Support NeoGAF

[Zathalus]

I've got no issue with using AIs like Copilot and ChatGPT in general, but you proxying my point while not advocating for the point that you obviously don't understand the significance of the advent of hardware accelerated z/stencil buffering to 3D graphics, how the last fragment to be shaded in a game frame can't be completed - without tearing - unless it passes that test, and how that becomes the main delay in the critical path of low resolution when shader units and ROPs are in abundance to accelerate the fragment shaders, is hardly the same thing as me conducting the same discussion with ChatGPT myself and correcting it on it misunderstanding contexts, failing to remember that Opengl/Vulkan are both Client/Server models, and that the client submission is single threaded on the main CPU core.

It didn't even seem from your response like ChapGPT accepted that the CPU primary core and GPU for an interactive game logic/simulation is in lockstep - where the GPU can't predict the future before the gamer has interacted with the present rendered frame. So if you think that wall of info covered up your lack of real game rendering knowledge from your previous comment, then whatever,

but it doesn't change the reality that a frame can't correctly finish rendering a v-synched frame in a game to advance the CPU logic until the very last fragment from the projected geometry passes or fails its zbuffer/stencil test, so at low resolution - as we tend to zero - the zbuffer/stencilling becomes the most important constraint on the critical path - even if combined with BVH hidden surface removal lowering the overdraw per pixel to an optimal one and a half.

I mean, ChatGPT 5.2 Codex Max, Claude Opus 4.5, and Gemini 3 Pro all agree you're factually wrong on quite a number of points. The advantage of your work having a paid GitHub copilot license means being able to use these advanced coding models is easy.

And, well, every single YouTube or technical testing I can find, finds the complete opposite as well, which I've provided quite a few, yet curiously you have not.

You should be a game developer, apparently Larian, CDPR, Ubisoft, Asobo, and a few others don't realize it's a simple matter of just lowering resolution to alleviate CPU bottlenecks. The Switch 2, despite having games upscaled from 360p still faces CPU bottlenecks, and that's from some of most technical competent game studios in the world.

 

[PaintTinJr]

I mean, ChatGPT 5.2 Codex Max, Claude Opus 4.5, and Gemini 3 Pro all agree you're factually wrong on quite a number of points. The advantage of your work having a paid GitHub copilot license means being able to use these advanced coding models is easy.

And, well, every single YouTube or technical testing I can find, finds the complete opposite as well, which I've provided quite a few, yet curiously you have not.

You should be a game developer, apparently Larian, CDPR, Ubisoft, Asobo, and a few others don't realize it's a simple matter of just lowering resolution to alleviate CPU bottlenecks. The Switch 2, despite having games upscaled from 360p still faces CPU bottlenecks, and that's from some of most technical competent game studios in the world.

Yet again, not following the context. When designed for the hardware the critical path limiting factor at low resolution will be the zbuffer/stencil test clearing the last pixel - to be shaded, and even more so with cascaded shadowmap updates because the PS6 portable probably won't use RT shadows - on any given untorn frame.

All the other reasons you were putting forward are related to software not being tailored (to the PS6 portable's 4-cores), and letting work on 3-cores that could be moved to an underutilised GPU or sub divided remain a bottleneck on the 3 other CPU cores that block the primary core flow control, or have work on the GPU that exceeds the needs of the lower resolution.

You can use other studios as a strawman, but PlayStation is going to be the lead platform even more so when PS6 Portable hits, and if PlayStation 6 will be using a low power mode as base for the main console(non-cross gen games), those games will scale with resolution for PS6 Portable as was my original point, because all the other ChatGPT reasons will already have been moved off the critical path that blocks higher frame-rate (60) above 30fps.

But feel free to contradict yourself and continue a back and forth on this pretty simple issue.

 

[Karim]

I mean, ChatGPT 5.2 Codex Max, Claude Opus 4.5, and Gemini 3 Pro all agree you're factually wrong on quite a number of points. The advantage of your work having a paid GitHub copilot license means being able to use these advanced coding models is easy.

And, well, every single YouTube or technical testing I can find, finds the complete opposite as well, which I've provided quite a few, yet curiously you have not.

