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

[lyndonguitar]

Originally Posted by No_Asylum

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

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

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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...

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.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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...

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.

[Rei86]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

so removing advertised features is OK?

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?

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

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.

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?

[Frick]

Originally Posted by Rei86

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?

Advertised features are all features they say the thing has, which included "otherOS" and F@H, it has nothing to do with actual advertising.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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?

It doesn't require 4 times the power with how things work today.

[DarthCyclonis]

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.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by Frick

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.

Read post #85 of this thread.

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

It doesn't require 4 times the power with how things work today.

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.

[1d10t]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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

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


Xbox


PS3


more

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!

sony did what on PS3?

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

so removing advertised features is OK?

such as?

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

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

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by nickbaldwin86

grosss... spex suck.

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

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

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.

[Rei86]

Originally Posted by Frick

Advertised features are all features they say the thing has, which included "otherOS" and F@H, it has nothing to do with actual advertising.

When a company no longer advertise features what do you call that

[Frick]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

Read post #85 of this thread.

I did.

Anyway I kinda missed the drama here. It's all so cute.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by 1d10t

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...

#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.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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

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.

[lyndonguitar]

@BigMack70

so what are you saying, that this supposed PS4 can't run ps3 games @ 1080p 60fps? LOL

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

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.

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.

[Dos101]

Originally Posted by 1d10t

sony did what on PS3?



such as?

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.

[1d10t]

Originally Posted by BigMack70

#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.

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



any objection?

[Atom_Anti]

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?

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by 1d10t

1.oke..so what is "a demanding game" ?
2. completely wrong.
http://img.techpowerup.org/121102/ps3.jpg


any objection?

LOL.

It says its at 1080p, but its upscaled, Games don't actually run at native 1080p on current gen consoles. Sorry to break it to yea.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by 1d10t

1.oke..so what is "a demanding game" ?
2. completely wrong.
http://img.techpowerup.org/121102/ps3.jpg


any objection?

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.

[RejZoR]

Originally Posted by Atom_Anti

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?

Probably not, because the OS used won't be the same...

[Benetanegia]

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.

[BigMack70]

Originally Posted by Benetanegia

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.

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.