Rumour: Xbox Lockhart Will Have The Same CPU Speed As Xbox Series X

This follows Digital Foundry's article conclusions which say that same CPU and fewer next-gen TFLOPS and less RAM makes possible that the mysterious console runs next-gen games at 1080p or 1440p., if Lockhart is a console and not the xCloud unit.

Maybe Microsoft sent some “hired goons” (yes, Simpson’s reference) to this guy’s house to......clear the air? 😂

But in all seriousness......this is good news, I guess. I will still be getting the Series X because I want the best console out there. This could be great for people not interested in moving up to 4k yet, though.

I think the most important thing is they have got proper CPUs this time round rather than the horrible ones used in xbo/PS4.

@GunValkyrie how so?

I'm buying one and will be happy with the savings.

A 1080p, £250-£300 machine is the kind of machine you can sell to families. It's the sort of console that would actually get me to consider buying one at launch.

Reveal it to be a hybrid console, and I'm definitely sold.

I still have a 1080p tv so I would be tempted to get lockhart if it came with a disc drive..

@Royalblues PS 5AD is as huge and as powerful as PS5. It just lacks the disc drive and the lateral hump.

@SuperNintendoMii The question is why is Microsoft making a next-generation console now? It’s clear that their first party developers won’t need additional power for another couple of years. I guess it’s that the advances in PC technology particularly the CPU and SSD allow them to deliver an enhanced experience on the generations of games they have available. Particularly consistently hitting 60 frames a second. The Xbox series X incredible GPU is to deliver that Enhanced experience at 4K.

Sony reason for needing A new generation was that their in-house developers were unable to achieve parts of their vision because of the slow data speeds of the hard disk in the PS4. It was preventing them from doing things like riding a flying robotic dinosaurs in horizon zero dawn. That’s why they have the big focus on the SSD as their feature and a focus on the new generation of games it will allow rather than how much better it will make the last generations of games on the new machine.

Lockhart comes into this because If the series X GPU performance is about providing an enhanced experience at 4K Rather than being needed for new games. Then a less powerful 1080p machine makes sense. But the existence of the less powerful machine makes it feel like a iterative progression rather than a generational shift.

@Ryall @SuperNintendoMii @GunValkyrie

Generations aren't as important as they use to be. We are seeing a diminishing return on graphical leaps. It's why the newer consoles getting more pc like and larger every gen. They are chasing a graphical standard beyond what the tech is really ready to do in the way it use to.

It's best to look at generations more in the audience sense. That is Sony and MS won't want the other to head a head start. Last time MS had a head start, Sony struggled to beat it, and a long with a bad reveal, it ended with launching their only sub 100 million unit console.

Ultimately what Sony will be trying to do is what they've done for 3 out of 4 of their console releases. Create huge amounts of hype, sell the most consoles, and corner the market for the next ten years and secure their financial future.

MS has tried this before but never to the same level of success Sony has. And I think that's why MS have taken a different tactic here. Rather than attempt to corner the market (and likely fail), they are going to try to slowly build their audience. Keep the 40 million current users, and give those that want a next gen system, a console to buy. I'm assuming they want both a mix of current xbox gamers, PS gamers, and casual gamers. That's why we seem to have inclusion of current gen systems, a higher end system, and a lower end system. Essentially, they are trying to provide a console for every type of gamer, rather than hoping to beat Sony at the next gen game outright.

When you think about it, not fighting Sony at its own game has worked out great for Nintendo.

And quite frankly, I think if you had MS and Nintendo offering cheap consoles, and left Sony to release an overpriced powerhouse, you'd probably get the most evenly split market share we've seen since the 7th gen.

@GunValkyrie I didn't saw anything on sony ps5 event that couldn't run on PS4.

Also, Microsoft didn't say Series X wouldn't have games of their own. They said that about first party developed only.

As they showed last xbox event, The medium is coming to Series X only, no Xbox One, as well as Scorn. Dirt 5 will be cross platform but will use all the power of Series X to bring a Next-gen experience with framerate up to 120fps.

There are lots of things to be excited about. And as far as I know cross-gen games never were hold back by inferior previous gen hardware. Just look at GTA V for PS3/360 and compare with PS4/Xbox One for example. Now imagine if you had bought GTA V on 360 and Once you bought xbox one you received the newer and improved version made to use all power of Xbox One for free.

This is what Microsoft is doing with Series X Cross-gen.

