Is 1.84 TFLOPS a lot for a GPU?

:lol: so many things wrong go back to sony's teat04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] :lol: so many things wrong go back to sony's teattormentos

Damn your dumb... tormentos

.

Pc gamers do not get it... at all. they are living in their own planet.
Optimization people. You can buy the most expensive card but the game itself is not developed for using it as it should be . this is natural and bound to happed as the pc is a  platform with millions of configurations.
It is like wanting to kill a fly with a bazooka. you ll kill that fly but firing bazooka was excessive.

Pc gamers do not get it... at all. they are living in their own planet.
Optimization people. You can buy the most expensive card but the game itself is not developed for using it as it should be . this is natural and bound to happed as the pc is a  platform with millions of configurations.
It is like wanting to kill a fly with a bazooka. you ll kill that fly but firing bazooka was excessive.

ioannisdenton

You obviously don't anythign about 3D rendering or hardware. So why are you trying to butt into this conversation?

OPTIMAZATIONZ!  Is the new cry of the ignorant console gamer.

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API. The difference between optimization on a modern PC and on a modern console is 10-30% at most. 

Now, pelase  let the grown ups talk.

Pc gamers do not get it... at all. they are living in their own planet.
Optimization people. You can buy the most expensive card but the game itself is not developed for using it as it should be . this is natural and bound to happed as the pc is a  platform with millions of configurations.
It is like wanting to kill a fly with a bazooka. you ll kill that fly but firing bazooka was excessive.

ioannisdenton

console gamers was saying that same thing over and over before the ps3, "ps3 with Optimization is going to beat the 8800GTX:cry:" and what you get is the 8800GTX playing every game with better graphics and performance than ps3. in fact even a prehistoric ati x1950pro(that have similar power with the xbox gpu) play games like crysis 2 with similar graphics and performance with a consoles link

consoles don't run on fairy dust.

PC gamers spend thousand of dollars for upgrades.In fact not all Pc users have the specs to run all those great looking games...The PS4 is a high power end PC..  I think PC gamers is over estimating what 8GB DDR5 of ram can do..

you wish... The OS plus the features will use more then 512mb.... thats common sense, next the PS4's 18 CU will partitioned normally into 14+4 CU the 4 CU for compute loads which means for main gaming 14CU you will only see typically for pixel pushing, likely the 4CU will be used for physics etc. Next lol, on efficiency turning the tide with a gpu depending on the load design is slower then a 7850 or only slightly faster. As long as you have a faster cpu then whats in the PS4 there will be no overhead to worry about. Which means no matter what they do with the PS4 gpu will never outperform a 7870 or better with same workloads. 04dcarraher

PC gamers spend thousand of dollars for upgrades.In fact not all Pc users have the specs to run all those great looking games...The PS4 is a high power end PC..  I think PC gamers is over estimating what 8GB DDR5 of ram can do..

stayhigh1

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API.

Kinthalis

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] you wish... The OS plus the features will use more then 512mb.... thats common sense, next the PS4's 18 CU will partitioned normally into 14+4 CU the 4 CU for compute loads which means for main gaming 14CU you will only see typically for pixel pushing, likely the 4CU will be used for physics etc. Next lol, on efficiency turning the tide with a gpu depending on the load design is slower then a 7850 or only slightly faster. As long as you have a faster cpu then whats in the PS4 there will be no overhead to worry about. Which means no matter what they do with the PS4 gpu will never outperform a 7870 or better with same workloads. tormentos

OS plus all the features they mentioned in the conference point to 2gb for OS+feature usage. Also their targeting 14+4CU standard and about the 14 + 4 balance The 4 CUs (410 Gflops) extra ALU as resource for compute, ie physics, dev's could opt out and use all the 18CU just for pixel pushing but that means you will not have all the features and will have a lack of advanced physics available. It's not clear whether this is a single die, or whether it's a pair of dies side-by-side on the same chip. It's more likely to be the former pair of dies side by side. at this stage, with a fully integrated single-die chip coming along in later revisions once chip yields have improved.

