Turkish said:
They are entirely relevant, because it's another example of people thinking they know better than engineers in the industry. Also learn to read, I said there is no difference on how I approached teraflops. Mark Cerny said 8 Tflopz is required to hit 4K and nothing about geomtry units or delta compression. Yet you took issue when I only used Tflopz. That is double standards from you. Either way doesn't matter. People acting smart on the internet and getting put into their place but still coming back instead of apologizing is just sad. |
You have made allot of assumptions. How do you know I am not an engineer?
Mark Cerny has to translate his "ideas" to the more casual/mainstream Audience like yourself, that does require a degree of simplification on his part in order to convey his intentions... Plus he is trying to sell the hardware for the company he works for, so he will talk up every advantage he can to shift more hardware.
You need to keep in mind that flops is a theoretical number, which is often unachievable in the real world, in-fact it is not unusual to get a graphics processor with "less flops" out-perform a graphics processor with more flops. - You can have a 2.5 Teraflop graphics card loose to a 1.5 Teraflop graphics card. - Wan't me to prove it?
As for requiring 8 Teraflops for 4k... That's a load of horse crap anyway. We know that is false, don't pretend otherwise.
The Geforce 1070 is capable of 4k gaming, despite the fact it is "only" 5.7 Teraflops... And yet the Radeon Fury X at 8.6 Teraflops struggles.
And why would I apologize? I haven't done anything wrong. ;)
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
