• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

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

No_Asylum said:
Actually ... that isnt even impressive at all. 60fps @ 1080p is slow by todays standards.
Click to expand...

people today buy xbox 360s with 720p 30fps

1080p 60fps is enough even for PC gaming, what more for the streamlined consoles. anything more than that and its just for benchmarks.

any resolution more than 1080p and you need to have a large HDTV(which not all have) and play from farther than the normal
 
BigMack70 said:
You originally said this:


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...
Click to expand...

Specs are well beyond double with current optimizations and architectural advances of 7+ years. Double is all they are in number. Not power. They are well beyond double in capability.
 
BigMack70 said:
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...
Click to expand...

And Mailman keep telling you it doesn't work like that, and he's right. Go play around with any modern game and you see it's not true. It's not that simple, not even generally.
 
Easy Rhino said:
so removing advertised features is OK?
Click to expand...

What advertised features?

Every f'en gaming forum has one. Sony stopped advertising backwards compatibility years ago. They never pushed its ability to Folding@Home, nor did they push 'otherOS' function.

So what advertised features?
 
TheMailMan78 said:
Specs are well beyond double with current optimizations and architectural advances of 7+ years. Double is all they are in number. Not power. They are well beyond double in capability.
Click to expand...

Surely that would have been much easier to simply clarify, rather than attempting a nonsensical argument about how 1080p 60fps in fact does not require 4x the power of 720p 30fps?
 
Rei86 said:
What advertised features?

Every f'en gaming forum has one. Sony stopped advertising backwards compatibility years ago. They never pushed its ability to Folding@Home, nor did they push 'otherOS' function.

So what advertised features?
Click to expand...

Advertised features are all features they say the thing has, which included "otherOS" and F@H, it has nothing to do with actual advertising.
 
BigMack70 said:
Surely that would have been much easier to simply clarify, rather than attempting a nonsensical argument about how 1080p 60fps in fact does not require 4x the power of 720p 30fps?
Click to expand...

It doesn't require 4 times the power with how things work today.
 
It would not surprise me if they run a mix GPU in this machine. APU for less demanding games. Discrete GPU or APU+GPU for highend graphics. Would certainly help to reduce the heat generated when idle. There are times I thought my sisters PS3 was going to melt down.
 
Frick said:
And Mailman keep telling you it doesn't work like that, and he's right. Go play around with any modern game and you see it's not true. It's not that simple, not even generally.
Click to expand...

Read post #85 of this thread.

TheMailMan78 said:
It doesn't require 4 times the power with how things work today.
Click to expand...

So you mean to say that running game [x] at 1080p 60fps is NOT 4x as demanding as running game [x] at 720p 30fps?

Huh? Again, you fail to see that my basic point was about resolutions and framerate, not a set of 2012 hardware vs a set of 2007 hardware.
 
BigMack70 said:
I find it hard to believe that they're claiming 1080p 60fps possible on an APU based system.
I call BS. More probably 720p upscaled
Click to expand...

so you think APU is weak?
3,2Ghz IBM Three Core + 500Mhz Xenos can do 720p.
3,2Ghz "7" core + 550Mhz nVidia RSX can do 1080p.
Quality?please show me if you see a major difference...

PC
003.jpg


Xbox
003a.jpg


PS3
003b.jpg


more

Easy Rhino said:
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!
Click to expand...

sony did what on PS3?

Easy Rhino said:
so removing advertised features is OK?
Click to expand...

such as?

sergionography said:
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
Click to expand...

but it sufficient enough for such optimized environment.any titles nowaday can do well both on PC or 5-years-old-hardware console
 
nickbaldwin86 said:
grosss... spex suck.

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

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

120hz is just the refresh rate of the screen. Really any platform can do that if your screen has the capability. 1080p @ 60fps is the standard right now, and not weak at all in terms of consoles.
 
Frick said:
Advertised features are all features they say the thing has, which included "otherOS" and F@H, it has nothing to do with actual advertising.
Click to expand...

When a company no longer advertise features what do you call that :wtf:
 
1d10t said:
so you think APU is weak?
3,2Ghz IBM Three Core + 500Mhz Xenos can do 720p.
3,2Ghz "7" core + 550Mhz nVidia RSX can do 1080p.
Quality?please show me if you see a major difference...
Click to expand...