Now your latency example is really off, its all about the cpu,cache and its intergrated memory controller. and with memory bandwidth is more important then latency especially for gpu's, system use not so much.  Also pc gpu's handle their own memory and can have a much higher bandwidth which is dependant on cpu supplying the data. which means a 7870 will still outclass then PS4's gpu when you have a good cpu..  

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API.

LazySloth718

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API.

tormentos

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

The API doesn't suck

It is necessarily alot of overhead because of open platform and hardware diversity.

Anyway PC's make up for it with raw horsepower (if you spend enough on it)

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API.

tormentos

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

04dcarraher

OS plus all the features they mentioned in the conference point to 2gb for OS+feature usage. Also their targeting 14+4CU standard and about the 14 + 4 balance The 4 CUs (410 Gflops) extra ALU as resource for compute, ie physics, dev's could opt out and use all the 18CU just for pixel pushing but that means you will not have all the features and will have a lack of advanced physics available. It's not clear whether this is a single die, or whether it's a pair of dies side-by-side on the same chip. It's more likely to be the former pair of dies side by side. at this stage, with a fully integrated single-die chip coming along in later revisions once chip yields have improved.

Now your latency example is really off, its all about the cpu,cache and its intergrated memory controller. and with memory bandwidth is more important then latency especially for gpu's system use not so much.  Also gpu's handle their own memory can can have a much higher bandwidth which is dependant on cpu. which means a 7870 will still outclass then PS4's gpu when you have a good cpu..  

04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]OS plus all the features they mentioned in the conference point to 2gb for OS+feature usage. Also their targeting 14+4CU standard and about the 14 + 4 balance The 4 CUs (410 Gflops) extra ALU as resource for compute, ie physics, dev's could opt out and use all the 18CU just for pixel pushing but that means you will not have all the features and will have a lack of advanced physics available. It's not clear whether this is a single die, or whether it's a pair of dies side-by-side on the same chip. It's more likely to be the former pair of dies side by side. at this stage, with a fully integrated single-die chip coming along in later revisions once chip yields have improved.

Now your latency example is really off, its all about the cpu,cache and its intergrated memory controller. and with memory bandwidth is more important then latency especially for gpu's system use not so much.  Also gpu's handle their own memory can can have a much higher bandwidth which is dependant on cpu. which means a 7870 will still outclass then PS4's gpu when you have a good cpu..  

tormentos

...:roll:

your proof about API is wrong and has been debunked.

API exist for a reason, they do have overhead, but it makes sure there is a common programming standard across all level of hardware. even if DirectX is removed, there is still graphic drivers, if we remove that, we remove those graphics company's source of income from blind/clueless enthusiastic: multi-GPU.

i see this as a way of trying to make game developers do the hardwork for them, so that they no longer need to provide so frequent driver updates to optimise for games. AMD being lazy....

CPU have a common instruction set: x86. even if software programmers use assembly language to write highly optimised code, they are still issuing x86 Opcode to be decoded by the CPU decoder. And guess what the PS4 cpu is x86 :shock:...

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1

http://www.cgarena.com/archives/interviews/john-carmack/john.php

04dcarraher

.:roll:

your proof about API is wrong and has been debunked.

API exist for a reason, they do have overhead, but it makes sure there is a common programming standard across all level of hardware. even if DirectX is removed, there is still graphic drivers, if we remove that, we remove those graphics company's source of income from blind/clueless enthusiastic: multi-GPU.

i see this as a way of trying to make game developers do the hardwork for them, so that they no longer need to provide so frequent driver updates to optimise for games. AMD being lazy....

CPU have a common instruction set: x86. even if software programmers use assembly language to write highly optimised code, they are still issuing x86 Opcode to be decoded by the CPU decoder. And guess what the PS4 cpu is x86 :shock:...

