Intrinsic on 24 February 2019
| Biggerboat1 said: 3) PS4 : 1.84 TFLOPS / Pro : 4.2 TFLOPS - so 2.3 x more powerful, just for clarity, but then the Pro isn't doing real 4K, to do that would need to be a bit more powerful, bringing us closer to the rumoured Xbox Skus. I'm not an expert on this stuff (maybe Pemalite or one of the more technically minded guys can help us here), but my understanding is that GPU power requirements scales with resolution. So to increase the resolution from Full HD to 4K, you're gonna need 4x the power. If I'm correct then the that means there won't be any extra 'bells & whistles' between the 2 skus but just resolution bump. In fact Anaconda might struggle to hit full 4K at only 3x...
4) I guess we just fundamentally disagree on the potential popularity of the lower-priced sku. I believe that there's a healthy market for a cheaper model and that a lot of gamers just don't care about 4K, not to the tune of an extra $100-$200 anyway. If MS does indeed go this route then I guess we'll see!
|
- Yes. In a rendering pipeline resolution is one of the things that scale proportionally. So if you are going for 4 times the rez you either need 4 times the power or 4 times the rendering time. But there are things that dont scale up at all unless a dev specifically wants them to (eg geometry). Another thing to consider is that the number you are told (eg 4.2TF, 1.8TF) doesn't mean that at any one time all of that GPU is fixed on driving rez. This is a very loose description, but say out of that 1.8TF 900Gflops was used solely for the rez part of the pipeline for a 1080p, then if you want the same game running in 4k you will need 3.6TF.
- I agree with you here as well. I too believe there is a very healthy market for a dedicated 1080p sku. Funny thing is that those f is in forums that say its stupid are the minority. Last I checked there are still more people with 1080p TVs than there are with 4KTVs.
