I don't really agree because to make the definition that make then directly compete could put PCs, Smartphones and even Cinema as direct competitors because "they compete for our entretainment budget".

But anyway we both understand what the other mean so no problem. My point is just that the cost and ROI for a Series Portable would be hard to justify, but sure I would welcome MS try since even if they lose money the company is very rich and more variety and competition in the market can put more ideas and innovation.

I have no clue what you are stating here. This goes against any real arguments and does not refute anything I stated.

Why would MS restrict the availability of the games on PC to not play on SteamDeck and other portable PC rigs currently available? From what I know being steamdeck certified or not just means it was tested and worked as intended on it, but a games doesn't need a certification to run on it.

Still do not get your point.  What restriction is MS doing.  The SteamDeck is not MS product.  You can still put GP on it so not sure where is this restriction you talking about.  MS gets nothing from SteamDeck besides someone who already has GP using it on that device.  MS gets whatever they charge to put games on their console, including GP as well as MS store purchase.  You know the same MS store where they sell games from within the Console.  Also, just because MS has their own mobile console doesn't mean they would not love for other OEM to sell Windows Handhelds like Asus AOG.  I never made any claim that MS would stop other OEM from creating their own mobile device and MS creating their own mobile device doesn't mean they would restrict other OEM from doing the same.  It would be no different then MS selling their own PC and surface laptops/Tablet.

You did not show me evidence that tflops is bullshits you've only shown me results that tflops are not even meant to represent.

Teraflops is single precision floating point.

No. TFLOPS of fp32 is for single, TFLOPS of fp16 is for half, and TFLOPS of fp64 is for double. They are all listed independently with every GPU and should be used accordingly with the workflow scenarios.

See here with the Geforce 2060 @5.2 Teraflops doubling the floating point performance of the Radeon RX 580 @5.8 Teraflops.
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU19/2703

https://foldingathome.org/2013/03/06/fah-bench-fah-coreopenmm-based-benchmark-for-your-gpu/?lng=en-US "It measures the compute performance of GPUs for Folding@Home". So a test that's sole purpose is to measure the performance of specific workflows associated to Folding@Home soft.

However using the same link you provided, just changing the benchmark to Geekbench level set segmentation 256 :

That's an incredibly strong relationship R²0.96, with only 2 outliers in the Vega 56 & vega 64 (the same architecture and revision), if we removed these just to see what we get (right), the graph shows an even stronger relationship of R²0.989. If the metrics were truly bullshit like you claim this should not be possible at all.

You do realise the Stream processors do more than just single precision FP32, right? right?

You do realize that even if stream processors can do int operations they have been created, designed, and optimized for large numbers of float operations, right? That's the reason they even exist. they generally do int it with added inefficiency compared to how the CPU handle them. GPUs exist because video games needed a better way to process large swat of floats operations required by graphics rendering.

fp32 TFlops is the most relevant figure when measuring stream processor capacity because that's what they are designed to compute predominantly, but this figure cannot assess for any bottleneck for the rest of the pipelines.

Even if they have a benchmark in mind during design this would only result in specific requirements targets, such as memory pool, bandwidth, and yes tFlops amongst others.

Of course, teraflops won't be used with supercomputers designed to process integers, that would be silly. But to claim, tflops is only an advertisement tool for others is simply wrong.

What? I have claimed since my very first reply to your claim that tflops needed contextualization and repeated this many times since.

If you view HP as a bullshit metric too that's up to you but that's not my assessment whatsoever nor do I think there's much support for this amongst the car enthusiast community. 

Yes, they account for fp16 and fp64 those are listed with every GPUs and they all use teraflops figure or a ratio over the fp32 one. How is that not accounting for those?

No float is a data type it's the same as single just with a different name and what you would use in C++ and many other languages. 

again the performance of other floating datatypes are all listed with GPUs so it's only disingenuous to say tflops fp32 does not represent tflops fp16 or fp64 when those are listed as separate figures.

Again the theoretical aspect of the figure is only to emphasize that you should not expect to max it out. It is the measurement of the max throughput of the stream processors for the datatype it represents.

If streams processor were designed for integers in any relevant capacity they would list performance with those separately just like :

and again it's only bullshit because you want to apply the tflops figure to something it isn't meant to represent.

500mV would be one hell of an undervolt, never heard of such a drastic figure for any GPUs. Realistically you can expect from 25mV to 100mV. From my limited experience with this default mV typically range from 900 to 1200 mv so 500mV would be pretty insane. I've heard some more pronounced undervolt like 125mV and even 150mV but hard to say if they are any real or if the user properly ran benchmarks to assess stability.

Anyway, binning is used mainly to create different SKUs and/or rebranding old SKUs as the process matured and the average yield increases. But no one should expect the same gain as from a node shrink.

Lord have mercy on us All EpicRandy and Pemalite!!!

To pivot the discussion somewhere else, I'm not sure if this has already been addressed in this thread, but if MS were to make a handheld device should it be a locked xbox portable? Or rather should it be a windows based device?

There are a lot of advantages for going the windows route. For one the issue of getting developers to actually support the machine goes out the window. It will just run everything assuming the specs are high enough to run the game on it's lowest settings. MS could even do something like Geforce Experience does where it automatically sets a games graphics settings based on your GPU, so MS could create recommended settings for every title that is automatically applied when you launch the game.

The disadvantage if of course that it isn't locked to the Xbox ecosystem so users could purchase titles that MS doesn't get any return on. The advantage is a more versatile customisable device for those that wish to and access to an absolutely huge library of games and no need for direct support from developers. If it runs on Windows it'll run on that.

Of course at this point it's basically just a Microsoft branded Steam Deck. However it would run Windows out of the box, customised for a user friendly experience which supports GP.

MS may need to price such a device higher as they couldn't rely as much on a return via software sales but I think it would be a much better device overall.

Do not forget that if MS turns the Series S mobile, it already have developers support because its just a modified Series S. The majority of Series S games do not go above 1080P and most displays today you can get that on the cheap so it would be no changes needed for Series S mobile device for support.

As to the issue of MS creating a windows mobile device, MS already have Surface laptops and Tablets. Let OEMs make those portable mobile devices like ASUS AOG using windows and MS create a more mobile version of the Windows OS to help with performance, Navigation, memory management and battery management.

MS also is a pretty damn good hardware company based on their Surface line and they have the money to make a mobile handheld device at a reasonable price so they could also do what they do with the surface line and set the standard for such devices and license out the mobile windows version of their OS to OEMs as well. Both approaches are viable and there is a market for it.

With the new Asus rog ally specs disclosed, it sure looks to be a really capable device, and with its advertising game pass, I'm curious to see how much the library is actually compatible with the device.

From : https://earlygame.com/gaming/asus-rog-ally-release-date-specs-price