04dcarraher

Given the games we've had this gen on the GPU's in consoles I don't think anyone needs to worry about graphics next gen.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"].:roll:

your proof about API is wrong and has been debunked.

API exist for a reason, they do have overhead, but it makes sure there is a common programming standard across all level of hardware. even if DirectX is removed, there is still graphic drivers, if we remove that, we remove those graphics company's source of income from blind/clueless enthusiastic: multi-GPU.

i see this as a way of trying to make game developers do the hardwork for them, so that they no longer need to provide so frequent driver updates to optimise for games. AMD being lazy....

CPU have a common instruction set: x86. even if software programmers use assembly language to write highly optimised code, they are still issuing x86 Opcode to be decoded by the CPU decoder. And guess what the PS4 cpu is x86 :shock:...

tormentos

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="MK-Professor"]no it is not

HD7950 & HD7970 are high end(for single gpu), and the HD7850 & HD7870 are mid range and also all these models are already one year old.

Essentially when the ps4 will be released will have a gpu that it was mid range 2 years ago.

So in the end of the year new GPU's will be released making the HD7850 completely low end.

04dcarraher

One variable you totally forgot... Sony is said to only target 14CU of the 18CU for the gaming while the other 4CU will be used for the lcd controller gpgpu workloads, physics etc. Which means the gpu will normally will never match a 7850 performance. 14CU=1.4 TFLOP. Also you totally have the idea of that guy who made FXAA wrong.... his statement was talking about improving texture fetching improvement not the whole gpu's performance, they can not bypass the hardware's physical processing limitations. Also you totally ignored basic computer functions The PS4 will never use 6 or 8gb for video usage, You have to account OS all the features, game data load and then video load into the memory.

Also the PS4 OS and all the features stated will use alot more then 512mb... you will be looking at 2gb OS+features, game will use 4gb(no streaming data) and video use 2gb since anything over 2gb is pointless at 1080.. Also your example of the 7850 vs 7950 is off you should only look at Direct x 11 based games since that will be the new set standard, The 7950 at 1080+ is still much faster then the 7850. Also you should look at dirt3 minimum fps too that gives you the real difference in base line performance.But lets not forget the 7950 boost clock performance or even the 7970 or even crossfire or SLI into the mix by the end of the year the 7850 will be considered mid ranged at best. Heck AMD APU's are going to get igp's nearly as fast as a 7750.

Games like Crysis already has some parts of it's physics running on GPU(1)

1. http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch16.html

Vegetation in games has always been mainly static, with some sort of simple bending to give the illusion of wind. Our game scenes can have thousands of different vegetations, but still we pushed the envelope further by making vegetation react to global and local wind sources, and we bend not only the vegetation but also the leaves, in detail, with all computations procedurally and efficiently done on the GPU.

[QUOTE="ioannisdenton"]

Pc gamers do not get it... at all. they are living in their own planet.
Optimization people. You can buy the most expensive card but the game itself is not developed for using it as it should be . this is natural and bound to happed as the pc is a platform with millions of configurations.
It is like wanting to kill a fly with a bazooka. you ll kill that fly but firing bazooka was excessive.

Kinthalis

You obviously don't anythign about 3D rendering or hardware. So why are you trying to butt into this conversation?

OPTIMAZATIONZ! Is the new cry of the ignorant console gamer.

DX11 is a MUCH more optomized API. The difference between optimization on a modern PC and on a modern console is 10-30% at most.

Now, pelase let the grown ups talk.

While DX11 has improved it's overhead issues, it wouldn't match AMD's HSD driver stack.

http://hsafoundation.com/f-a-q/

Q: Will HSA support Microsoft C++ AMP?

A: HSA will support Microsoft C++ AMP

http://blogs.amd.com/developer/2012/07/10/hsa-%E2%80%93-a-boon-for-opencl%E2%84%A2-and-heterogeneous-compute-in-general/

This HSA driver model runs in Windows.

