By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
shikamaru317 said:
Pemalite said:

You can pull off 4k with less flops than that.
It really is a bullshit number, almost as useless as using "bits" to try and work out a consoles performance.

A Geforce 1080 @ 8 Teraflops can provide a better experience than Vega 64 @ 10 Teraflops.

The amount of flops doesn't tell us what a GPU's Fillrate, Geometry, Bandwidth capabilities and so on is... Which are also important for running games at 4k.

Well, I was mainly basing 7-8tflops on the fact that the 6 tflop XB1 X isn't hitting Native 4K on every game, though that may be more down to the Jaguar CPU than the GPU. I also seem to recall Mark Cerny saying that 7-8 tflops is the requirement Sony would need to hit native 4k consistently. 

You're right about flops not being a good measure, but it's the most convenient way to talk about a GPU's power. 

Also, if we have ceteris paribus for all else on the architeture, looking at how much more flops would be necessary on a "scalar approximation" isn't really that off.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."