SourceThe real challenge of getting PC to Xbox game streaming working is encoding games and having the right amount of bandwidth to stream them to the Xbox One. Streaming from Xbox One to Windows 10 PCs is a lot more predictable "because we know exactly what you have," says Spencer. "It's actually a little more challenging doing the encoding on the PC side to the Xbox, but challenge is good." There's no timeline on when this might arrive, but it's clearly a challenge Microsoft is willing to tackle.
I think the advantage here would be that the xbone costs about the same as a low end steam machine or a really low budget pc build, and has the ability to play xbox games when you get bored of your PC collection.
There's such a thing as getting bored with your pc collection?
Maybe that was the wrong thing to say lol. How about, "has the ability to play xbox games that you can't play on PC"...
True but I'm working off assumptions from his post. If this the tipping reason he'd get an xbone then he probably would've gotten eventually anyway and more power to him; if it's just for this feature then really there's no point in getting an Xbone when you can use an old PC or laptop to stream your games.
nVidia and AMD both have hardware encoders in their recent GPUs; QuickSync is pretty common too, and software encoding works as a fallback when all else fails. I think the challenge that MS is referring to is supporting all of them (or at least several) and determining which to use - which isn't terribly difficult, mind you, but it is trickier than with the XBone, where they only need one.
I think steam is putting out a cheap streaming device soon. I think it's something like $100 or under. Would make a good option for streaming PC to the living room. Though, the Xbone has a Blu-ray player.
Not sound proof budget PC. You either build last generation with old used parts or you build worse than XBone at the same price.
Why? If you want to stream a PC game to your TV it would be far more economical to get Steam Link (50$) which can use also controllers if you so desire and can do so for practically any Windows program (including non-steam ones).
PC has far greater number of exclusives than XBOne. Including like whole genres of games not existing at all on XBOne (like roguelikes, for example). Ofc XBOne has also some exlusives. But the list of true exclusives is rather small one. Like ... Halo and ummm ... cant see anything else in AAA category in this list at first glance but I'm sure there is couple more. With few others being also console exclusive, like Titanfall.
You could already build a gaming PC performing better than consoles at their launch with off the shelf new parts. See, for example, this article from that time. A little while has passed since then. XBOne has dropped the requirement of it's Eye thingy and on PC side the new generation of GFX cards has been released.
Pentium (G3258), no way two threads is enough these days.Originally Posted by Carniflex
You could already build a gaming PC performing better than consoles at their launch with off the shelf new parts. See, for example, this article from that time. A little while has passed since then. XBOne has dropped the requirement of it's Eye thingy and on PC side the new generation of GFX cards has been released.
Ofc what these articles conveniently overlook is that a typical console gamer is highly unlikely to go out and build a custom PC on such budget that performs that well. It is a careful balancing act to get just the right components on such tight budget so that nothing bottlenecks too bad. As far as CPU's go ... it is rather easy to knock the snot out of the ones in consoles. Even an anniversary edition Pentium (G3258) can do it with some overclock.
Sound and heat are ofcource a bit different subjects, however, with the release of the Steam Link your PC does not need to be anymore in your living room. Neither of the consoles are themselves fully passive and with sensible selection of components it is possible to make PC just as quiet, just sitting in larger box as miniaturization would break the budget.
I was comparing the G3258 against the console CPU's - it's two threads are a bit stronger if overcloked than the 8 cores in consoles. So in highly threaded load G3258 would offer roughly the same performance, in weakly threaded stuff (which is unfortunately majority of it out there it seems) it has an strong edge. I mean in single threaded stuff it offers same performance as i5 at equal clocks.Originally Posted by SpeedyVT
Pentium (G3258), no way two threads is enough these days.
860k @ 4.4 and G3258 @ 4.4 butt heads quite evenly. Trading blows some games. DX12 may make the difference far more significant over the G3258.
Obviously in highly single threaded applications the 860k gets thrashed. Just an FYI.
