They're going to make that look as good as they possibly can, meaning they're unlikely to cut the consoles a break when it comes to designing games that can hit 60fps reliably at 4k because that's simply not their primary market. Games aren't going to be optimized for 4k at 60fps unless the average consumer is right on track to have those when they launch.

It's easy to pretend I'm just pulling this out of this out of my ass, but I'm saying we'll see more checkerboarding / upscaling at 4k or a framerate hit and you don't have to be Nostradamus to see that. But since that apparently makes me psychic in your eyes, I'll also say we're going to have another recession and there will be unrest in the Middle East while I'm at it.
 

Unoid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,049
There's such a thing as making shit up v. educated guess. The latter are based on past evidence and reasoning. Here's what led me to the conclusion:

-Consoles have a history of overselling their marketing. The Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One X were supposed to be capable of 4k gaming if you believe the marketing. They're generally not. They do checkerboarding, upsampling, and other tricks.

-AMD doesn't have a card NOW that can hit 4k @ 60fps. So basically, they're claiming this will be more powerful in the console than the fastest card they've produced for the PC. That would be surprising, since profit margins for them are lower on console than compared to the PC market. If they DO have that, they're losing money not having it now.

-Let's be generous and say they DO have a card that can deliver that kind of performance. The latest generations have shown us console makers don't put the biggest, baddest GPUs into their consoles due to cost, power consumption, and heat. So even if they CAN make something comparable to top of the line Nvidia cards today, it's unlikely they'll include that as an integrated GPU meant to sell wholesale with less demanding power requirements.

-AAA Games aren't moving backwards in terms of fidelity. The average consumer is still at 1080p, so that's the skew that devs will aim for. They're going to make that look as good as they possibly can, meaning they're unlikely to cut the consoles a break when it comes to designing games that can hit 60fps reliably at 4k because that's simply not their primary market. Games aren't going to be optimized for 4k at 60fps unless the average consumer is right on track to have.

It's easy to pretend I'm just pulling this out of this out of my ass, but I'm saying we'll see more checkerboarding / upscaling at 4k or a framerate hit and you don't have to be Nostradamus to see that. But since that apparently makes me psychic in your eyes, I'll also say we're going to have another recession and there will be unrest in the Middle East while I'm at it.
it'll be chiplet zen2, IO, + GPU, either modified navi style full chip or two smaller navi's using mGPU which console could easily optimize for.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
it'll be chiplet zen2, IO, + GPU, either modified navi style full chip or two smaller navi's using mGPU which console could easily optimize for.
Alright, I'll give you that, if they're going to have multiple GPUS, that would do it. I was assuming they were only going to have 1 GPU. Yes, that could happen with multiple GPUs in some sort of crossfire arrangement.
 

Nolan7689

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
1,669
-AMD doesn't have a card NOW that can hit 4k @ 60fps. So basically, they're claiming this will be more powerful in the console than the fastest card they've produced for the PC. That would be surprising, since profit margins for them are lower on console than compared to the PC market. If they DO have that, they're losing money not having it now.

-Let's be generous and say they DO have a card that can deliver that kind of performance. The latest generations have shown us console makers don't put the biggest, baddest GPUs into their consoles due to cost, power consumption, and heat. So even if they CAN make something comparable to top of the line Nvidia cards today, it's unlikely they'll include that as an integrated GPU meant to sell wholesale with less demanding power requirements.
.
I feel like you're assuming parity between PC and Console graphics. Consoles are always somewhat reduced which will help to hit that goal of 4K60, in addition to their much more optimized nature; hell look how far Sony stretched the Jaguar cores in the orginal PS4. With that in mind, the Vega 64 can play games at 4K, some of them at maxed settings and 60FPS, others with lower settings to become playable. But it's a hot power hog obviously. Hence Navi, and looking at the recent leaks Navi's top end is targeting Vega 64+15% performance but with a much lower TDP, and hopefully cooler.

All that said, I agree with you. It's no different from the PS3s 1080p60 claims back in the day. Sure it was possible, but the vast majority of games on the system targeted lower resolutions/framerates in order to keep the eyecandy turned up higher. And it won't be any different with this next round of consoles.
 

Shadowed

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
505
-AMD doesn't have a card NOW that can hit 4k @ 60fps. So basically, they're claiming this will be more powerful in the console than the fastest card they've produced for the PC. That would be surprising, since profit margins for them are lower on console than compared to the PC market. If they DO have that, they're losing money not having it now.

