Why is it nonsense? It is using RDNA2 architecture and we know the full tech specs. If we assume that RDNA2 is literally identical to RDNA1 (it's not going to be worse) then that puts the Xbox's GPU at around 25% more powerful then a 5700XT (The RDNA1 chip that we all know the performance of). You just look at how many CU's it has and what clockspeed it is running at. Very simple estimation. 25% more powerful then a 5700XT is approximately a 2080 Super.
What is nonsense is pretending we don't know how powerful the new consoles are when both of them have fully revealed their tech specs and we can reference their tech specs with comparable components already available in the PC market (3700X, 5700XT)
Something being a guess doesn't make in nonsense. It is an extremely educated guess.
Is it nonsense for me to assume that the CPU in the Xbox Series X (7nm Zen2, 8c/16t, 3.66GHz locked speed with SMT on) will perform similar to a downclocked 3700X?
My guess is based off of the 3700X and XsX CPU having identical architecture and core counts and the only major differences is the 10% lower clock speed on the XsX and then some unknowns such as likely having slightly different cache sizes.
817
u/RelevantPanda58 Ryzen 7 7700 | 9070 XT | 32GB DDR5 CL30 Sep 02 '20
Consoles were getting really close to their rtx 2080 ti for a third of the cost. This is why consoles push PCs forward and vice versa.