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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS4Pro Can Run At 8.4tf (Eurogamer)

16 bit floating operations require less power then 32 or 64 bits thats not a secret and is true for GPus in general. Look at FP 16 peformance on nvidia gpus. This is not anything exclusive to the PS4



Around the Network
Netyaroze said:

16 bit floating operations require less power then 32 or 64 bits thats not a secret and is true for GPus in general. Look at FP 16 peformance on nvidia gpus. This is not anything exclusive to the PS4

No it isn't, the point here is that on PS4 and X1 a 16bits would occupy almost the same "space" as 32 so there wasn't much gain, so some twiking were made and now they basically can double (instead of a small gain) the processing when using 16bits when possible.



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."

Secret sauce!

Btw, what's misterxmedia doing these days?



Official member of VGC's Nintendo family, approved by the one and only RolStoppable. I feel honored.

Lrdfancypants said:

What is your point?

As a hardware enthusiast you would think you'd be enthused about what they accomplished for the price.  Same goes for Nintendo if it is priced right we might be seeing quite a powerful device for a mobile/hybrid device. 

He won't be enthused about anything if isn't on a PC. The guy clearly has an agenda and is trying to make a paragraph where Eurogamer guys clearly give THEIR opinion seem like a paragraph where they reported Cerny's opinion writing in first person.

Let's get to the point here. They could either develop the checkerboard renderind technic or simply render games at 1600p or 1800p and upscale it. If the new technic did not provided any kind of image quality gain, why would they bother with it? They could just render at lower resolutions, upscale it and call it a day. So it's safe to assume that if they are actually bothering with it, it's because it provides gains.

From the screenshots we saw, it's actually quite close to a native 4K frame and probably undistinguable from a native one at some feet away. As nobody plays a PS4 game in a 70 inches TV sitting at just 3 feet, it's a smart trade-off.

The biggest problem with 4K is that the jump is too costly. I have an OC 970 and it won't cut it. Even the most powerful GPUs still suffer to achieve it as a good framerate. This stuff applied to PCs could facilitate the transition and allow more normal PCs to run 4K games at 60 fps. Because right now, we have a 4X gap in performance to do so and that's too much.

But in the end, he will just be happy about it when it arrives on PC. Remember that he is the guy that says that all console games will be on PC thanks to emulators, but conviniently forgetting that we are still waiting for PS360 emulators to boot most games created in 10+ year old platforms, so he shouldn't hold his breath waiting for it.



torok said:
Lrdfancypants said:

What is your point?

As a hardware enthusiast you would think you'd be enthused about what they accomplished for the price.  Same goes for Nintendo if it is priced right we might be seeing quite a powerful device for a mobile/hybrid device. 

He won't be enthused about anything if isn't on a PC. The guy clearly has an agenda and is trying to make a paragraph where Eurogamer guys clearly give THEIR opinion seem like a paragraph where they reported Cerny's opinion writing in first person.

Let's get to the point here. They could either develop the checkerboard renderind technic or simply render games at 1600p or 1800p and upscale it. If the new technic did not provided any kind of image quality gain, why would they bother with it? They could just render at lower resolutions, upscale it and call it a day. So it's safe to assume that if they are actually bothering with it, it's because it provides gains.

From the screenshots we saw, it's actually quite close to a native 4K frame and probably undistinguable from a native one at some feet away. As nobody plays a PS4 game in a 70 inches TV sitting at just 3 feet, it's a smart trade-off.

The biggest problem with 4K is that the jump is too costly. I have an OC 970 and it won't cut it. Even the most powerful GPUs still suffer to achieve it as a good framerate. This stuff applied to PCs could facilitate the transition and allow more normal PCs to run 4K games at 60 fps. Because right now, we have a 4X gap in performance to do so and that's too much.

But in the end, he will just be happy about it when it arrives on PC. Remember that he is the guy that says that all console games will be on PC thanks to emulators, but conviniently forgetting that we are still waiting for PS360 emulators to boot most games created in 10+ year old platforms, so he shouldn't hold his breath waiting for it.

It just sends every thread into a downward spiral because it seems to always come from a negative perspective.  



l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble?  If not, I'll keep looking.  

 

 

 

 

I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?  

Marco....

Around the Network
GribbleGrunger said:
Dark_Feanor said:
Oh! The magic of dividing by two and than multpling again.

Oh, the magic of dividing by two, multiplying again and making it work because you're actually a hardware manufacturer.

Yes, AMD has to get credit for that.



Pemalite said:

 

GribbleGrunger said:

This is the last time I'll ever converse with you.

Sure. Whatever floats your boat, I certainly wont loose any sleep over it.

 

Not that you miss much but tell me that this was intentional



Fei-Hung said:
Basically 4.2TF is the minimum and 8.4TF is the maximum. However, to get 8.4 you will need to make sacrifices in various departments that require heavy coding.

I see indies getting more out of it or less graphic heavy games or maybe games that don't require much physics such as destruction.

A game like Destiny that has pretty much static assets and zero destruction might be able to draw on more performance.

You don't even get the 4.2TF. All this is just making no sense at all because no one knows the real world performance which greatly depends on many factors like CPU, caches, memory bandwidth, memory latency and bus congestion, just to name a few.

This is the theoretical maximum the GPU is specced for and it will also greatly depend on how the code is written or what the engine actually does with the hardware.



Pemalite said:
GribbleGrunger said:

Just admit you're mistaken and stop this silliness.

"He's not exaggerating here either. In a demo this week, he pulled up a scene in Days Gone on two separate Pros and 4K televisions, one of them natively rendered and the other checkerboard upscaled. The images were nearly indistinguishable: The native game was slightly more saturated and the textures in the grass were clearly resolved while the checkerboard grass shimmered slightly in the breeze. However, from three or four feet away, it was nigh impossible to see a difference."

It's not based on what Cerny said it's based on what they actually saw 'themselves'.

What a load of rubbish. The entire Article is based on what Cerny has stated. The Article is litterly littered with his name.

I have taken print screens of every paragraph that mentions and quotes Cerny. And even the tidbit that this was an interview with Cerny.




I think that pretty much prooves my point.

"He's not exaggerating here either"

Did you choose to skip this part of the post?



DonFerrari said:
Netyaroze said:

16 bit floating operations require less power then 32 or 64 bits thats not a secret and is true for GPus in general. Look at FP 16 peformance on nvidia gpus. This is not anything exclusive to the PS4

No it isn't, the point here is that on PS4 and X1 a 16bits would occupy almost the same "space" as 32 so there wasn't much gain, so some twiking were made and now they basically can double (instead of a small gain) the processing when using 16bits when possible.

Actually the 16 bit operation would occupy the entire register. In other words you wouldn't gain anything by using it other than maybe save a tiny tiny tiny amount of ram space.