You should be a game developer, apparently Larian, CDPR, Ubisoft, Asobo, and a few others don't realize it's a simple matter of just lowering resolution to alleviate CPU bottlenecks. The Switch 2, despite having games upscaled from 360p still faces CPU bottlenecks, and that's from some of most technical competent game studios in the world.

One could say the switch 2 hasn't exactly a perfect designed cpu neither eh.

 

[Zathalus]

Yet again, not following the context. When designed for the hardware the critical path limiting factor at low resolution will be the zbuffer/stencil test clearing the last pixel - to be shaded, and even more so with cascaded shadowmap updates because the PS6 portable probably won't use RT shadows - on any given untorn frame.

All the other reasons you were putting forward are related to software not being tailored (to the PS6 portable's 4-cores), and letting work on 3-cores that could be moved to an underutilised GPU or sub divided remain a bottleneck on the 3 other CPU cores that block the primary core flow control, or have work on the GPU that exceeds the needs of the lower resolution.

You can use other studios as a strawman, but PlayStation is going to be the lead platform even more so when PS6 Portable hits, and if PlayStation 6 will be using a low power mode as base for the main console(non-cross gen games), those games will scale with resolution for PS6 Portable as was my original point, because all the other ChatGPT reasons will already have been moved off the critical path that blocks higher frame-rate (60) above 30fps.

But feel free to contradict yourself and continue a back and forth on this pretty simple issue.

Mate you started it with your "lack of real first hand know how of graphics programming." Which was hilarious with your claim of "so zbuffering and stencil test has never been done on the main CPU core in 3D games or the CPU's other cores for that matter." when Quake existed. Hence, you know, my entire original point that lowering the resolution used to increase FPS by lowering load on the CPU. And, which I pointed out, hasn't been the case for ages. It's like you didn't even read my original post.

It's frankly simple, lowering resolution frees up GPU resources but it doesn't free up CPU resources. If you are CPU capped at 1080p, be it via game logic, physics, animation, etc, then lowering the resolution or upscaling from 360p ain't really going to alleviate that. In short, lowering resolution does not increase frame rate if you are CPU-limited but lowering resolution can increase frame rate only if you are GPU-limited on pixel/fragment work. That is factually true. And I can bet your next rebuttal will offer zero evidence to imply otherwise.

It's been so obvious and that way for ages now that I'm surprised anyone is arguing against it.

 

[Radical_3d]

It already is 2026 in Spain, Mark Cerny!! Your most important market!

 

[Bojji]

It already is 2026 in Spain, Mark Cerny!! Your most important market!

He walks on the stage and announces: "First game with PSSR2 support launches in December 2026".

 

[Zathalus]

One could say the switch 2 hasn't exactly a perfect designed cpu neither eh.

I never claimed otherwise, the Switch 2 CPU is very limited. But it proves my point perfectly. CPU power between docked and handheld is basically identical, while GPU power is not, that is almost cut in half. Now a game running on docked mode can face drops due to the CPU, Cyberpunk 2077 comes to mind, dropping all the way to 18fps. If we look at docked mode, the game is running 1080p, upscaled from a DRS range of 720p-1080p. Next, we look at the portable performance mode, upscaling to 720p from a low of 360p via DLSS and yet, what do you know, it still has the exact same CPU drops. Dropping rendering resolution to almost a quarter and basically the minimum any game should probably render at, did nothing to alleviate the CPU bottleneck.

For the PS6 Portable, devs are just going to need to do cutbacks on the portable version of games, as it will have half the number of cores and a much reduced frequency vs the main PS6 console. Lowering resolution is not going to help them at all either the CPU (GPU yes). Game logic and simulations would need to take a cut, and that's exactly what we see happening with the Switch 2 as well. Other than the obvious graphical cutbacks in SW Outlaws and AC Shadows we also see reduction in water and cloth simulation, as well as things like reduced animation effects when compared to the PS5.

 

[KeplerL2]

Game logic and simulations would need to take a cut

I think it's more likely for devs to take the 60 FPS settings for the PS6, cut internal res by 4x and frame rate by 2x and call it a day.

 

[Zathalus]

I think it's more likely for devs to take the 60 FPS settings for the PS6, cut internal res by 4x and frame rate by 2x and call it a day.

That's the most likely scenario, but I'm assuming worst case, a very CPU heavy demanding game. But they should be rare. I think it depends a lot on what the clock speed difference between the two are.