Isn’t 4K twice of 1080p? 1440p is like the half way point more or less right? I hear 20-30% when the PS5 isn’t over clocking. Unless it’s overclocking 100% the time it’s not overclocking it’s just....clocking.
My dumbing down aside lol, I guess this is gonna be a case by case basis.
Nope. 1080p is half 4k per axis, so it is 1/4 of the pixels.
Tflop is just one aspect and not even the most thrustworthy one. And on that I think the difference is 18%. So overall the system could be on that range of 10-20% perhaps more, but we will only know when we have games out to compare.
From Mark Cerny PS5 will be able to keep the maximum clock for as long as the dev request it.
So If a game on PS5 is 1440p30fps for it to even be 4k30fps on XSX it would need cuts in several other aspects, for 60fps even more. Now if both are rendered at the same pixel count and framerate then that power discrepancy in favor of Series X can be used on some image quality aspects (that I wasn't sure until Pema said them) that can be quite usefull. That is the reason I told you that sometimes you can get better overall image quality internally rendering at 1440 and time reconstructing to 4k than rendering nativelly in 4k because the power saved could be used to stuff more impactfull.
Were you able to see the DF video I told you?
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
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"