Pixels per second

[tuna]

With all this talk about resolutions I thought we should introduce a better way of measuring performance of games. So I introduce Pixels per Second (pips)!

So if we look a BF4 on PS4 we have 1600X900X60 = 86400000 pixels per second (8.6 Mpips).
The Xbone version would have 1280X720X60 = 55296000 pips (5.5 Mpips)

(The above assumes a perfect 60 fps which is not the case in the real world.)

So COD has 12.4 Mpips on the PS4 while only 5.5 on the Xbone.

Ryse will have 4.3 Mpips and KZ4 will have 6.2/12.4 Mpips.

Anyone likes this way of counting?

 

[DrJay24]

You have to divide by the inverse of the pixel fidelity...

 

[Scott_Arm]

So ... if I draw a white square on screen, and I do it at 4k and 120Hz, then I'm pushing 3840 x 2160 x 120 = 995328000 pixels per second. Impressive.

Or if I do 4k at 10Hz, then that's 82944000, which is also a pretty big number, and therefor impressive.

 

[Albuquerque]

So ... if I draw a white square on screen, and I do it at 4k and 120Hz, then I'm pushing 3840 x 2160 x 120 = 995328000 pixels per second. Impressive.

Or if I do 4k at 10Hz, then that's 82944000, which is also a pretty big number, and therefor impressive.

Indeed. A billion pixels per second will be quite difficult to beat, so I think we've unequivocally decided that your game and related console are the absolute best.

+1 internets to you, sir!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Pips are fine in principal for determining comparative drawing (m pips vs n pips), but it lacks the quality information of the discrete values. Resolution tells us image fidelity. Framerate tells us smoothness. The same pips rating can come from two very different approaches - low res high-framerate and vice versa.

 

[Bigus Dickus]

Seems like this was in common use previously... late 90's perhaps?