1

With reporting from the likes of Moore's Law is Dead and prominent leaker Kepler_L2, a picture is starting to form of the hardware specifications of the next generation Xbox and PlayStation. It goes without saying at this point that any information needs to be treated with caution. In fact, even if all of the specifications turn out to be completely true, we should still be very careful about coming to premature conclusions about the capabilities of the new consoles. Nevertheless, if the specs turn out to be true, Microsoft can go into the next generation knowing that while the bill of materials will be higher, Xbox will have a performance advantage.

But what if I was to tell you that it probably won't matter? That Sony and Microsoft are basically partners now, their next-gen hardware built for different audiences? Of course, there is some commonality in design which does make them comparable at least, so let's address that first before considering strategy, where we should expect considerable divergence.

The plausible leaks suggest that - once again - both Microsoft and Sony have tapped AMD to deliver their next-gen hardware. The CPU technology is based on the latest Zen 6 architecture, while the graphics side of the equation taps into the upcoming RDNA 5. In both areas, Microsoft is said to have more hardware, along with a wider memory interface - 192-bit vs Sony's 160-bit bus.

However, there are many differences beyond just the memory interface. Microsoft allegedly has three Zen 6 performance cores, paired with eight Zen 6c compact cores. Sony has no performance cores at all apparently, with up to eight Zen 6c cores and a brace of low power cores. Adding some spice to the mix is that Microsoft is investing in a potent neural processing unit (NPU) capable of 110 TOPs. The word is that Sony is instead banking on the GPU to provide ML acceleration - though of course, Xbox can tap into that too: until evidence emerges to the contrary, the suggestion is that both consoles use the RDNA 5 architecture.

But even then, there are differences, with Microsoft targeting a maximum of 68 RDNA 5 compute units up against Sony's projected maximum 54 CUs. Now, comparing compute unit counts didn't really help in the current console generation. PS5 proved a match to Xbox Series X and could even outperform it, despite having only 36 CUs up against Microsoft's 52 CUs. Faster clocks were a factor, while some developers have told us of increased efficiency in Sony's GPU compiler and development environment. However, this time around, speculation suggests that Sony is targeting a more efficient processor, while Microsoft is willing to pour a lot more power into its chip, which should once again give it an advantage.

You've likely seen these spec comparisons elsewhere, but the reason I bring it up is because we had a fascinating supporter question in this week's Q+A show. If a PC user has an RTX 5070 Ti or an RTX 5080, to what extent does the more highly specced GPU make a difference? Assuming a circa 20 percent difference in performance between them, if you're targeting the same frame-rate, the real world difference in the current-gen era comes down to adjusted resolution.

And in the world of temporal reconstruction techniques - especially ML-driven ones - it takes a wide shift in GPU performance to actually see any kind of appreciable difference. When viewed at living room distances, that difference becomes even harder to detect. And of course, both next-gen consoles will have access to excellent ML upscalers.

Indeed, with the Project Amethyst collaboration between Sony and AMD feeding into both PSSR and FSR technologies, it may well be the case that both consoles have very, very similar upscalers to work with. I don't think we'll see the next-gen Xbox not being able to run FSR - it is a PC, after all.

In a worst case scenario for Microsoft then, we could see a re-run of Xbox Series X vs PS5, where the lines blurred in terms of actual game output. Extra GPU power may offer a resolution bump which won't actually look that much better. Extra CPU power could provide more stable performance in CPU-limited scenarios but in terms of a new "console war", what Microsoft might like to see would be the commanding lead offered by Xbox One X over PS4 Pro.

But I think it's worth remembering that when it comes to the next generation consoles and leaked specs, even if those specs are entirely accurate, we are missing swathes of crucial context. Fundamentally, we don't actually know how the platform holders tend to deploy that hardware - but we can make some guesses. And I don't think either of them are actually gearing up for a new console war at all.

With Sony, it's looking for a genuinely game-changing hardware upgrade, capable of delivering exciting new experiences to its user base. Mark Cerny and his team are far less interested in comparisons against a new Xbox than they are against the PlayStation 5. Additionally, the spec comparison against Xbox suggests that the new PlayStation is targeting a console-like price-point - though what that actually is right now does seem to be a bit of a moving target.

Microsoft also wants hardware to push gaming into a new era, just like Sony but the fact is that it's no longer competing with Sony. In case we've forgotten about the last two years, Sony is now a valuable partner and based on Microsoft statements, there's every reason to believe its games will come to PS6 too. With Project Helix, it's aiming to retain the die-hard Xbox community who can bring their digital libraries with them - but it's clearly looking to expand its reach with a particular eye on the PC audience.

Suddenly, Microsoft's hardware choices take on a different dimension. While targeting fixed frame-rates with different GPU performance levels may not see much of a real world difference in the DRS/ML upscaling era, it actually makes a lot more difference if you're connecting to a high refresh rate display, running with frame-rate unlocked. It makes a lot more difference if you can "opt out" of the developer's choice of settings and deploy GPU power based on the full range of PC settings available in any given game. The increased CPU performance is also very useful when running with unlocked frame-rates as PC gaming can tend to be either CPU- or GPU-bound at any given moment.

Stop thinking of console gaming as we know it right now and suddenly, Project Helix makes a lot more sense: it looks like a console but it gives you everything that PC gaming has to offer. Finally, Xbox has a discernable difference against PlayStation.

The NPU? Well, the jury's still out on that. The world's biggest AI hardware company does not make NPUs at all, after all. Beyond that, to what extent are developers likely to use it if it's not available on PlayStation? For gaming applications, it's probably going to require Microsoft itself to come up with good use-case scenarios for the NPU. Even then, I'm not optimistic about it - shuttling data to and from the NPU sounds like an unreasonable bottleneck.

I see the inclusion of an NPU more as a necessity in Microsoft's eyes bearing in mind they want the silicon not just to run games but to run as a standard PC too - and that's another crucial area where a new Xbox provides functions that a PlayStation cannot. The chances are it'll be a significantly more expensive device, but then again, so are PCs more generally. And that's the point really: in bringing Xbox and Windows 11 together, Microsoft believes the way to make maximum impact is to deliver a specs-heavy PC. And here, consoles are just a part of the strategy if the reports that Microsoft is looking to enable OEM Xbox hardware bear fruit.

And to a certain extent, that's why Project Helix vs PlayStation 6 as a concept is certainly interesting but perhaps misses the point. My contention is that we're looking at two different devices which may play the same games but look to address different audiences. And at GDC this week, it'll be Microsoft that goes first in sharing more. We'll report back on that with our thoughts in the next DF Direct Weekly.