#1) That's not a demanding game
#2) The Xbox/PS3 render at 720p, not 1080p+ that the PC can do, so posting downsized screenshots is irrelevant because it inherently shows the consoles in their best light and removes the biggest advantage of the PC.
 
BigMack70 said:
I find it hard to believe that they're claiming 1080p 60fps possible on an APU based system.

I call BS. More probably 720p upscaled
Click to expand...

This is why I was TRYING to break it to you how hardware has changed and can do what they claim VERY EASY. Its not BS. Its Engineering.
 
@BigMack70

so what are you saying, that this supposed PS4 can't run ps3 games @ 1080p 60fps? LOL
 
BigMack70 said:
Read post #85 of this thread.



So you mean to say that running game [x] at 1080p 60fps is NOT 4x as demanding as running game [x] at 720p 30fps?

Huh? Again, you fail to see that my basic point was about resolutions and framerate, not a set of 2012 hardware vs a set of 2007 hardware.
Click to expand...

Dude, just drop it. Hardware and software has changed since 2005-2007 when current gen launched. Obviously itll take more system horse power to run at 1080p 60fps, but it won't take 4x the power. Like mailman has said this stuff is not linear, and mailman is correct on virtually all accounts.
 
1d10t said:
sony did what on PS3?



such as?
Click to expand...

He's referring to the OtherOS feature that allowed you to install certain distro(s) of Linux iirc. It was advertised, then after that whole Geohot hacking thing with the PS3 Sony removed it with a firmware update, so some argues you can't remove an advertised feature like that. I agree, but some are more butthurt than others.
 
BigMack70 said:
#1) That's not a demanding game
#2) The Xbox/PS3 render at 720p, not 1080p+ that the PC can do, so posting downsized screenshots is irrelevant because it inherently shows the consoles in their best light and removes the biggest advantage of the PC.
Click to expand...

1.oke..so what is "a demanding game" ?
2. completely wrong.
ps3.jpg



any objection?
 
Is that also mean GTA 5 will be optimized for A10 Trinity, so those who have Trinity laptop will be able to play on PC very nicely?
 
1d10t said:
1.oke..so what is "a demanding game" ?
2. completely wrong.
http://img.techpowerup.org/121102/ps3.jpg


any objection?
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you and be the one to shatter your inner console fan, but...
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241

Current consoles don't really render anything at 1080p. The 360 isn't even capable of true 1080p output and with the PS3, for anything even remotely demanding (99.9% of games), it likewise renders at ~720p and upscales.

Also, I think the # of people who have failed to understand I've been making a picky point about comparing the computing power needed for different resolutions/settings is up to 3 or 4.

*whoooooooooooooooooooosh* go my posts over your head.

There are implications in this discussion for 1080p60 vs 720p30, but my point hasn't been about those implications.

And I stand by my speculation about an APU not being able to do 1080p60. Your speculation that it can is as good as mine that it can't - it's all speculation right now - but I just don't believe their claims.
 
Atom_Anti said:
Is that also mean GTA 5 will be optimized for A10 Trinity, so those who have Trinity laptop will be able to play on PC very nicely?
Click to expand...

Probably not, because the OS used won't be the same...
 
I'm probably late, but doing 1080p @60 fps DEFINITELY requires 4x the power that 720p @30 fps needs. BigMack is absolutely right on that account.

A very different thing is that when running low resolutions some other parts (95% of times the CPU or DirectX draw calls...) become the bottleneck and hence you don't see 4x the performance at the lower resolution.

But magic does not happen on computing. If performance moving to higher res is not linear is because graphics cards have power to spare and because of that they do a better work at the higher res. On lower res or with low settings GPU resources stay unnused.
 
Benetanegia said:
I'm probably late, but doing 1080p @60 fps DEFINITELY requires 4x the power that 720p @30 fps needs. BigMack is absolutely right on that account.

A very different thing is that when running low resolutions some other parts (95% of times the CPU or DirectX draw calls...) become the bottleneck and hence you don't see 4x the performance at the lower resolution.

But magic does not happen on computing. If performance moving to higher res is not linear is because graphics cards have power to spare and because of that they do a better work at the higher res. On lower res or with low settings GPU resources stay unnused.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Things not performing exactly linearly doesn't really have any bearing on how much power 1080p60 requires relative to 720p30 - I already explained why back in post #85 - and this basically says the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top