Passmark would rate the PS4 processor (1.8ghz) at 4600 in passmark. basically between 2050 and 2600 passmark score 5150 and 5350. Stock for stock the G3258 is rated 3991. This places it closer to an a10-5800k @ stock or i7-920 @ stock. However has eight threads!Originally Posted by Carniflex
I was comparing the G3258 against the console CPU's - it's two threads are a bit stronger if overcloked than the 8 cores in consoles. So in highly threaded load G3258 would offer roughly the same performance, in weakly threaded stuff (which is unfortunately majority of it out there it seems) it has an strong edge. I mean in single threaded stuff it offers same performance as i5 at equal clocks.
As far as two threads not being enough goes - yeah, two is a bit on the low side nowadays, but as far as I'm aware there is only couple games out currently which refuse to run unless they see 4 cores. Some of these can be forced to run regardless but it's ofc a bit inconvenient to arrange some kind of workarounds. That said if 4 cores are needed at all costs the AMD has some similarly priced 4 thread CPU's that would do the trick just as fine.
Anyway - the main point I was actually trying to make was that it is already possible to build a PC on similar budget to console that outperforms it. That is new development as far as consoles go, as traditionally it has taken a number of years for PC to catch up with the new generation of consoles at the same price point. I believe for the last gen it happened approx 2010 giving these a fair number of years of being a sensible budget option for gaming. Leaving aside for a second the observation that a "typical console gamer" is highly unlikely to go out and build his own custom PC on such a tight budget to pull off this feat. On the other hand I expect OEM systems to start pulling off this feat as early as end of this year or early next year. So this time around the PC's are - in my opinion - quite strongly starting to compete for the attention of the crowd traditionally interested in console gaming.
Simplicity of use for the SteamBox is essentially similar to current gen consoles. Both need Internet connection and predominantly make use of Internet to distribute content. Both need you to sign up some account in the beginning. SteamOS just does not have it's being online fees and also lacks some entertainment features (like netflix, for example, as far as I remember). So in this sense I believe XBOne decision to do streaming from PC is a logical decision - that feature is there for the SteamOS and they want it also to compete.
There is also the entire forza franchise which has the best combination of driving damage and physics simulation while also having a huge level of customisation and detailed sounds that change with upgrades etc.. and they even make open world games with that like forza horson series. Forza Horizon 2 is so good I dropped $600 AUD on an xbone just to play it.Originally Posted by Carniflex
PC has far greater number of exclusives than XBOne. Including like whole genres of games not existing at all on XBOne (like roguelikes, for example). Ofc XBOne has also some exlusives. But the list of true exclusives is rather small one. Like ... Halo and ummm ... cant see anything else in AAA category in this list at first glance but I'm sure there is couple more. With few others being also console exclusive, like Titanfall.
Mind hopping back in your time machine and letting me know if they actually do a new Blade movie?
Eight threads is not exactly an advantage compared to two threads offering the same total performance. G3258 is at stock at 3.2 GHz, however, it goes pretty reliably up to 4.2 and good percentage of chips can go up to 4.5 GHz without needing excessive voltage. From 4.5 up to 4.8 GHz it is not worth the needed extra voltage unless one has particularly golden chip. At 4.2 GHz one should get passmark score of approx ~5000 ... 5100. That is why I noted about overclocked G3258 being "a bit stronger than the CPU in consoles". Without over-clocking an i3 or some AMD quad or hexa core offering would make more sense - like, for example, the FX 6300, which was used in that link for the digital-foundry example build.
Well on a platform like PS4 threads get used much more so it's multi-threading will scale significantly more than what passmark puts it at. Sony's APU would never fly in desktop conditions.Originally Posted by Carniflex
Eight threads is not exactly an advantage compared to two threads offering the same total performance. G3258 is at stock at 3.2 GHz, however, it goes pretty reliably up to 4.2 and good percentage of chips can go up to 4.5 GHz without needing excessive voltage. From 4.5 up to 4.8 GHz it is not worth the needed extra voltage unless one has particularly golden chip. At 4.2 GHz one should get passmark score of approx ~5000 ... 5100. That is why I noted about overclocked G3258 being "a bit stronger than the CPU in consoles". Without over-clocking an i3 or some AMD quad or hexa core offering would make more sense - like, for example, the FX 6300, which was used in that link for the digital-foundry example build.