Chuck Norris
Banned
Who is SuperDAE?
What an incredibly disingenuous statement, you know very well what the context here is, what is the point of this smartass retort?
Is this guy legit?
Is this guy legit?
Who is SuperDAE?
Yes and no. He seemed like it at first but has been wrong and trolling a lot since then. I don't know what his current status of reliability is.
Yes and no. He seemed like it at first but has been wrong and trolling a lot since then. I don't know what his current status of reliability is.
That's as exquisite turn of events if I've ever witnessed one! Some forumers will be taught the virtues of patience the hard way!
That's as exquisite turn of events if I've ever witnessed one! Some forumers will be taught the virtues of patience the hard way!
Oh apologies. I saw that a couple online sites said he was and thought he was. If he isn't sorry about that. I thought it was VGleaks themselves.
Vgleaks info is from feb last year I hear that means nothing should have changed unless they don't want to release soon.
Guess he could easily just be fucking with people again.
So, Durango > Orbis?
Interesting.
Aegies claims Sony changed their specs in the summer of 2012 and they're believed to be ready for release this year.
so it only works as a metric when it works in your favor, eh?
btw try to quantify a game that looks 50% better. do it. especially when you have resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two systems.
50% more FPS.
I also remember both thuway and Proelite saying flops won't tell the true story with these new consoles.
But hey, you have seriously convinced yourself that you see whatever you want to see.
Aegies claims Sony changed their specs in the summer of 2012 and they're believed to be ready for release this year.
Thats what I'm wondering. If the specs haven't changed, then it doesn't matter how old they are.
Unless MS gave devs public specs, but had a slightly more powerful chip should the need arise is the only thing I can see.
Both of them are banned. I am not sure I would put much trust in what they have said.
Both of them are banned. I am not sure I would put much trust in what they have said.
50% more FPS.
oh really, what's the context then?
I'll wait here.
Seems like you already got told by Codeblew.50% more FPS.
not quite! that's the assumption that the CPU is sitting there doing nothing.
not quite! that's the assumption that the CPU is sitting there doing nothing.
Microsoft's problem right now is one of perception. If MS doesn't come out screaming at the Durango unveil and/or E3 shouting "Core, Core, Core!", I don't think the early midterm looks good for MS unless those new first party games show up fast.
The 360 could coast like it has due to still getting superior multiplats late in this gen, but if they come out with the lower power box it is an uphill climb which leaves them vulnerable to a hungry Sony.
Actually it's assuming that the game is GPU limited. CPU could have practically the same workload at twice the framerate
So now you have a game where the physics, AI, HUD and controller response is disjointed from the frame rate
Not very wise especially with physics which have a direct impact on visuals in motion
It really doesn't seem to make sense to have some beast early dev kits if your final target hardware is nowhere close to it. But I don't know how those things work.
It really doesn't seem to make sense to have some beast early dev kits if your final target hardware is nowhere close to it. But I don't know how those things work.
1: ps3 flops number was given by nvidia for RSX and they were bullshit (nvidia is known to downright lie about their numbers and wildly exaggerate)
2: wildly different architectures both cpu and gpu wise.
This time: both developed by amd, both (going off rumors still which is what the speculation is about) using the same GCN architecture.
We have (the 'leaked') CU and flop numbers for both and they are way more representative of performance relative to eachother because of the above.
The only difference this time being the memory set up which appears weaker on durango...
You claim ps3/xbox360 were further apart based on some early bullshit number nvidia gave that wasn't comparable to the xenos numbers to begin with.
So either you know all this and still felt the need to be obtuse about it, or you didn't and we are just going in circles with people parroting the same shit (like in your post) over and over every few pages.
Pick your poison.
That's assuming the physics engine doesn't already tick at over 60fps
So again, cherry picking to prove some point? I sourced 4 generations of data, youre looking at one. Still, I didn't see you quantifying what difference it would be with resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two...
I'm still waiting
So again, cherry picking to prove some point? I sourced 4 generations of data, youre looking at one. Still, I didn't see you quantifying what difference it would be with resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two...
I'm still waiting
It's worse than that. It's more like, "The theoretical Durango, as portrayed by various somewhat dubious internet rumors, is the laughing stock on GAF at the moment."Durango is like the laughing stock on GAF at the moment. Stressing 'GAF'. I'd like to see how this plays out.
SuperDAE's info can't be ignored. If you do believe he had a Durango devkit (which is a big if), then his knowledge of the hardware (at least of the alpha kits) is better than anything from VGleaks IMHO.
No, you were suggesting this is the first time in several gens that it would be this close, obviously referring to last gen.
As for the second part of your post, I think you have me confused with someone else. I only responded to your 'closest since psx and n64' comment.
Fight it out with them.
It is all about the games.It's worse than that. It's more like, "The theoretical Durango, as portrayed by various somewhat dubious internet rumors, is the laughing stock on GAF at the moment."
If the rumored specs are true, I'm underwhelmed by the the Durango at the moment. Not appalled, just underwhelmed. But I'm not at all convinced that we're getting the straight skinny. So many things just don't make sense to me.
BTW, I've been critical of MS's (alleged) Durango design choices in my last couple posts. But I'm a happy one-console 360 owner this gen, so please don't assume I'm one of the fanboys. I'll switch allegiances in a heartbeat, if it looks like the grass has gotten greener elsewhere.
Ding don't care.
Yes I decided to bring you into it.
And no, actually I was thinking more of Xbox - GameCube which was 21.6 vs 10.5 GFLOPs when I was making the comment and that one was 100% increase
Your cherry picking generations which aren't similar and cant be used for comparasiom
Different architectures not comparable this would have to be the fifth or sixth time you've been told this
I'm not cherry picking anything
I am asking how you can quantify that 50% increase for a very explicit reason.
SuperDAE's info can't be ignored. If you do believe he had a Durango devkit (which is a big if), then his knowledge of the hardware (at least of the alpha kits) is better than anything from VGleaks IMHO.
Is that reason to try and detract from the fact that it's there I have said multiple times you can't quantify it visually because it could be anything, it could allow for higher reso effects , more effects, anything really.
Yes I decided to bring you into it.
And no, actually I was thinking more of Xbox - GameCube which was 21.6 vs 10.5 GFLOPs when I was making the comment and that one was 100% increase
So when you're looking at a game like crysis 3 - which basically has every pixel on screen pixel shaded, how easily do you think you'd be able to distinguish the game across the two platforms?
Depends on what the extra flops are used for, if they are used to render a giant middle finger on the screen then it's going to be obvious of its used to up the reso of a couple of effects not so much.