MS is aware of the problem and it's working with AMD to fix it i.e. HSA enabled MS C++ AMP. There are more changes after Windows 8 RTM and DirectX11.1 Level 11.1

Like AMD64 ISA and Window X64 edition, Microsoft basically handed over the future of Windows to AMD (or HSA Foundation). The template for Window core's changes would be coming from Xbox Next i.e. AMD HSA powered box.

Note that Windows RT (ARM edition) would be supporting HSA i.e. most of ARM vendors** are on board HSA. **Minus NVIDIA i.e. NVIDIA is a small fish when it comes to ARM powered devices.

AMD HSD driver stack would be released about the same time as Xbox Next's and PS4's release time period i.e. Q4 2013.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"].:roll:

your proof about API is wrong and has been debunked.

API exist for a reason, they do have overhead, but it makes sure there is a common programming standard across all level of hardware. even if DirectX is removed, there is still graphic drivers, if we remove that, we remove those graphics company's source of income from blind/clueless enthusiastic: multi-GPU.

i see this as a way of trying to make game developers do the hardwork for them, so that they no longer need to provide so frequent driver updates to optimise for games. AMD being lazy....

CPU have a common instruction set: x86. even if software programmers use assembly language to write highly optimised code, they are still issuing x86 Opcode to be decoded by the CPU decoder. And guess what the PS4 cpu is x86 :shock:...

tormentos

A game coded for HSA would run across HSA compatible accelerators.

PS; Current C++ AMP runs on top of DirectCompute. The future C++ AMP would run on top of HSA stack.

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

ShadowDeathX

Beisdes CPU side overheads, another problem with DirectX11.1 Level 11.1 is it doesn't expose GCN's non-Direct3D features e.g. X86-64 pointer functions between GCN and CPU.

PS4's APIs are not resticted by Microsoft's DirectX11.1 Level 11.1 standard.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] you wish... The OS plus the features will use more then 512mb.... thats common sense, next the PS4's 18 CU will partitioned normally into 14+4 CU the 4 CU for compute loads which means for main gaming 14CU you will only see typically for pixel pushing, likely the 4CU will be used for physics etc. Next lol, on efficiency turning the tide with a gpu depending on the load design is slower then a 7850 or only slightly faster. As long as you have a faster cpu then whats in the PS4 there will be no overhead to worry about. Which means no matter what they do with the PS4 gpu will never outperform a 7870 or better with same workloads. tormentos

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

ShadowDeathX

On Cinebench 11.5 benchmark, AMD Jaguar "Temash" @ 1.4Ghz (QC/4T) ~= Intel Core i3-2367M (17 watts) "Sandybridge" (@1.4Ghz. (DC/4T).

AMD "Temash" was running on the laptop DDR3 memory, while PS4 would be running on faster GDDR5 memory (~176GB/s).

When running Cinebench 11.5, AMD A6-1450 "Jaguar/Temash" @1.4Ghz was faster than AMD A8-4555 "Piledriver/Trinity" (QC/4T) @1.6Ghz..

AMD A6-1540 "Jaguar/Temash" @1.4Ghz has ~5 watts TDP, while AMD A8-4555 has 17 watts TDP.

Since some ultra thin laptops has surface mounted memory (following Apple's example), AMD could have a laptop design with surface mounted GDDR5 memory.

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

ShadowDeathX

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

tormentos

wrong again give it up, a 1.6 ghz jag 8 core is not going to beat an intel quad core or any other amd 6 or eight core cpu clocked above 2.4 ghz.  Your just blind and in denial to the facts, that PS4 is not going to be on par with a modern pc with a modern direct x 11 based gpu

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

tormentos

All I know is that the PS4 was based from 7970m and a slightly gimped version of it.

The 7970m performs more closely with the desktop 7850 than the desktop 7870.

I'd say the PS4 should be pretty close to the 7850, the CU count is not a direct indiction of performance.

