James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
Thanks for the summary. This thread has really gone places.
This is really nothing we didn't already know. Mark Cerny stated that GPU's are not fully efficient, and that there's gaps in performance with idle cycles. To fill these gaps in, devs are suggested to use the GPU for compute...similarly to how devs would try and maximize cycles on CELL for various purposes since the hardware was quite flexible.
Also, I hate that there's this perception that compute somehow won't impact graphics because it's not direct rendering. IMHO, the biggest advancements we will see in the coming gen will come from making environments feel more alive and tangible, rather than static....this is where GPGPU comes into play heavily.
And at the end of the day, the performance gap for the PS4 is still 40+%, with that figure perhaps being larger since Sony has optimized and "balanced" the hardware specifically to extract more out of GPGPU.
Every detail we've seen regarding the XB1 vs. PS4 indicates that PS4 is far better "balanced" for gaming.
This is really nothing we didn't already know. Mark Cerny stated that GPU's are not fully efficient, and that there's gaps in performance with idle cycles. To fill these gaps in, devs are suggested to use the GPU for compute...similarly to how devs would try and maximize cycles on CELL for various purposes since the hardware was quite flexible.
Also, I hate that there's this perception that compute somehow won't impact graphics because it's not direct rendering. IMHO, the biggest advancements we will see in the coming gen will come from making environments feel more alive and tangible, rather than static....this is where GPGPU comes into play heavily.
And at the end of the day, the performance gap for the PS4 is still 40+%, with that figure perhaps being larger since Sony has optimized and "balanced" the hardware specifically to extract more out of GPGPU.
Every detail we've seen regarding the XB1 vs. PS4 indicates that PS4 is far better "balanced" for gaming.