|
Pemalite said:
Rubbish.
You think texture's, effects, geometry data doesn't take any bandwidth? The more bandwidth, the more you can dial up those effects, regardless of resolution.
You are also forgetting that the PS4 is fixed hardware, it's not going to magically get any speed increases in it's life time, 170GB/s is fine now, but how amenic isn't it going to look in a few years time?
Hell, the Playstation 2 could in theory do 1080P with 4x Anti-Aliasing, but guess what? The games are going to look horrible as sacrifices to other things will have to be made and the PS2's memory bandwidth isn't anywhere near even a PS4.
Actually, my processor is hitting almost 70GB/s in memory bandwidth, quad-channel DDR and all.
The memory controller certainly isn't that crap.
Again, Rubbish.
The Cell is a low-performance cheap processor as it's a chip going into a cost-sensitive device, the "graphics" processing can be done on any modern processor just as good or significantly better than the Cell.
Besides, most of the graphics effects the Cell does is usually frame-buffer effects and even games like Halo 3 on the Xbox 360 had that.
The PS4 can certainly do everything the PS3 can, it's faster and superior in every way. But, I beleive it could have still been better in the CPU, memory bandwidth and memory amount department, it's still slower than a several year old PC.
|
1) No... 170GB/s is fine for now and for the next five years at for 1080p... for resolution over that is the biggest problem... even for texture in 1080p they have a virtual limite size... and don't 4k textures for 1080p lol.
2) So you have a Sandy Bridge-E the only descktop processor with quad-channel (256bits)... a max bandwidth of 51.2GB/s... maybe you did overclock to reach 60GB/s.
3) Again... the Cell SPE can do way more things that you think.
