You will have to find me a quote for that because I don't think I ever said that.
Quote found. Just after I suggested the PS5 could have all 20 WGPs turned on, instead of disabling two like it is in The Gospel with 18 WGPs, this was your response:
As for adding of additional WGPs, therefore creating COMPLETELY different chip 6 months before final tapeout being equated to upping the clocks, I'll pass.
The argument isn't explicitly in favour of either machine. It's just saying a possibility.
I can't fathom how you reached this conclusion when he writes this:
There is nothing more to add than what has been said by any developer who has commented. At the beginning of the year PS5 was still the one that offered the best performance. I don't know if that has changed with the new Devkits, I don't have access to that information at this time and personally I think that (theoretically) I won't have physical access until early summer, for my part.
"You should think less about TF and think more about machine balance."
You're right he does say balance and I missed that.
He does
not claim the PS5 is the most balanced one, though. In fact he implies the opposite, by saying the PS5 is the most powerful but you can't notice any difference because the other (
i.e. SeriesX) is more balanced.
Yes. He didn't go into any details like upscaling. He just said one machine may have a TF deficit but be better at using it.
"one could have more TF than the other and give less performance. You should think less about TF and think more about machine balance."
An explanation for that on my part, because zero hardware details were given, is that the machine with less TFs could be using better upscaling than the other one, and produce results that it takes pixel-counters a long while to figure out what its rendering (which is becoming harder anyway because there's not really a single render resolution and hasn't been for ages).
I agree and it's not just upscaling. It could be a more advanced method of VRS (which Microsoft have already bragged about BTW).
I just don't agree with your interpretation that BGs isn't claiming that the PS5 is the more powerful console specs-wise and SeriesX is the most balanced (or the one using clever tricks like upscaling and variable rate shading to make up for it), because it seems to me that he clearly is.
The guy, who's not a native English speaker and so you're basing an awful lot on what's an inherently weak communication, also says some people can see a laser pointer on the moon and some like to sit 30cm from their 4K TV to see if the game is 4K native or not, neither of which is exact.
We can tilt the
lost-in-translation-ness either way, so I suggest we just don't.
You'd need to provide us with numbers to prove your claims. I can't do anything with 'its powerfull', 'its close', or even worse, 'people won't notice the difference'.
I don't need to provide anything when I'm literally paraphrasing someone else. Be my guest to doubt Jason Schreier's credibility, but it's his that you'll question, not mine. I have no connections in the console industry.
If that had to do with Stadia, then that claim doesn't make any sense at all.
It makes all the sense to use TFLOPs throughput as comparison, as aside from 3dmarks it's the best comparison you'll get assuming both consoles use the same architecture.
We don't know actually how much Navi really differs from GCN3/4 in a programming environment where the dev is able to maximize ALU occupancy, unlike what we get in the PC.
