About the supercharged PC thing, I think it is a good way to describe it as there are lot of tweaks done and changes compared to an ordinary PC to maximise gaming potential of hardware.
"On our Core i7/GTX 680 gaming PC". Exactly what the PS4 isn't. TFLOPS figure from Sony puts it between 7850 and 7870, still far off the GTX 680 in those tests.
I already know PS4 isnt that. My post in context makes sense, responding to Luminis showing that it is possible to get good quality gaming on 4K with high end systems.
Just curious why post these 4k tests when they are on systems superior to what the ps4 will be what does it prove?
If you see the post I made to you before, it explains what to look for.
It proves the PS4 won't be able to do 4k gaming.
It doesnt prove that, it proves high end PCs can do 4K gaming. The other part I posted shows lower end PCs than PS4 are more than capable of doing 4K gaming.
Simply put, I do think a lot of insider information is available for the companies in question. Even more so thanks to the link that is AMD.
There is most likely only info developers get and any leaked stuff on the Internet. Otherwise there would be no point in keeping things hush hush, if your rival knows what you are trying to keep secret. Something like the 8GB of GDDR5 was even a surprise to people involved developing on PS4.
First off, the hardware wasn't at least very similar to what's going to be released, we wouldn't have coherent leaks and dev kits wouldn't be out. What we'ev seen recently are last minute changes. It doesn't get much later if Sony wants to get the console out in time.
I wouldnt say they are last minute changes, they are only starting to get make a more representative system. The final system could be changed without it being last minute changes as it could have been planned a while back. Developers know only alpha hardware going by what DICE person said and corresponds with leaks.
Not for the cooling, but for the R&D on energy consumption, reliability, heat development, practicability and also on business cases for the profitability of such measures. Easier decisions take months at my conpany, that's for sure.
Something like energy consumption, reliability and heat would be quite easy to understand as AMD make GPUs that take a lot more power to run. They should know their products they make inside and out, Sony will have that information already. Profitability and practicability wise, they will know what their targets are quite well at this stage.
You have to stop changing stuff somewhere and that's usually when you announce your product. Once you think you're finished, you announce it. Sony has announced it, so they think they're done. Only morons would announce a product when significant changes are to be expected.
It would most likely be added to; they are unlikely to completely change the architecture around. *Specifications are subject to change without notice helps their cause if there are changes.
It is borderline, but they won't care.
They look like they care; otherwise they could have skimped out much more.
Games will be optimized for a low-end APU that's mostly prevelant in laptops. Won't make too much of a change in terms of PC gaming.
It will make a change for AMD, games CPU requirements will probably go down and also be low clock multi-core friendly. HSA will most likely take off quicker. Games will be designed to take advantage of AMDs GCN architecture so that should benefit them over their rivals.
I'm convinced that there will be zero 4k games, as Sony said themselves.
Person responsible for system has said, it is something they are in the initial stages of supporting 4Kx2K in games as well as something he is personally interested in. Maybe even Knack will get 4K support. I think there is a higher chance of there being no 720p only games personally.
You do realize the game is running on a system that utilises as GPU that's about 1.5 times as powerful as the PS4 as a whole, right? And even then, it's struggling with a now outdated game on medium settings.
Yes I do realise GPU is more powerful than PS4, just making a point that top end GPUs arent struggling that much on games that are quite resource intensive. The games were current when tested in their series.
What did they say, then?
Linky.
Which seems pretty black and white that Sony doesn't want their developers putting the time into doing it beyond special events even if they could, which:
Linky.
Seems that they can't with one system. Unless you have some other explanation for what those statements mean.
This is what Yoshida thinks, he might be impressed if developers like PD do 4K on one PS4 console.
About bandwidth, if PC GPUs with similar or less bandwidth can do higher than 4K gaming, I think it is enough. He is just trying to give a glimpse of how much power it would take.
What reasons? The reasons that shows a computer setup that is notably more powerful than the PS4 hacking and wheezing to get to the maximum allowed 30 frames per second for games from a few years ago on medium settings? Or the reasons that show computers running games on highest settings at sub 1080p resolutions and similarly failing to get to 30 fps?
I have shown a weaker system playing higher than 4K playing games with decent FPS. Technically it is possible to deliver a good 4K gaming experience on the PS4 even if it is limited on number of games that should support it.
Not really. If you really want to continue this discussion of posting history that you started, it's not particularly difficult to find examples of you cherry picking which things you want to respond to when proven wrong about something over any topic. GT5 physics problems, 4k gaming on the PS4, the importance of the GT5 David Coulthard event, the meaning behind FIA track boundary rules... off the top of my head.
I don't personally see the point, though, since only the Super Slim and 4K discussion is relevant (and the former is pushing it).
I havent been proven wrong though on them things IIRC. I cant remember about saying importance of GT5 David Coulthard event. Something like FIA track boundaries, if you think I got the meaning of it wrong then you can tell FIA they are wrong and you are right about regulations if you want, doesnt change things on what is right no matter how many people have a similar opinion to you. I am sure I could get a lot more people agreeing with it if I posted it in the Motorsport section.
Regarding physics, so far I have only seen my opinion differing to some others and usually the same group of people, which does not mean I am wrong. If I am factually proven wrong with evidence then it would be great if you could send a link showing this but I cant think of any moments regarding them subjects that I have.