The PS4 CPU is not exactly a power house even when compared to the years old i5 2500k.

But the PS4 doesn't have the API overhead like PC does and the overhead is experienced on the CPU side.

So you will need a PC CPU more powerful than the PS4 one to run the same games but an i5 2500k will easily be enough for that.

If you have a high end 2010 PC with a higher clocked i5 CPU and an well oced GTX 480 (3gb version would be better) then you are set to play next gen console multiplats.

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]

04dcarraher does have a point with the GpGPU thing.

On PC, the video card normally does not have to do much GpGPU computing because CPUs are powerful enough to do it themselves. On PS4, the CPU is weak and developers will most likely than not have to redirect some instructions to be processed by the GPU. That will take some performance away from the GPU.

Sony did put a restriction of ONLY 14CU of the 18CU to be used for graphics processing. From what I heard though, that restriction is gone and developers are free to allocate the CUs to what they please. But again, much more times than not, developers will have to allocate some CUs away from graphics processing. So graphics processing might not even be on par with a PC 7850 (even with the almighty optimizations).

RyviusARC

All I know is that the PS4 was based from 7970m and a slightly gimped version of it.

The 7970m performs more closely with the desktop 7850 than the desktop 7870.

I'd say the PS4 should be pretty close to the 7850, the CU count is not a direct indiction of performance.

The PS4 CPU is not exactly a power house even when compared to the years old i5 2500k.

But the PS4 doesn't have the API overhead like PC does and the overhead is experienced on the CPU side.

So you will need a PC CPU more powerful than the PS4 one to run the same games but an i5 2500k will easily be enough for that.

If you have a high end 2010 PC with a higher clocked i5 CPU and an well oced GTX 480 (3gb version would be better) then you are set to play next gen console multiplats.

 

But the PS4 doesn't have the API overhead like PC does and the overhead is experienced on the CPU side.

 

RyviusARC

How is Direct3D API experienced on  CPU side? Do you have any source to prove that?

 

If you have a high end 2010 PC with a higher clocked i5 CPU and an well oced GTX 480 (3gb version would be better) then you are set to play next gen console multiplats.

 

 

RyviusARC

I seriously doubt that. High end 2006 PC is not set to play this (last) gen console multiplats afterall...

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"]

 

But the PS4 doesn't have the API overhead like PC does and the overhead is experienced on the CPU side.

 

BlbecekBobecek

How is Direct3D API experienced on  CPU side? Do you have any source to prove that?

 

If you have a high end 2010 PC with a higher clocked i5 CPU and an well oced GTX 480 (3gb version would be better) then you are set to play next gen console multiplats.

 

 

RyviusARC

I seriously doubt that. High end 2006 PC is not set to play this (last) gen console multiplats afterall...

Just compare an 8600gt to the 360 in games and you will see they perform similar with the 8600gt sometimes even coming out above.

On the other hand you need a more powerful CPU to run the same games because of this.

Also what happened in last gen doesn't influence this gen, that would be a fallacy.

The 360 had unified shader tech before PC GPUs did, without that the 360 would have been really weak.

Unified shaders help in shader intensive games and provide a hefty performance boost.

This gen has nothing special like unified shaders.

Also in 2006 there was the 8800gtx which was more than 3x the power of the consoles.

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"]

 

But the PS4 doesn't have the API overhead like PC does and the overhead is experienced on the CPU side.

 

BlbecekBobecek

How is Direct3D API experienced on  CPU side? Do you have any source to prove that?

 

If you have a high end 2010 PC with a higher clocked i5 CPU and an well oced GTX 480 (3gb version would be better) then you are set to play next gen console multiplats.

