Over the last several months, Microsoft has been trickling out details about their mid-generation hardware update for the Xbox One console, which has been going under the name Project Scorpio. Now at this year’s E3 conference, the company is releasing the final details. We now have a name, a launch date, and perhaps most importantly, a price.

Hitting the streets on November 7th will be the new Xbox One X, which is Microsoft’s retail name for the console.(ed: I’m convinced MS is trying to keep us from writing their console names in short-hand) It will be priced at $499 in the US and equivalent prices in other regions, which is the same price as the original Xbox One (with the Kinect) at its launch back in 2013. On a relative basis, this stacks up as being twice the cost of the Xbox One S, whose base model (and now bundles as well) has been $249 for a while now.

Xbox One Specification Comparison
  Xbox One (Original) Xbox One S Xbox One X
CPU Cores 8 8 8
CPU Frequency 1.75 GHz 1.75 GHz 2.3 GHz
CPU µArch AMD Jaguar AMD Jaguar "Custom CPU"
(AMD Jaguar Variant)
GPU Cores 12 CUs
768 SPs
853 MHz
12 CUs
768 SPs
914 MHz
40 CUs
2560 SPs
1172 MHz
Peak Shader Throughput 1.31 TFLOPS 1.4 TFLOPS 6 TFLOPS
Embedded Memory 32MB eSRAM 32MB eSRAM None
Embedded Memory Bandwidth 204 GB/s 218 GB/s None
System Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 8GB DDR3-2133 12GB GDDR5
(6.8 Gbps)
System Memory Bus 256-bits 256-bits 384-bit
System Memory Bandwidth 68.3 GB/s 68.3 GB/s 326 GB/s
Manufacturing Process TSMC 28nm TSMC 16nm TSMC 16nm
Dimensions 343mm x 263mm x 80mm 295mm x 230mm x 65mm 300mm x 240mm x 60mm
Weight 3.54kg 2.9kg 3.81kg
PSU 220W
Optical Drive Blu-Ray UHD Blu-Ray UHD Blu-Ray
Wireless 802.11n (Dual Band) 2x2 802.11ac 2x2 802.11ac
Launch Price $499 w/Kinect $299 $499
Launch Date 11/23/2013 08/02/2016 11/07/2017

As far as the hardware itself goes, thanks to Microsoft’s ongoing campaign, we already know the bulk of the details of the console. The 16nm SoC at the heart of the new Xbox One design is meant to be significantly more powerful than the original and S versions of the Xbox One, vaulting MS from having the least powerful console to the most powerful console. All told, the Xbox One X will offer almost 4.3x the GPU compute throughput of the Xbox One S, while the CPU cores have received a healthy 31% clockspeed boost (Interesting aside: Microsoft is still not calling it Jaguar, unlike the XB1/XB1S). The memory feeding the beast has also gotten a great deal faster as well, with Microsoft switching out their 8GB of DDR3 for a large and very fast 12GB of GDDR5, which has a combined memory bandwidth of 326GB/sec.

Meanwhile the only real details we didn’t have on the console itself, such as the size, have been answered. Microsoft is going for a super slim design on the console, announcing that it’s the “smallest Xbox ever”, placing it below even the already slimmed-down Xbox One S. At 300mm x 240mm x 60mm, the console is 5mm wider and 10mm deeper than the Xbox One S, but it's 5mm shorter than said console. Or to put things in terms of volume, it's 98% the volume of the Xbox One S, indeed making it smaller, though just slightly so.

Otherwise, Microsoft has largely confirmed that the Xbox One X will function as you’d expect as a mid-cycle console upgrade, similar to the Xbox One S. Existing games will benefit from the more powerful hardware, though to what degree is apparently going to depend on the game. For games that are fully Xbox One X enabled, Microsoft is targeting a 4K (3840x2160) resolution, and will offer downsampling for improved quality when hooked up to 1080p TVs. And all of the existing Xbox One ecosystem accessories will work as well.

Gallery: Xbox One X

Source: Microsoft

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • IanHagen - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    But, but... but... you can have a true 4K machine for true men for only $3000! /s
  • fanofanand - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    No. Windows is $100, which leaves you with $400 for a case, motherboard, psu, memory, gpu, and cpu. We will get a lot closer after the Ryzen APUS come out, but I doubt those will have the GPU power this console has. To get a similarly performant PC you are looking at $600-700 minimum.
  • cknobman - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    I just build out a $470 gaming rig on NewEgg with a Nvidia 1060 6GB, AMD FX-4300, 8GB ram, case, cpu, mobo.

