[IGN] Report: PS4 Dev Kits Surface - Page 39  

Well we're talking next gen consoles right? What would be the limiting factor in that to bottleneck a hd7850 or even a hd6670 in terms of clocks.

And you still haven't answered my question. How does it not make any difference?

Wow, now I am being insulted by two people. I NEVER claimed render = texture. I know the difference. I know what a games native resolution means. And I know what a games render resolution means. They are completely different. Sorry to say, but you lack some ability to read. COD renders at 1080p on all platforms. But that does not make it native.

lol? Seriously now, stop posting, you doing nothing but making yourself look silly.

How long is a piece of string? Until we know the actualy clocks they'll be running at we have no idea, but historically EVERY console ever released has been bandwidth limited towards to end of its life

Weird, if I am making myself look silly using what you said than that is also making you look silly.
"Texture resolution and rendered resolution are 2 completely different, unrelated things"
"COD renders at 1080p on all platforms."
And COD also can render higher on PC. Unless you are saying COD does not have a rendering of 1920x1080, then I am still correct.
Edited by Paratrooper1n0 - 11/13/12 at 11:11am

But we're going off topic now. I asked if clockspeeds mattered for cards and you said nope..not a thing. Now we're talking bandwith and lifecycles. In general clockspeeds matter to performance correct? And so does architecture. So even if the hd6670 would have the same rops and whatnot the clockspeeds and architecture would still up the performance by a great lot.

I'm not insulting you, I'm just saying that you don't know what you're talking about.

Your quote:
Every game on PC renders at native resolution, regardless of what resolution that may be (with some extreme exceptions like games that may not support certain high resolutions like the retina macbook use). You mention that Skyrim and COD are games that somehow are not rendering at native resolution, and you bring textures into the conversation, when those have nothing to do with render resolution in any way.

So I wouldn't say I misunderstood what you wrote. Maybe you misspoke?

Increasing clock speed only matters in cases where you're not limited by a bottleneck elsewhere. For example you'll often see CPU benchmarks for games in which the resolution is set very low, this is to force the CPU to become the bottleneck in the benchmark. If the GPU is waiting on the CPU to complete its tasks before it can start rendering, then speeding up the GPU will not net you much of a gain because it's still waiting the same amount of time for the CPU. That's just one example, often the bottleneck can be a specific part of the GPU that won't be affected by a clock-speed increase. For example if the bottleneck is that you're waiting on memory access, increasing the core clock speed will not increase your framerate by much at all, because the memory is the bottleneck and the GPU is still waiting on the memory just as much as before.

I'm not arguing whether or not there is a bottleneck in this case, I haven't done any research into the GPUs that we're talking about, I'm just explaining why an increase in clocks will not always increase framerate.
Edited by lordikon - 11/13/12 at 11:38am

Well now that you word it that way, completely different to way you worded it before.....

COD does not render 1080 on every platform, only PC can render the game at 1080.

The other platforms don't render at 1080, they output 1080.

Big difference between the 2 and you would be wise to learn that difference before you post again.

Wow this is a waste of my time. I am trying to learn something here not trying to prove you wrong and this is all the answer I can get after three times trying to ask the same question? Nvm man, sorry I bothered you,