Sony PlayStation 4 "Orbis" Kits Shipping to Developers, Powered by AMD A10 APU

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

No. It would need to work 4x more efficient.

If it were 4x more efficient, it would also be 4x more efficient at 720p. For any given hardware/software combo, it is 4x more difficult to get 1080p 60fps than it is to get 720p 30fps.

Really, man, this is basic math here.

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

If I were you I would be mad also about the Linux thing. However with that being said you are not the average user. Most people are very happy with the PS3.

oh and btw sony removed folding@home from the ps3. apparently sony likes cancer

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...-PlayStation-3

[_JP_]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

none of you have a point. sony will just screw you over with ps4 like they did on ps3. stop arguing about something you wont buy and shouldn't buy!

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Sony didn't screw me over.

Me neither.
PS4 won't probably screw buyers, because sony won't offer the same type of software package. If anything, it's going to be even more restricted from the start.

Originally Posted by BigMack70

If it were 4x more efficient, it would also be 4x more efficient at 720p. For any given hardware/software combo, it is 4x more difficult to get 1080p 60fps than it is to get 720p 30fps.

Really, man, this is basic math here.

Except that performance gains/losses are not linear.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

If it were 4x more efficient, it would also be 4x more efficient at 720p. For any given hardware/software combo, it is 4x more difficult to get 1080p 60fps than it is to get 720p 30fps.

Really, man, this is basic math here.

I don't think you understand how things are rendered. Hardware is vastly more efficient today then 7 years ago.

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

oh and btw sony removed folding@home from the ps3. apparently sony likes cancer

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...-PlayStation-3

Cancer isn't so bad. You get to save money on hair cuts.

Originally Posted by _JP_

Except that performance gains/losses are not linear.

Shhhh hes on a roll. Can't wait to hear how the Germans invaded Pearl Harbor.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I don't think you understand how things are rendered. Hardware is vastly more efficient today then 7 years ago.

If I had to pick one, I'd rather fail to understand how things get rendered than fail to understand kindergarten mathematics.

[Arciks]

Originally Posted by No_Asylum

Actually ... that isnt even impressive at all. 60fps @ 1080p is slow by todays standards.

why its slow,you ar claiming that on 60fps your game runs slideshow?becaue on 30fps games dont run slideshow,so 30fps would be still enought.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

If I had to pick one, I'd rather fail to understand how things get rendered than fail to understand kindergarten mathematics.

Of course. Insults when logic escapes.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

none of you have a point. sony will just screw you over with ps4 like they did on ps3. stop arguing about something you wont buy and shouldn't buy!

The only one here at this point that doesn't have a point is you. Sony didn't screw people over. Their PS3 console is a great platform with some of the best exclusive titles to date.

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

The only one here at this point that doesn't have a point is you. Sony didn't screw people over. Their PS3 console is a great platform with some of the best exclusive titles to date.

so removing advertised features is OK?

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by _JP_

Except that performance gains/losses are not linear.

True, but not directly related to my point that you have to crunch 4x more numbers to get 1080p 60fps than you do to get 720p 30fps.

The lack of linearity is due to a number of factors (how optimized the code is, how evenly spread the load is across all hardware subsystems e.g. GPU/CPU, etc), not due to the fact that you need some other amount of number crunching power to get 1080p 60fps relative to 720p 30fps.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

True, but not directly related to my point that you have to crunch 4x more numbers to get 1080p 60fps than you do to get 720p 30fps.

The lack of linearity is due to a number of factors (how optimized the code is, how evenly spread the load is across all hardware subsystems e.g. GPU/CPU, etc).

Eureka! We have struck common sense! Now we just need to get him to realize its been 7 YEARS since the PS3 and he might see the light.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Eureka! We have struck common sense! Now we just need to get him to realize its been 7 YEARS since the PS3 and he might see the light.

Which has nothing to do with my point. If the PS4 is going to run at 1080p 60fps, it needs to have 4x the overall power as if it were to run at 720p 30fps. It really is just basic math.

I'm not saying it has to be 4x as powerful as the PS3. I'd argue it has to be more than 4x as powerful if it really is going to be humming along at a steady 1080p 60fps, as games are going to be increasing in graphical complexity... the PS3 runs Unreal Engine 3-caliber games, for example. The PS4 is supposedly going to be running UE4-calibur games.

[D4S4]

this thread delivers.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

Which has nothing to do with my point. If the PS4 is going to run at 1080p 60fps, it needs to have 4x the overall power as if it were to run at 720p 30fps. It really is just basic math.

Again its gains are not linear. Its better then 4x now on just hardware alone. NEVER MIND the optimizations that have been done in 7 YEARS. Hell the hardware in the PS3 is even older then 7 years now.

[EpicShweetness]

Originally Posted by D4S4

this thread delivers.

For real, I mean wtf I went and got breakfast, and comeback. A damn flame war erupted.

[sergionography]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

none of you have a point. sony will just screw you over with ps4 like they did on ps3. stop arguing about something you wont buy and shouldn't buy!

yup thats what they get for spending billions on r&d to build better hardware which has yet more potential that they havent took advantage of years after , but instead they are slapping an apu this time which isnt bad but surely not ahead of its time

[Shihabyooo]

HSA in action, anyone ?

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by sergionography

yup thats what they get for spending billions on r&d to build better hardware which has yet more potential that they havent took advantage of years after , but instead they are slapping an apu this time which isnt bad but surely not ahead of its time

Cell was never ahead of its time. Just the hype was.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Again its gains are not linear. Its better then 4x now on just hardware alone. NEVER MIND the optimizations that have been done in 7 YEARS. Hell the hardware in the PS3 is even older then 7 years now.

What in the world are you talking about and how is it at all relevant to comparing two hypothetical PS4 scenarios where one has (x) power and renders things at 720p 30fps and the other has (4x) power to render things at 1080p 60fps?

I'm not directly comparing the PS4 to PS3. I'm comparing 1080p 60fps to 720p 30fps.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

What in the world are you talking about and how is it at all relevant to comparing two hypothetical PS4 scenarios where one has (x) power and renders things at 720p 30fps and the other has (4x) power to render things at 1080p 60fps?

I'm not directly comparing the PS4 to PS3. I'm comparing 1080p 60fps to 720p 30fps.

Which is directly comparing a PS4 to a PS3.

[nickbaldwin86]

grosss... spex suck.

1080p @ 60FPS... WEAK!!!

1080p @ 120hz... ok now we are talking... I don't see why they can acheive this

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Which is directly comparing a PS4 to a PS3.

Huh?

Those are graphical settings, not consoles.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

so removing advertised features is OK?

Depends on the features.

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Cell was never ahead of its time. Just the hype was.

Totally. It's still kinda cool imo but it still is a bit of a flop.

Anyway, if PS4 had PS3 and PS2 compatibility I'd be in heaven and I would sell a leg to get one. Woe is me.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

Huh?

Those are graphical settings, not consoles.

Those are the graphical settings of the consoles this thread is about. Unless you are posting off topic?

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Those are the graphical settings of the consoles this thread is about. Unless you are posting off topic?

You originally said this:

If you don't think a PS4 can't do it with DEDICATED hardware that's double the specs of the current system on a game designed for the LAST SYSTEM, who am I to argue with such intellect.

And I simply reminded you that 1080p 60fps is undeniably 4x as demanding as 720p 30fps.

So, if the story on the PS4 is merely that it's twice as powerful as the PS3, as you here state, then it's not going to be doing anything at 1080p 60fps. If it's twice as powerful and twice as well optimized, thus making it effectively 4x as powerful, then sure, but that's not what you posted.

And I did warn that I was being picky...