    So I can get close. Add in $150 for Windows, Keyboard, Mouse, and even a XBox controller and I've got a gaming rig that is actually more powerful than a XB1X.

    Yeah, its not that hard.
  • nikon133 - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    Well... 1060 is a bit bellow 4TF, X1X is 6TF, almost on level with 1070. I think. CPU is more powerful but consoles' games seem to be doing multi-treading better than Windows... plus, most PC games don't favor AMD CPUs... and then, consoles platforms are easier to optimize for than general purpose Windows. At least until devs really start squeezing out bits and pixels out of DX12.

    I will be surprised if you get games running on same res, fps and level of details as on X1X.

    But the thing is, you can do other things on PC, while playing all the new Xbox games, too... this is major weakness of X1X. If anyone has gameable PC, X1X doesn't make much sense. All MS exclusives are coming to Windows, and 3rd party games are usually multiplatforms, rarely/never Xbox exclusives.
  • sorten - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    I don't remember the last time I built a new PC with all of the components. I typically buy a new mid-range graphics card every 2 - 3 years and a new processor every 6 or 7 years. So I could have a gaming PC that outperforms the new Xbox for $200 or $250.
  • nikon133 - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    That's true, too. I have recently replaced R9280x with 1070, and killed most reasons I could have to get X1X. Rest of PC is based around Haswell i7, 16GB RAM... some SSDs have sneaked in in the past 12 - 18 months... that's it, really. Mostly due to slow progress on CPU development side, can't find a reason to build complete box.

    Poor X1X, nice as it is, really has a hard road in front of it. Not only competing with populist-choice PS4, but also with Windows sibling.
  • James5mith - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link


    That's my story and I'm sticking to it.a
  • Achaios - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    With the Xbox One X (Scorpio) on the horizon I've heard a lot of talk about teraflops and how the One X will perform the same as a 1070 because they are close in terms of teraflops. I'm going to try and shed some light on the subject.

    First off, what is a teraflop? Well, it's a measure of floating point operations per second. Or in layman's terms "how fast a GPU can do math." So that means higher numbers are better, right? The higher the number the faster the device can add, subtract and multiply numbers.

    Well not exactly. Teraflops are really only a good measurement of performance if you're only running complex math and doing nothing else (think bitcoin mining or physics simulations).

    For example: The rx 480 has 5.8 Tflops and is a pretty capable GPU. However, the 980Ti only has 5.6 Tflops. Now wait a second. The 980Ti wrecks the 480 in any gaming benchmark. How come a GPU with a lower Teraflop rating can outperform one with a higher rating?

    To quote EuroGamer:

    Teraflops are a very basic measure of computational power, separate and distinct from all other aspects of GPU design.

    Teraflops really have very little to do with gaming performance, because there are lots of other things that impact gaming performance (vRAM bandwidth, cache, etc).

    In short, the Xbox One X probably won't perform on the same level as a 1070. The One X has 6 Tflops, but seeing how the 480/580 (which is very similar to the One X's GPU) stacks up against the 1070 we can't reasonably expect the One X to do much better.

  • Achaios - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    In addition to the above to quote ANANDTECH:


    Please note that NVIDIA TFLOP ratings are using NVIDIA's base clock while AMD's results are using their "up to" peak clock. While interesting to see, you should really be comparing only NVIDIA TFLOPS to NVIDIA TFLOPS.

    Your console's TFLOP rating is not comparable to NVIDIA TFLOP rating. (AMD artificially overinflates their GPU TFLOP ratings to make them look good).

    I rest my case.
  • BrokenCrayons - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    I'm not sure why TFLOPs should matter at all. The vast majority of people will buy a console and use it to play games. The specs and computational capabilities are meaningless to everyone that doesn't have a bone (XBOne?) to pick because of console brand loyalty or some PC owner personal insecurity. In short, there's no case to rest because there's no case worth making and no point to prove. Anyone looking for amusement is going to buy what they want and then shut up and play video games while nerds like us have pinching and hair pulling fights over a manufacturer's meaningless hardware specs.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now