What is the Series X GPU Relative to?

[Sound_Card]

Microsoft makes the 'driver', and it probably performs around a 6800 since it can get much closer to metal with custom dev kits.

 

[SJZL 2.0]

Microsoft makes the 'driver', and it probably performs around a 6800 since it can get much closer to metal with custom dev kits.

Huh? Never heard of that. Could you be able to elaborate on how dev kits can boost the hardware power of the Xbox Series X?

 

[Sound_Card]

Huh? Never heard of that. Could you be able to elaborate on how dev kits can boost the hardware power of the Xbox Series X?

There are less layers of software between the developers game engine and the silicon, vs something on PC. So it's a bit silly to count pixel pipes and shaders, then look at bandwidth and say ... it must compare to this PC graphics because they have similar specs. But even then ... it has more TMU's, and Shaders than the 6700XT, as well as way more bandwidth, so it's kind of strange in the first place that it's even being compared to a 6600XT. In reality in a closed system in the way 'Scarlett' is configured (xbox series x gpu), it can most likely hit the 6800 and maybe even fall in between a 6800 and XT.

 

[eidairaman1]

There are less layers of software between the developers game engine and the silicon, vs something on PC. So it's a bit silly to count pixel pipes and shaders, then look at bandwidth and say ... it must compare to this PC graphics because they have similar specs. But even then ... it has more TMU's, and Shaders than the 6700XT, as well as way more bandwidth, so it's kind of strange in the first place that it's even being compared to a 6600XT. In reality in a closed system in the way 'Scarlett' is configured (xbox series x gpu), it can most likely hit the 6800 and maybe even fall in between a 6800 and XT.

AMD Xbox Series X GPU Specs

AMD Scarlett, 1825 MHz, 3328 Cores, 208 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 1750 MHz, 320 bit

www.techpowerup.com

3328/208/64

It is a Unique Exclusive part for Microsoft.

You can't compare it to a 6800/XT either.

AMD Radeon RX 6800 Specs

AMD Navi 21, 2105 MHz, 3840 Cores, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

3840/240/96

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT Specs

AMD Navi 21, 2250 MHz, 4608 Cores, 288 TMUs, 128 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

4608/288/128

The PS5 GPU Oberon is just a 6700M (IGP) that has a slightly higher clock speed than a 6700, with a larger memory bus (256)(192)(160)

AMD Playstation 5 GPU Specs

AMD Oberon, 2233 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 1750 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

2304/144/64

AMD Radeon RX 6700 Specs

AMD Navi 22, 2450 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 160 bit

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Radeon RX 6700M Specs

AMD Navi 22, 2400 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 160 bit

www.techpowerup.com

 

[SJZL 2.0]

AMD Xbox Series X GPU Specs

AMD Scarlett, 1825 MHz, 3328 Cores, 208 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 1750 MHz, 320 bit

www.techpowerup.com

3328/208/64

It is a Unique Exclusive part for Microsoft.

You can't compare it to a 6800/XT either.

AMD Radeon RX 6800 Specs

AMD Navi 21, 2105 MHz, 3840 Cores, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

3840/240/96

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT Specs

AMD Navi 21, 2250 MHz, 4608 Cores, 288 TMUs, 128 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

4608/288/128

The PS5 GPU Oberon is just a 6700M (IGP) that has a slightly higher clock speed than a 6700, with a larger memory bus (256)(192)(160)

AMD Playstation 5 GPU Specs

AMD Oberon, 2233 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 1750 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

2304/144/64

AMD Radeon RX 6700 Specs

AMD Navi 22, 2450 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 160 bit

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Radeon RX 6700M Specs

AMD Navi 22, 2400 MHz, 2304 Cores, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 10240 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 160 bit

www.techpowerup.com

Isn't the Theoretical Performance much more reliable to take as a conclusion than the render config? I'm not that smart but I believe the Theoretical Performance is the final result and makes up for the conclusion for how a card can perform. Render config shows its materials instead I believe. Any corrections?

 

[Sound_Card]

Would be an interesting TPU review to read. 6600xt, 6700xt, 6800 vs Scarlett on the same games with a similar CPU. My money would be on 6800 like performance.

 

[eidairaman1]

Considering game devs suffer consolitis, the games are far more optimized on console and hardly touched for PC.

Physical hardware present is still present.

You would have to figure out a way to oc the XBO to make up for lack in hardware.

Sorry this is apple's to oranges comparison. It may be rdna2 but there is no apu/igp/gpu to compare scarlet to.

Would be an interesting TPU review to read. 6600xt, 6700xt, 6800 vs Scarlett on the same games with a similar CPU. My money would be on 6800 like performance.

Did you not read the links I provided?

Isn't the Theoretical Performance much more reliable to take as a conclusion than the render config? I'm not that smart but I believe the Theoretical Performance is the final result and makes up for the conclusion for how a card can perform. Render config shows its materials instead I believe. Any corrections?

Theoretical is up in the air, the physical hardware is proof that no the Scarlett is not a 6800 or 6800xt, it is a custom igp.

 

[Sound_Card]

Of course I have read them. I think you are misunderstanding. I'm not saying they are the same GPU or that they are apples to apples. In fact my point is inverse, because I'm saying that this apples to oranges difference is precisely the reason why Scarlett will perform better in a relative sense, hitting much closer to its peak rates of performance. Games can get down deeper to the silicon and do a lot more custom things with the GPU. As dev kits get more mature, it will become more apparent.

I also think devs do a pretty good job on PC ports in general today. There is a bad apple here and there but this is not 2005.

 

[SJZL 2.0]

Of course I have read them. I think you are misunderstanding. I'm not saying they are the same GPU or that they are apples to apples. In fact my point is inverse, because I'm saying that this apples to oranges difference is precisely the reason why Scarlett will perform better in a relative sense, hitting much closer to its peak rates of performance. Games can get down deeper to the silicon and do a lot more custom things with the GPU. As dev kits get more mature, it will become more apparent.

I also think devs do a pretty good job on PC ports in general today. There is a bad apple here and there but this is not 2005.

Series X playing MCBE Ray Tracing (Without Upscaling) (1080p) (8 Chunk) Hits about 56-60 Frames per second. A tad bit slower than 2080 Ti with same settings.

It has been tried on the Minecraft preview which is series x optimized and has RTX for these consoles. (It was there since yesterday morning).

NGL you are maybe correct.