 

 

RyviusARC

I seriously doubt that. High end 2006 PC is not set to play this (last) gen console multiplats afterall...

also you have to be kidding me that you doubt a high end pc from 2006 cant play current multiplats.... Athlon X2 3ghz or C2D 2.4 ghz, 4gb DDR2 and a 8800GTX done there you go your playing games 2x the graphical ability of current HD consoles

Its an AMD chip so to get a rough estimate of how it compares to an Nvidia chip take 1.8/2 so no its not even close to a gtx 580 or anything else u listed.

wrong again give it up, a 1.6 ghz jag 8 core is not going to beat an intel quad core or any other amd 6 or eight core cpu clocked above 2.6 ghz. No your just blind and in denial to the fact that they can take those 18CU and set it up where it only uses 14/4 for certain uses. 04dcarraher

 

Just compare an 8600gt to the 360 in games and you will see they perform similar with the 8600gt sometimes even coming out above.

On the other hand you need a more powerful CPU to run the same games because of this.

 

Also what happened in last gen doesn't influence this gen, that would be a fallacy.

The 360 had unified shader tech before PC GPUs did, without that the 360 would have been really weak.

Unified shaders help in shader intensive games and provide a hefty performance boost.

This gen has nothing special like unified shaders.

Also in 2006 there was the 8800gtx which was more than 3x the power of the consoles.

RyviusARC

Those 8 gigs of GDDR5 seem pretty special to me even compared to today's high end pcs.

Cpu is what processes everything needed, the time takes the cpu to process the needed data, for example modern API with dx 11 its overhead is very little comared to dx 9 your looking at 15% vs "to metal" all you will need to overcome that 15% is a slightly faster cpu or abit higher clockrate.

also you have to be kidding me that you doubt a high end pc from 2006 cant play current multiplats.... Athlon X2 3ghz or C2D 2.4 ghz, 4gb DDR2 and a 8800GTX done there you go your playing games 2x the graphical ability of current HD consoles

04dcarraher

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"]

 

Just compare an 8600gt to the 360 in games and you will see they perform similar with the 8600gt sometimes even coming out above.

On the other hand you need a more powerful CPU to run the same games because of this.

 

Also what happened in last gen doesn't influence this gen, that would be a fallacy.

The 360 had unified shader tech before PC GPUs did, without that the 360 would have been really weak.

Unified shaders help in shader intensive games and provide a hefty performance boost.

This gen has nothing special like unified shaders.

Also in 2006 there was the 8800gtx which was more than 3x the power of the consoles.

BlbecekBobecek

Those 8 gigs of GDDR5 seem pretty special to me even compared to today's high end pcs.

Those 8 gigs of GDDR5 seem pretty special to me even compared to today's high end pcs.BlbecekBobecek

PC GPUS already do over 3.0 TFLOPS and cows are impressed with 1.84 TFLOPS :lol: ? AMD 7990 does 3,788.80 GFLOPS x2 :cool:Tessellation

PC GPUS already do over 3.0 TFLOPS and cows are impressed with 1.84 TFLOPS :lol: ? AMD 7990 does 3,788.80 GFLOPS x2 :cool:Tessellation

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]

[QUOTE="RyviusARC"]

 

Just compare an 8600gt to the 360 in games and you will see they perform similar with the 8600gt sometimes even coming out above.

On the other hand you need a more powerful CPU to run the same games because of this.

 

Also what happened in last gen doesn't influence this gen, that would be a fallacy.

The 360 had unified shader tech before PC GPUs did, without that the 360 would have been really weak.

Unified shaders help in shader intensive games and provide a hefty performance boost.

This gen has nothing special like unified shaders.

Also in 2006 there was the 8800gtx which was more than 3x the power of the consoles.

faizan_faizan

Those 8 gigs of GDDR5 seem pretty special to me even compared to today's high end pcs.

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]Those 8 gigs of GDDR5 seem pretty special to me even compared to today's high end pcs.tormentos

They dont want to see it. They hermits master race afterall.

Well Im PC gamer for at least past 20 years, so playing console ports with slightly sharper textures doesnt seem exactly like "ownage" to me. PC gaming had better times long long ago, and those shall most likely never return.