Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Rumor/Leak: Switch Hardware Specs, 1024 FLOP (Possibly 1TF) Device, Maxwell Architecture, Chat w/out Smartphone, Bluetooth Enabled...

Pemalite said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah, I was wondering what the go was there. With so many PS2 games (including GT4 itself) failing to hit even true 480p, 1080i seemed a bridge too far.

For years people keep bringing up GT4's supposed 1080i resolution to try to make PS2 look better compared to Gamecube and Wii, but it always felt fishy.

Because people don't make the distinction between rendered resolution and output resolution.

Like the days when people thought 720p/sub-HD PS360 games were 1920x1080 because it said on the back of the box that they "supported" 1080p. 

Hell, several of my friends were taken aback recently when I informed them that PS4 Pro didn't play all or even most games in true 4K. One of them heard a misleading ad in EB Games tell them it would "play all your favourite games in stunning 4K" and took their word for it. (Which to be fair wasn't entirely his fault; very dishonest marketing there)



Around the Network
fleischr said:
HoloDust said:

Not expert on subject, but few things to consider:

"To get an idea of what a difference in precision 16 bits can make, FP16 can represent 1024 values for each power of 2 between 2-14 and 215 (its exponent range). That’s 30,720 values. Contrast this to FP32, which can represent about 8 million values for each power of 2 between 2-126 and 2127. That’s about 2 billion values—a big difference."

https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/mixed-precision-programming-cuda-8/ 

 

Current performance king in gaming GPUs, Titan X:

FP32: 10,157 GFLOPS

FP16: 159 GFLOPS

This is of course nVidia's way to prevent gaming cards being bought instead of Teslas for tasks that actually benefit from FP16...but just shows how little FP16 performance is important in games.

Honestly, not an expert on the subject, but last time I recall any talk about FP16 in gaming was some 15 or so years ago. Sure, mobiles have it, but degradation in quality seems to be quite noticeable.

Can you give an example? FunFan just gave one that seems to prove otherwise.

Sorry, what? Are we looking at the same picture? Because that image is Imagination Technologies showcase for their PowerVR GPUs that is showing superiority of FP32 over FP16 and degradation in image quality that latter produces. Just like this picture as well:

Anyway, FP16 has its place in mobile industry, but some people are having unrealistic expectations thinking that gains are 2x. IIRC, boosts from using FP16 code in real games are very modest, since most of the work is still done in FP32.

But as I said, I'm no expert on subject, best place for discussions like this is probably Beyond3D and there are threads out there dealing with this matter.



HoloDust said:
fleischr said:

Can you give an example? FunFan just gave one that seems to prove otherwise.

Sorry, what? Are we looking at the same picture? Because that image is Imagination Technologies showcase for their PowerVR GPUs that is showing superiority of FP32 over FP16 and degradation in image quality that latter produces. Just like this picture as well:

Anyway, FP16 has its place in mobile industry, but some people are having unrealistic expectations thinking that gains are 2x. IIRC, boosts from using FP16 code in real games are very modest, since most of the work is still done in FP32.

But as I said, I'm no expert on subject, best place for discussions like this is probably Beyond3D and there are threads out there dealing with this matter.

Holodust is correct on this.

Shame the search function on this forum is cumbersome, I would find my old post. :P



---:::}}} Part of the PC Gaming Master Race. {{{:::---

HoloDust said:
fleischr said:

Can you give an example? FunFan just gave one that seems to prove otherwise.

Sorry, what? Are we looking at the same picture? Because that image is Imagination Technologies showcase for their PowerVR GPUs that is showing superiority of FP32 over FP16 and degradation in image quality that latter produces. Just like this picture as well:

Anyway, FP16 has its place in mobile industry, but some people are having unrealistic expectations thinking that gains are 2x. IIRC, boosts from using FP16 code in real games are very modest, since most of the work is still done in FP32.

But as I said, I'm no expert on subject, best place for discussions like this is probably Beyond3D and there are threads out there dealing with this matter.

Are these the same number of flops for both images? As in say 1TF of in FP16 vs 1TF in FP32?

The fact it's listed simply as 'competing multicore GPU' and not anything else specfic comes across dubious.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

Wyrdness said:
irstupid said:
So it can do 4k at 30fps?

That's the port output not the console itself, for example older platforms like the PS2 technically had HD output but obviously the hardware would never reach that.

There are actually some HD games on the PS2.
Gran Turismo 4 was one of them.



BraLoD said:
Wyrdness said:

That's the port output not the console itself, for example older platforms like the PS2 technically had HD output but obviously the hardware would never reach that.

There are actually some HD games on the PS2.
Gran Turismo 4 was one of them.

No mate two people have already debunked this earlier, GT4 was not HD it used a trick to convert the game's output signal to support 1080i, the game itself is not HD in any way. Supporting a resolution doesn't mean it's rendered in that resolution otherwise you'd be saying that every Wii U game is 1080p because the console outputs that resolution.



BraLoD said:
Wyrdness said:

That's the port output not the console itself, for example older platforms like the PS2 technically had HD output but obviously the hardware would never reach that.

There are actually some HD games on the PS2.
Gran Turismo 4 was one of them.

I hope you don't genuinly believe that. 



Alkibiádēs said:
BraLoD said:

There are actually some HD games on the PS2.
Gran Turismo 4 was one of them.

I hope you don't genuinly believe that. 

I don't need to "believe" that, the game was 1080i.
It might not be "true HD" like the not "true 4K" like nowdays, because of what wyrdness said, but it's still a PS2 game with HD display.



BraLoD said:
Alkibiádēs said:

I hope you don't genuinly believe that. 

I don't need to "believe" that, the game was 1080i.
It might not be "true HD" like the not "true 4K" like nowdays, because of what wyrdness said, but it's still a PS2 game with HD display.

The game is not rendered in HD. The PS2 could barely handle 480p, let alone 720p or 1080p lol. 



Around the Network
Alkibiádēs said:
BraLoD said:

I don't need to "believe" that, the game was 1080i.
It might not be "true HD" like the not "true 4K" like nowdays, because of what wyrdness said, but it's still a PS2 game with HD display.

The game is not rendered in HD. The PS2 could barely handle 480p, let alone 720p or 1080p lol. 

What you want to make it be and what was said not being the same thing really doesn't matter to me, honestly.