-Let's be generous and say they DO have a card that can deliver that kind of performance. The latest generations have shown us console makers don't put the biggest, baddest GPUs into their consoles due to cost, power consumption, and heat. So even if they CAN make something comparable to top of the line Nvidia cards today, it's unlikely they'll include that as an integrated GPU meant to sell wholesale with less demanding power requirements.

-AAA Games aren't moving backwards in terms of fidelity. The average consumer is still at 1080p, so that's the skew that devs will aim for. They're going to make that look as good as they possibly can, meaning they're unlikely to cut the consoles a break when it comes to designing games that can hit 60fps reliably at 4k because that's simply not their primary market. Games aren't going to be optimized for 4k at 60fps unless the average consumer is right on track to have those when they launch.

It's easy to pretend I'm just pulling this out of this out of my ass, but I'm saying we'll see more checkerboarding / upscaling at 4k or a framerate hit and you don't have to be Nostradamus to see that. But since that apparently makes me psychic in your eyes, I'll also say we're going to have another recession and there will be unrest in the Middle East while I'm at it.
We already have a couple games on Xbox One X and PS4 Pro at native 4k60; no checkerboarding. I game at 4k60 on a GTX 1070, and before that an R9 290. I recently got to try a Vega 64, and I
it is way faster (27%), but both cards have no problem maintaining 60fps. I would argue 4k60 is easily attainable and it is 4k144 that will be the next hurdle.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
There's such a thing as making shit up v. educated guess. The latter are based on past evidence and reasoning. Here's what led me to the conclusion:

-Consoles have a history of overselling their marketing. The Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One X were supposed to be capable of 4k gaming if you believe the marketing. They're generally not. They do checkerboarding, upsampling, and other tricks.

-AMD doesn't have a card NOW that can hit 4k @ 60fps. So basically, they're claiming this will be more powerful in the console than the fastest card they've produced for the PC. That would be surprising, since profit margins for them are lower on console than compared to the PC market. If they DO have that, they're losing money not having it now.

-Let's be generous and say they DO have a card that can deliver that kind of performance. The latest generations have shown us console makers don't put the biggest, baddest GPUs into their consoles due to cost, power consumption, and heat. So even if they CAN make something comparable to top of the line Nvidia cards today, it's unlikely they'll include that as an integrated GPU meant to sell wholesale with less demanding power requirements.

-AAA Games aren't moving backwards in terms of fidelity. The average consumer is still at 1080p, so that's the skew that devs will aim for. They're going to make that look as good as they possibly can, meaning they're unlikely to cut the consoles a break when it comes to designing games that can hit 60fps reliably at 4k because that's simply not their primary market. Games aren't going to be optimized for 4k at 60fps unless the average consumer is right on track to have those when they launch.

It's easy to pretend I'm just pulling this out of this out of my ass, but I'm saying we'll see more checkerboarding / upscaling at 4k or a framerate hit and you don't have to be Nostradamus to see that. But since that apparently makes me psychic in your eyes, I'll also say we're going to have another recession and there will be unrest in the Middle East while I'm at it.
The main problem with most of what you are saying there is that you are assuming PC = Console. The fact is, regardless of the underlying hardware, the console is faster than a PC with equivalent hardware, in no small measure. Therefore, most of what you are saying is being pulled out of your behind, in as far as consoles are regarded.
 

alamox

Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
596
i would prefere to have watch dog E3 2013 edition in 1080p@30fps rather than the released version of watch dog running in 4k@60fps.
if they keep down grading their 1080p@30 fps by changing the lighting, volumetric, shadows, renderers, details, to the point of having a blend game, maybe puting that sorry excuse of a game in 4k isn't that good, and surely puting those extra resources into keeping some of the jaw dropping effects would be better ?
maybe it's just me but i find this 4k argument fairly stupid.
i hope i had couple billion dollars to produce a game, i would treat you with a master piece game, sadly am no billionnaire :D
 

horrorshow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
7,772
Soooooo....

Pick up a 8c/16t Zen2 and I'll be set for another 9 years?? :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

RobCalleg

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 15, 2018
Messages
128
It’s smarter to get the consumer a console right away so they start paying 60/year for Online. (Plus micro transactions like 2 dollar shirts for your avatar, or renting movies etc etc)

I don’t predict prices of consoles go up in this mostly digital world.
 

Verge

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 27, 2001
Messages
6,610
lol run titles via the cloud.


Has Microsoft learned nothing about Sony completely destroying their buttholes this generation... this will end well.
 

shpankey

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
157
SSD or I'm out. I've abandoned consoles completely a year ago due to the insanely long loading times and slow ass menus... hell, slow everything, all due to shitty cheap 5400rpm ancient HDD's. Even phones have SSD's.

