The Mighty Xbox One X already has to resort to low settings

You asked if I missed "Stable 30 FPS." I didn't, as I didn't quote that post (if there was a post.) I referenced fps, not your specific statement. I'm not sure how to break down a flow of conversation/debate, let alone the English language any more. Hell, you stated I called out a typo for "loosing," when you also used it in a different thread. It's not a typo if you do it fucking twice... Holy shit.

Here:

Man I remember the days when Lemmings like @i_p_dail

The days when Lemmings like @i_p_daily swore up and down how powerful the almighty xb1x is that 4k wouldn't be compromised lol. Well 4k @30fps at Low settings sounds like a huge compromised to me.

I think you need to calm down. You can pull up all the times I misspelled a word it still doesn't make it relevant to the discussion. You referenced the fps. The fps of the game is known to be locked 30 fps. Were you referencing the fps without knowing the actual performance? If so, then that's your error and would indicate that you MISSED that little factoid.

Lol, it really is... not just cows it seems either. Hermits are trying to defend their expensive purchases too.

Yeah defending from 30 fps on low. rofl what is this 2003.

Lol, let's compare the cost to performance ratio of the X vs a PC that achieves similar results. I think we all know who'd win... but whatevs. Each to their own :)

Yes, we know, the better product costs more. Welcome to reality.

Those two settings account for a 3% performlance drop switching from the highest setting to the lowest setting. (Combined)

TSAA is a bigger performance hit, and this benchmark doesn’t even have AA enabled

Your comment is along the lines of people buying a weak graphics card and complaining that they have to run the game on lower settings then have someone like yourself comment on the hardware performing within spec as a con. LMAO.

Sounds like XB1X users for most games when compared to a PC.

Yes, so it's kind of stupid to point out the fact that a particular game doesn't run as well on the cheaper, specifically designed system compared to the more expensive product.

Stop. Digital Foundry already has your number. You seem pathetic now.

They stated 1070 runs full ultra,4k,30locked.It's over. You lost. When tweaking settings lower, like the shitty 1x has to, it goes 50-60 FPS. Double the frames. Or UW at 80+ fps on ultra. All 3 options are superior.

When was the last time ANY Xbox or ANY console gamer on this forum complain about their performance in comparison to PC? Sometimes you guys take this shit a bit to seriously as in you are starting to believe the bullshit posted on here.

Plenty of times, go to the XB forums for games that were/are busted. The hoopla over Destiny 2 running at a god damn 30 fps (LMAO!) for example. You're taking 2nd/3rd place a bit too harsh. I get it, things didn't work out. DF killed you today. You've got to troll extra.

Perhaps you should go back to defending Giovela's lying and saying this game was gonna be better on 1X or same as 1070.

Lmao nope. 28.7 FPS without TAA. X1X has TAA

good effort by the 1070

Why are you using this benchmark when a take dating April 3rd from Digital Foundry confirmed you get the full fat 4K experience at Ultra locked at 30fps with a 1070?

At 11:36

Seems like you only use DF when it suits your argument lol.

Nah, that's cows.

He's trolling.

Not that it matters, since DF destroyed him and there is nothing left to debate, but note he's purposefully being deceptive in writing the "lowest fps" number instead of "average fps" number. This is some climate denier level data bullshittery.

A weasel through and through. He deserves this inferior experience.

Except for the fact he' just quoted a lemming who is actively doing it in 3 front page threads.

Didn't mean cows were the only ones... just the usual ones.

LOL. You really think that I care who is in 2nd/3rd place. LOL. You are really taking this shit seriously. The reality (not the imaginary world you live in) Xbox gamers don't complain about their performance relative to PC. That stems from folks like you who act as if console gamers give a shit. Don't confuse the forum retardism with reality.

I just don't understand why you console players don't switch over to PC, get yourself an average computer for around $500-600 which has much better graphics, more reliable, fully customisable, more game choices, better social aspect, the ability to more etc...

Is @GioVela2010 the new @ronvalencia??? What the hell is going on in here?

Yes he is. He's being extremely dishonest. He takes quotes from PC gamer, an outdated benchmark from Techpowerup and a video from Digital Foundry and uses all mix them together to form a false narrative lol.

@GioVela2010 This benchmark is from YESTERDAY. Yours if from last week. Also quit being dishonest and address what DigitalFoundry said.

Strange comment for a thread that was started by a PC gamer.

I don’t care what Alex says, nothing he showed convinced me, and Alex is new.

the one time he showed framerates at 4K it was hitting 29 FPS and he was complaining about frametimes.

Where was the same stress test that was performed on the X1X version? That test SHOWED me that X1X was locked at 30 FPS. absolutely nothing in this latest video SHOWED a 1070 Can lock 30 FPS.

I don’t know why you guys are so adement on shootin down benchmark testing and taking someone’s words as the final say.

Why would you compare X1X Minimum vs 1070 Average?

you compare lowest FPS vs lowest FPS

TechPowerUp benchmarks are from last week. The one I linked is from yesterday and in line with what Alex said. Also doesn't matter that he's new. He's the new resident PC expert and was brought on board exactly because he has more knowledge on the PC platform. So no, discrediting him won't work.

Benchmark from April 3rd or GTFO.

Watch as he deflects and continues to post shitty benchmarks from last week.

The dude is a total clown.

Bullshit you don't. You compare average vs average. The lowest frame rate is the lowest 0.1% to 1%tile. Absolutely not representative of the overall experience.

@GioVela2010: You need to turn your subwoofer down, it’s giving you brain damage

@GioVela2010 More proof you are full of shit:

From KitGuru, the article you keep linking.

Drivers used for the tests were 391.24

Latest drivers released for Far Cry are 391.35

So yes, your benchmark you keep linking is outdated. It doesn't even use the Game Ready driver optimized for Far Cry 5.

