Quantcast
View Post
Trumpstyle said:

Now you say that this new ipad pro model is twice as fast as the old one putting it about 6x of snapdragon 820/821 and you say this device has 410-520 gigaflops, so you are saying this new ipad pro has 2460-3120 gigaflops (6x410 and 6x520).

LOL

Where you got source that snapdragon calculates in fp32? From what I know it's fp16 but I can't find source on either.

Yeah, nah. Flops doesn't equate to a GPU's complete performance.

Trumpstyle said:

But we know from digitalfoundries fortnite analysis that switch in handheld mode beats the iphone X

The iPhone X actually beats the Switch in a few areas in that game. I.E. Resolution.
However... The Switch has lower overheads than the iPhone, the iPhone X's hardware is actually superior, especially in areas such as memory bandwidth, CPU. Etc'.

Trumpstyle said:


If that iPad is running that game at 60 fps, at 5.6 million pixels (2732x2048 resolution) .... that's waaaaaaaaaaaay past the XBox One's 1080p and Switch at 720p (undocked).

...You aren't getting it. More to graphics and performance than just resolution and framerate.

It's all well and good to promote big resolution and framerate numbers... But if it has compromised shadows, texturing, lighting, simplified geometry, physics and so on... Then it's going to present an inferior image overall.

Trumpstyle said:

That's impressive. The GeekBench scores on the CPU are freaking beastly too, the CPU destroys the PS4/XB1 and goes toe to toe with Intel i7s, it probably isn't a stretch accounting for all that the GPU is pretty solid.

Depends on the i7. - But that is certainly a bold claim... One that needs to be empirically proven across a slew of benchmarks rather than a few cherry picked results that leverage the chip in the best light.

Trumpstyle said:

I think this chip is easily 3x the Tegra X1 that's in the Switch (it is 3 1/2 years newer tech on a radically smaller 7nm node). If you put this chip into a Switch and let devs code right down to the metal, I think just about every PS4/XB1 game would doable on it, especially at a 720p resolution for undocked.

Beating the Switch isn't exactly an achievement though.
Nor is beating the base Xbox One for that matter... Keep in mind of how archaic that graphics architecture is.

JRPGfan said:

In terms of Graphics performance:
Switch = ~393 Gflops (docked)
Xbox One = 1,310 Gflops (this is the non-S version, the weakest Xbox)


No. That is in terms of FLOPS. Not graphics performance. Learn the difference.

Soundwave said:

It doesn't just beat the Switch version in graphics ... it destroys it. 

60 frames per second at 2732x2048 resolution is double the frame rate of the Switch version and almost SIX times the resolution/pixels (undocked). 

Again. Resolution and Framerate isn't everything.

The iPhone X version of Fortnite for example runs at a much higher resolution than the Switch. - But the Switch version is graphically superior.
Funny how that works, huh?

It's also rather ironic that resolution only became a more prominent issue during the 8th gen...