No more. I don't care how fast the gpu/cpu is, they keep bottlenecking the shit out of them with memory, both volatile (ram) and non-volatile (hdd).
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
lol run titles via the cloud.


Has Microsoft learned nothing about Sony completely destroying their buttholes this generation... this will end well.
Dude, there is going to be one unit available for Digital downloads only. Nothing wrong with having that as an option, although I would want a disk drive because I do have DVD and Bluray movies on disk.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,008
It’s smarter to get the consumer a console right away so they start paying 60/year for Online. (Plus micro transactions like 2 dollar shirts for your avatar, or renting movies etc etc)

I don’t predict prices of consoles go up in this mostly digital world.
Except that I have never paid more than about $40 a year and receive about 36 or so free games a year with it. (No, not crappy indie titles either.)
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
The main problem with most of what you are saying there is that you are assuming PC = Console. The fact is, regardless of the underlying hardware, the console is faster than a PC with equivalent hardware, in no small measure. Therefore, most of what you are saying is being pulled out of your behind, in as far as consoles are regarded.
We already have a couple games on Xbox One X and PS4 Pro at native 4k60; no checkerboarding. I game at 4k60 on a GTX 1070, and before that an R9 290. I recently got to try a Vega 64, and I
it is way faster (27%), but both cards have no problem maintaining 60fps. I would argue 4k60 is easily attainable and it is 4k144 that will be the next hurdle.
I feel like you're assuming parity between PC and Console graphics. Consoles are always somewhat reduced which will help to hit that goal of 4K60, in addition to their much more optimized nature; hell look how far Sony stretched the Jaguar cores in the orginal PS4. With that in mind, the Vega 64 can play games at 4K, some of them at maxed settings and 60FPS, others with lower settings to become playable. But it's a hot power hog obviously. Hence Navi, and looking at the recent leaks Navi's top end is targeting Vega 64+15% performance but with a much lower TDP, and hopefully cooler.

All that said, I agree with you. It's no different from the PS3s 1080p60 claims back in the day. Sure it was possible, but the vast majority of games on the system targeted lower resolutions/framerates in order to keep the eyecandy turned up higher. And it won't be any different with this next round of consoles.
I should have clarified more on the optimization. Yes, it will be a boost, but if that's not the industry standard, it won't matter. We're not talking about highly optimized top-end hardware, the power and heat requirements won't be there for that. We'll be talking about optimized midrange parts that can be mass produced with a smaller footprint and low profit margin. Here, let's look at the Xbox One X enhanced games:

https://www.gamesradar.com/every-xbox-one-x-enhanced-game-4k-hdr-framerates-and-features-explained/

Out of that list, let's exclude sports games like Madden (since yes, you can get a lot of power if you're just rendering a football field), and Microsoft exclusives, since those will get special treatment to show off the platform. Out of that list of a couple hundred titles, how many others are native 4k with full 60fps? I count 4:

Doom
Mantis Burn Racing
Path of Exile
Super Lucky's Tale

So yes, if the game is highly optimized, it will hit 4k at 60fps. And again, the next generation will be more powerful, but the games will also be more demanding too (emphasis added since I know some people will ignore that part). It's a treadmill. Now if Microsoft comes out and says they WILL NOT let games on its platform unless they can run 4k at 60fps, then yes, we'll see games like that. Anything less, and you're not going to see that as a standard. You'll see a handful of highly optimized games, everything else will either be at 1080, or 4k 30fps or some mix in between. As Nolan7689 pointed out, this is nothing new. This game has been going on for well over a decade. The fact that you think otherwise shows an incredible amount of faith in what AMD is cooking up to be able to handle anything the games industry can throw at it. It's naive.
 
Last edited:

Vader1975

Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
820
This isn't news the PS5 specs were announced before and thus the Xbox whatever would be a semi clone as we all know by this point.
 

WBurchnall

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
2,621
Sweet.
Really? So, you already know what the hardware is going to fully be and therefore, you did not pull this stuff out of your backside? Sorry but, consoles always can be optimized to reach a target. (No, not optimized as in reducing setting, either.)
Great. So can you optimize my ps1 to run at 1080p or my ps2 to run at 4k? Without reducing settings? No? Why not? The hardware isn't good enough?
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,268
Wow with new consoles dropping every 2-3 years rather than every 8-10...I'll just keep waiting....and waiting....


To be honest why Sony and MS just doesn't team up and just release one machine as a joint venture and be done with it.

PlayBox or XStation?
 
Top