@Juub1990 said:

@GioVela2010 More proof you are full of shit:

From KitGuru, the article you keep linking.

Drivers used for the tests were 391.24

Latest drivers released for Far Cry are 391.35

So yes, your benchmark you keep linking is outdated. It doesn't even use the Game Ready driver optimized for Far Cry 5.

Dude is straight up reminding me of climate denial blogs, purposefully giving misleading data.

Weasel. Rat. Pathetic.

@Juub1990 said:

@GioVela2010 More proof you are full of shit:

From KitGuru, the article you keep linking.

Drivers used for the tests were 391.24

Latest drivers released for Far Cry are 391.35

So yes, your benchmark you keep linking is outdated. It doesn't even use the Game Ready driver optimized for Far Cry 5.

Absolutely destroyed lol.

@Juub1990 said:

@zaryia said:

He's trolling.

Not that it matters, since DF destroyed him and there is nothing left to debate, but note he's purposefully being deceptive in writing the "lowest fps" number instead of "average fps" number. This is some climate denier level data bullshittery.

A weasel through and through. He deserves this inferior experience.

Yes he is. He's being extremely dishonest. He takes quotes from PC gamer, an outdated benchmark from Techpowerup and a video from Digital Foundry and uses all mix them together to form a false narrative lol.

@GioVela2010 This benchmark is from YESTERDAY. Yours if from last week. Also quit being dishonest and address what DigitalFoundry said.

Minimum FPS is not the same as 97 percentile.

Is that using TAA? Because that’s an extra 2.5% performance drop. The SLI benchmark from them doesn’t use TAA.

And last but not least, that’s not a FOunders Edition. The Founders Edition can be had for $440, every other 1070 is over $510

I dunno man I’ve been pc gaming for some years now and haven’t bothered with console gaming for a while but I recently picked up a one x and i must say the graphics aren’t too far off from at least the high settings on pc. With it being native 4K is especially incredible. Can’t hate on that.

Where did you get that they turned off TAA in the SLI benchmark? They simply said TAA was enabled with Ultra.

Also lol @ the Founder's Edition comment. You really are getting desperate. Nobody buys that piece of crap any more.

97% percentile is the lowest 3%. A lot more representative than using the lowest 0.1%.

That’s fucking stupid. It’s locked at 30 FPS because locked 30 is smoother than 29-36 and provides consistency and less judder.

30 FPS diving evenly into 60hz or 120hz is superior to 29-36 FPS. and you can’t use the 4K Gsync excuse because none of you own one.

X1X has never shown to drop below 30 FPS

1070 has proven to drop below 30 FPS

keep spinning it however you want, those are the FACTS

it doesn’t get anymore cut and dry than that

And it's also Ultra on nothing on the X1X except for AF which looks like High/Ultra and may as well not count because AF is basically a free feature and has barely any impact on performance. Yet here you are using Ultra settings on a 1070 when the X1X version isn't even approaching Ultra and even has two damn settings on low. Latest benchmark shows the 1070 being locked at 30fps on Ultra and DF also confirmed it. Alex is their new PC expert. You can't discredit him for being new.

You lose.

They aren't competing against PC's. They're competing against "other consoles", with their console. As a console, it IS a beast. As a console, it DOES deliver the best resolutions and frame rates. They never said "4K, 60 FPS Ultra settings or go home, bitches!!" They at no point in this video showed Phil Spencer pounding a beer, belching and drunkenly slurring, "Bring on any PC, any PC at all, and this mother@$%#er will destroy it!!" They aren't trying to steer PC consumers away from PC's, these people all seem pretty intelligent and sane.

1070 uses Ultra settings.

Xbox One X doesn't.

It doesn't get any more cut and dry than that.

Also the fact the X1X has to resort to using Low settings pretty much tells you it has no headroom left lol.

Horse shit...

They compared the Xbox One X to a high end PC gaming rig. Bunch of chicken shit overhyping liars.

When asked about how the 4K capable Xbox One X compares to Sony’s PS4 Pro, McCarthy replied that he would more readily compare the performance of the Xbox One X to what the high-class PC setups are doing at the moment.

“I make more of a comparison [with Xbox One X] to what the higher end PCs are doing right now”, McCarthy said in the interview. “There is a big difference with 40% more processing power, in terms of ensuring that consistent frame rate, including that frame buffer that’s going to get you all those 4K textures, ensuring the spatial audio is going to be at a premium for you. So it really is that top-end experience.”

Phil even went as far as saying the PS4 Pro was more comparable to an S than the X lol.

“I look at [PS4] Pro as more of a competitor to [Xbox One] S than I do to Xbox One X,”

Aaron Greenberg calling the console a "no compromise box"

We wanted to build the most powerful console ever made, a premium product with no compromises. And we also wanted to at the same time deliver an incredible set of developer tools so that developers would be able to get up and running right away and be able to make the best versions of their games on Xbox One X

It’s a 4% performance difference between PC’s Max Setting in Terrain and Volumetric, vs Xbox Settings in Terrain and Volumetric

TAA has a 5% performance drop vs No AA

@GioVela2010: Same old outdated benchmark using outdated drivers. Try harder please.

Let me know where you can find a PC that has 1TB HDD, 6tflop gpu, octa-core CPU, UHD Blu-ray disc, controller, 12GB GDDR5, all for $499. The answer of course is you cant.

X1X getting exposed again. What good is 4k when you have to turn all the sliders down?

For some reason I imagine Phil Spencer making this a mandate with publishers. "The rest of the settings don't matter, just push it to 4k and we'll pay you a bonus for the marketing."

So, is anyone enjoying this, or is it just politics or muh visuals?

low settings is barbaric BARBARIC