@Ryall personally, I think this gen had a bit more left to give. I'd rather the new consoles have been geared for winter 2021 than 2020. I'm not sure the generational leap in graphics is going to be as amazing a leap as we've had previously. Especially when we have 4k consoles out already. I'm sure the graphics will look awesome but when we can have the last of us 2 and Gears 5 look as amazing as they do on current consoles, how much more better can they get next gen?

But having two different consoles from Microsoft is an odd move. It's never been done before. It could end up being a masterstroke, but it does feel like we have series x as the uber powerful 60fps/4k juggernaut, and lockhart as xbox one.5. Series x will be future proofed, next to that lockhart will look outdated. But, we shall see if it sells to families...

@Richnj it has worked out great for Nintendo, but they are really an exception rather than the rule. Nintendo can put out low powered hardware and it will sell on the games alone. I don't think Microsoft or Sony could put out a new console that's an overclocked version of what they currently have and watch it fly off the shelves. They've always made classics, even on the Wii which a lot of people hate.

Only company that has ever been better than Nintendo imo is Sega, but creatively they never recovered from the Dreamcast.

@GunValkyrie I get that. It is kinda a problem that Microsoft games will also be coming to Xbox One so there won't be any first party exclusives, at least for a couple of years. It is a legitimate question that when the games are coming to a console you own already, what's the point in upgrading?

I suspect people will upgrade, but we shall see if Microsofts plan of same games across multiple consoles (and pc) was a stroke of genius or a mattrick style disaster.

Is Lockhart a digital-only console too?

@zane547 I hope so. While Series S wouldn't hold Series X back because the first games will also be available on Xbox One VCR and many of them on PC, I'd rather see Series X in the spotlight. If they can price it cheaper than PS5 they don't need any other console and let Xbox One X be the "weak" and "cheap" console until discontinued. That's what I would do.

Makes sense as the CPU will still need to do all the same calculations (like AI, Physics etc), draw calls etc as the Series X in the same amount of time - what ever the frame rate dictates, where as the GPU will need to do 'less' work if the Graphical settings (like Resolution) are dropped.

Dropping the resolution doesn't change the AI, the physics, the assets and objects and where they sit in the scene, any collision detections etc so it makes sense that the 'Brain' of a system would need to be the same to deliver a comparable gaming experience, same frame rates, enemy counts etc. I know sometimes aspects can be handled by the GPU - especially on consoles that may not have the best CPU but in general, these tasks are handled by the CPU.

I still think this will be a HD console in general more than a 1440p console. Of course that depends on what the devs opt for as they could scale down the Ray Tracing for example to deliver a higher resolution and some games may well have the headroom to deliver higher resolution with VRS and/or modern rendering techniques so some games could well be higher - If Pro can do 4k/60 in Fifa, then this could do 4k/60 too...

If it’s the same CPU then I would be less wary of it existing. Many insist that games can scale, but the main game logic loop for XSX games, even games that don’t reach 30fps, should expect to be able to execute all their code reliably within 1/30th of a second on any “series” machine.

It’s way easier to scale down the graphics than it is to scale down the main logic loop.

@SuperNintendoMii Just because MS plan on scaling their first party games down to current gen consoles, which does make sense as those games will also be releasing on PC's and xCloud so would need to be scaleable anyway, it doesn't mean that the Series X won't offer a tangible reason to upgrade OR have games that won't be on current generation - Scorn and the Medium are two that spring to mind.

If you are happy to play a game at sub 1080p and up to 30fps, you can stick with your XB1S - with none of the advantages the Series X (or Lockhart) could offer. The XB1X may offer a 'boost' in visual quality and occasionally offer a 'higher' frame rate option but the Series X would offer a higher frame rate and higher visual quality with added benefits like Ray Tracing, faster (if not no) loading times etc. It would be like playing Fortnite on you Switch at 30fps against high end PC users with much higher resolution to have an advantage at longer distances and much faster frame rates and lower input lag. Even if you do see each other at the exact same time, press to shoot at the same time, you will lose because the of the higher frame rates and lower input lag.

There is a big difference between just having access to the same game and playing that same game at much higher frame rates and visual quality settings. So many things can be much higher on the Series X - LoDs, foliage density, lighting, shadows, reflections etc. You can play Battlefield on a 'low' end PC and it will look and run much different to a high end PC with Ray Tracing. You could play it at lower resolutions, with most settings on low to get a 'reasonable' frame rate - just because you have access to it..

Both the XB1X and PS4 Pro offered no software that couldn't run on the base hardware and yet they offered a tangible upgrade - not 'just' for those with 4k TV's. The opportunity to play games at higher, more consistent frame rates was a big reason and a lot of gamers on PC don't upgrade just because a certain game needs a 'high' minimum spec GPU/CPU, they upgrade because they offer a 'better' gaming experience...

