I forgot about that. Do they not have that low frame compensation or whatever it's called that basically draws frames twice once you get below a certain point?
Current Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]
- Thread starter Proelite
- Start date
- Status
I forgot about that. Do they not have that low frame compensation or whatever it's called that basically draws frames twice once you get below a certain point?
It looks like it's time for a public announcement to remind some people of their places.
lol common man.
Metal_Spirit
Regular
That's the basic idea. And why a thermal solution works at those speeds but it was a problema with locked clocks event at 2 Ghz.
Metal_Spirit
Regular
Iroboto... Do you mean that if they decrease they cannot go up again?? Off course thy will go up.
Yea they will go back up to their cap.Iroboto... Do you mean that if they decrease they cannot go up again?? Off course thy will go up.
But boost mode is about sitting at a base clock and going up to a max cap when the load is light and there is power to spare to increase frequency.
This is how we do this on GPUs today.
PS5 has it's power set higher to already have the base frequency high, and when loads are introduced the clock goes down.
In this essence it's the opposite. One is trying to go up as much as it can, and the other is trying to stop from going down.
Metal_Spirit
Regular
Metal_Spirit
Regular
Nope... Thats a boost clock Speed... That happens on PC!
This is not boost clock speed, its "Continuous Boost"! The CPU ang GPU are all the time boosting to required clock levels, with no base clock. This is how I get it!
The comparison to PC is the reason I believe people think PS5 will downclock to 9.2 Tflops.
And it was their problem.
On Alex's posted that was totally misinterpreted by wccftech for a clickbait title:
His point is largely that to increase the variety of content developers will have to rely on procedural generation vs storing pre-made assets on the ssd. If you look at the cost of a game like RDR2, now what would it cost to double or triple the amount of unique plants, animals, people, building etc? Now there is maybe some middle ground where you could create more base assets and stitch them together for variability in clothing, or certain animals like horses, dogs that come in varieties of colours. But I think his point is not that you can't stream in all of these assets from an SSD, but that you'd have to create all off them first, and that's where the problem is. Procedural generation will probably have to be the way to go for open world games, if people expect a certain next-gen density. People can disagree, but I don't think he's necessarily wrong. There could be a lot of gains on the development side that could allow people to make more assets faster. Like have procedural creation tools up front so they can be stored on the ssd, vs having procedural generation in memory.
There's a lot to discuss here without having a fanboy war over it.
His point is largely that to increase the variety of content developers will have to rely on procedural generation vs storing pre-made assets on the ssd. If you look at the cost of a game like RDR2, now what would it cost to double or triple the amount of unique plants, animals, people, building etc? Now there is maybe some middle ground where you could create more base assets and stitch them together for variability in clothing, or certain animals like horses, dogs that come in varieties of colours. But I think his point is not that you can't stream in all of these assets from an SSD, but that you'd have to create all off them first, and that's where the problem is. Procedural generation will probably have to be the way to go for open world games, if people expect a certain next-gen density. People can disagree, but I don't think he's necessarily wrong. There could be a lot of gains on the development side that could allow people to make more assets faster. Like have procedural creation tools up front so they can be stored on the ssd, vs having procedural generation in memory.
There's a lot to discuss here without having a fanboy war over it.
Very few now, by end of generation everyone who cares about framerate? All the new tv's from lg for example have had vrr for a while. Consequently I'm looking to perhaps get the new lg 48" gaming oled to play console games on(or just use my 27" pc vrr enabled display if console can connect to it). LG is doing a 48" oled with gaming branding. It's about perfect size for gaming for me. For movies, bigger would be better.
https://www.engadget.com/2020-03-17-lg-2020-4k-oled-pricing.html
Last edited:
Yes.. so it is the opposite from how GPU boost is.
One is trying to go up. The other is trying not to go down.
Metal_Spirit
Regular
I don´t get it that way... I see it as clocks moving free, but I recon it´s a possibility.
Actual developer and not a journalist. Maybe?
I'm not sure I've understood it correctly. But AFAIK. Cerny was hinting that unless you use AVX CPU will be always underpowered.
And I have no problem with that.
Last edited by a moderator:
I asked the question because I didn't know. I was not being flippant or snarky.
Procedural generation as the ultimate way to replace all the art in games.
He never actually wrote that. He said that procedural generation would be necessary, not that it would "replace all the art in games."
No. It does not.
Turing has full speed parallel integer pipeline. That's used at on average 36% with the FP pipeline.
You could look at it as if Turing cards have +36% to their FLOPS (in real games, on paper they have 2x flops, because of that pipeline).
I think you've lost the context of the discussion.
I didn't realize int was used so much in graphics. I would have assumed it would be much more highly skewed to fp. Do you have any links or reading on where they're using it?
Metal_Spirit
Regular
No. He did not say that!
He talked about AVX instructions as an workload example. Using them would pull the CPU to the max, but they would not be used all the time.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