Another thing I noticed is my words often try and get twisted / taken out of context or things made up to try and further ones agenda but I dont react like person would prefer to probably. I have met people similar in real life so nothing new to me that is for sure. If I find I am constantly wrong and people in the know keep disagreeing with me, then I will look to change my stance on things.
Doesn't matter now, does it? Sony announced it soon after you started on about how obvious it was that it would happen, so there was no need for you to actually defend any of your points. This thread isn't even the same as that one in that regard, since as I recall no one in that thread was saying that it wouldn't happen. They just wanted you to explain why you were acting like it definitely would, which you never did and instead used the announcement as proof that you were right all along. Just like is the case with this 4k gaming discussion, which is kind of the point.
It was you who wanted to explain why and Simon. I gave valid reasons I feel, and also backed up with a source you quite like now too. Reasons mentioned turned out to be true and maybe good for you as I dont think anything short of actual evidence of such device would have convinced you. I think it will go similar regarding 4K.
No, someone from Sony did not say that.
He said 'We're not looking at 4K gaming initially, we are looking at 4K video and stills images. [4K gaming] is something we will look at in future," which could (and based on the PS4 hardware, probably does) mean nothing more than "we'll worry about 4k games next time around, when the hardware is more powerful and the TVs are more common."
The article turned that into "4k games coming to the PS4 in the future."
I just posted a link to what they said. What that person from Sony has said is in the speech marks. However your point, you turned it the other way around. I think that website got interpretation accurately IMO. I mean when talking about PS4, you are not looking at 4K gaming initially and looking at other features such as 4K video and still images, I doubt he is thinking PS5 that quickly when PS4 has not been released yet. He could have said they are not thinking about 4K gaming regarding PS4 simply like Yoshida but like Cerny, it seems they are on path for 4K gaming when it is more relevant, a bit like how 3D was pushed.
Holy assumptions Batman...
OK, should have said on GTPlanet then.
That's running on an i7 and GTX 680, and the frame rate is down to 30fps for that 4k resolution. The PS4 won't be that powerful. Closest nVidia GPU (based on flopperz) I've read that the PS4 might be comparable to is a GTX 660ti, which is a great card but it's not a GTX 680. Then the CPU I highly doubt will be in the i7 realm.
Of course we'll have to wait for the full specs of the system, and of course Sony already said we won't see 4K gaming so I don't know why we're discussing that..
There are graphics cards weaker that can do gaming quite well at 4K, depends how resource intensive the games are. I am not saying things Battlefield 4 will be 4K but games that are more likely less hardware demanding should be able to. One person from Sony has said no to that thought, two people from Sony have said more or less, it is something in future regarding platform.
We're discussing it because apparently Sony were lying when they said that and they will in fact put out 4k games in a few years, even though it's been shown quite conclusively that to even manage 30fps at 4k with old games with LQ textures takes a PC far more powerful than the PS4.
But then he did also say this:
Which is bordering on tin foil hat theory.
What is so tin foil hat about that? They are in control of hardware and OS. They could disable resolutions quite easily, two PS4s for 4K support would mean more chance of wider 4K game support, more visually impressive 4K games, and less compromises for developers have to make if supporting it on just one console.
I'm not familiar with 4k technology so everything I say has no backing at all other than what I think I know:
Even if Sony pushes 4k gaming, how many people will be able to afford a TV that has 4k resolution? Or do you guys mean multi-monitor/tv support? I'd say multi monitor support is more likely to happen due to eyefinity and whatnot (why the hell not?).
So in the end, probably 1% of PS4 owners will actually game at 4k.
or not.
So Sony would have to consider whether it's really worth it.
If I could compare this 4k discussion with something related to the PS3, it'd have to be the whole CELL debate. People said CELL would change the way of gaming.
It didn't.
Cell was way too hard to program for and if my memory serves me correctly (which it probably doesn't and it seems my google-fu fails me) people said that CELL would be the way of the future. Sony even said this while stating CELL would eventually end up in TV's. As far as I know, it didn't. And by the time developers realized what CELL and the PS3 could do (using the PS3 as the development head followed by porting it to the Xbox...if that's correct at all), it was too late.
That what this 4k discussion reminds me of.
It will probably be pushed like 3D was.
Cell did offer a lot, problem for PS3 was ram and GPU held it back quite a bit. Cell had to be used to make the difference, and in top first party games this is more obvious to see. They would have been better off going for a cheaper CPU and more RAM and better GPU in hindsight IMO. PS4 follows this direction so good to see they have learned their lessons.
whats really bothersome is that by the time the ps4 and 720 get released, a year or 2 later well have mobile phones with the same power as these consoles.
i said it many times before, this next gen is coming out way too fast and not nearly powerful enough. hey shouldnt even think about releasing anything thats at least 7 times more powerful than what they want to bring out now.
in short, next gen already sucks and will be outdated and outperformed by mobile phones in 2 years. f this s.
I don't think we will see mobile phones as fast as PS4 until there is a big breakthrough in the semiconductor industry. Well I suppose technically in a way they could, if it is quite big in size but it wouldn't be exactly very mobile. Something portable and comparable would be probably in 2018, something like a small sized gaming laptop or low battery life expensive gaming tablet.