@Tharsman Perhaps the long development cycles have something to do with the first games supporting Xbox One and the next bunch of Series X games will not be compatible with Xbox One. If I was Microsoft I would support Xbox One with new games until next year only.

This makes a lot of sense for those who maybe haven't upgraded their TV or simply aren't bothered about 4K. By the end of next gen it may well be able to stream at much higher quality anyway, so at the right price could be a great choice for many

@zane547 Stadia is literally dead. Its quite clear Google didn't have a clue what they were doing, and will inevitably dump it sooner or later like everything else they dabble in. Nobody plays it, nobody makes anything for it, barely anyone even knows the thing exists.

Couldn't have happened to a better company.

@BAMozzy sure. I personally am not happy with 1080p whether it's on 60fps or not. I have a 4k tv and want my next gen games to be in 4k, less input lag and higher framerates are a bonus. To me, lockhart won't offer the experience I want or need, so I'll go and get the higher end version. Just like I have an x now instead of an s.

But core gamers will get the series x. Non core will get lockhart. But none core don't really care about the experience anyway, they just want to shoot people in cod or play as their football team in fifa. Either way, it's quite interesting watching this all play out.

But why.. all the games will be available on the current gen consoles and you'll no doubt be able to get the current one X cheaper than the new console. I don't see how this would be tempting. It may be quicker, but if it's a low price point I can't see how it would be much of an upgrade.

@EquiinoxGII Lockhart, aka Series S, is Series X with the same CPU but a weaker GPU and less RAM so would be like a shrunken HD/1440p Series X. Series X Lite or something like that. The interesting part is that it might not be a console but the units that run xCloud games.

@SuperNintendoMii "Nintendo are the exception rather than the rule"

Actually, they're not. The PS1, and 2 were the weaker hardwares. The 360 was perceived as weaker too. The PS4 was weaker also. But these were all cheaper too. In general, the cheaper (albeit weaker) hardware does better.

The only two exceptions I can think of were actually Nintendo consoles, and both were more powerful machines.

@Richnj Nintendo haven't been big on tech since the GameCube. The Wii, Wii U, DS, 3DS, Switch, are all less focused on power and more on game experiences.

They may have been similar to Sony and Sega once upon a time, but those days have gone. At this time they have become an exception

@SuperNintendoMii Not really addressing my argument with that. So I repeat. Even between Xbox and PS, the weaker and importantly, cheaper, hardware sells better.

@Richnj between Sony and Microsoft. But not Nintendo, who live in their own bubble. A point I just made

@SuperNintendoMii I don't think you've followed the debate.

I originally said that MS doesn't need to compete with Sony through putting out powerhouse consoles. That releasing low powered, cheaper consoles is a actually the better option. And that Nintendo are evidence of that.

You said, that's an exception to Nintendo. Not a rule.

I said, it is true of xbox and PS also, and provided examples.

You said, Nintendo doesn't put out high powered consoles (completely sidestepping what I said).

I repeated my claim.

You repeated that Nintendo exists in a bubble (again, ignoring the conversation being had).

The discussion was about low vs high powered consoles, and how those appeal to audiences. And you claim Nintendo doesn't count, so I limited it to just xbox and PS, and you seemed to want to carry on talking about Nintendo.

It's a poor basis for a discussion.

@Richnj originally I was talking about Nintendo being an exception because they are. I said that they can put out underpowered hardware and sell on the games alone, yet if Sony or Microsoft did that it wouldn't work. Hence Nintendo being an exception.

You can say Microsoft don't need to compete with Sony on power, but they quite clearly think otherwise.

@SuperNintendoMii "I said that they can put out underpowered hardware and sell on the games alone, yet if Sony or Microsoft did that it wouldn't work"

And as I have pointed out twice, this being the third time. It would. Sony have done it twice. MS have done it once. And even in this current gen, players didn't flock to the most powerful console on the market (X1X), they continued to stick to PS4, with most of those sales going to the base PS4. Specifically because that console is now in the £250-£300 range. The range I'm saying the Lockhart needs to be in. The range that the Switch currently sits in. It's the sweet spot for selling a console. Price, not power.

@Richnj underpowered Sony and Microsoft style is different to underpowered Nintendo style

@EquiinoxGII
The rumor is that both current consoles have been discontinued, so beginning this Holiday, your only two choices are Series S ($199-249) or Series X ($400-500).

@gingataisen that would make sense!