TFLOPs generally correlate to actual, general game performance quite well.

A very demanding game will do poorly on a gpu with a given TFLOPs score, but a less demanding one may do fairly well.

So, if you can roughly dial things into a TFLOPs value, you can get a result that is then generally applicable to all games.

The most graphically demanding games require the most TFLOPs out of a GPU to render well and fast, but less demanding games can be fine with a lower TFLOPs GPU.

Like… a GPU with a medium high TFLOPs score may only be able to push about 50 fps on CP77 ultra w/o RT, but it could likely easily hit something like 200ish FPS in say, CounterStike2, both games at 4k.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/all-games-with-ps5-pro-enhancements.1026072/

A PS5Pro can render CP77 at ‘quality mode’ …which is roughly the ‘high’ graphical quality preset of CP77 on PCs, with… I believe all raytracing other than raytraced shadows off…

… at 2k30fps, or it can render at a dynamicly scaling resolution between 2k and 1080p at a locked 60fps.

https://www.gpu-monkey.com/en/benchmark-amd_radeon_rx_6700-cyberpunk_2077

An RX 6700 can render CP77 at 2k, 43 fps avg.

This site isn’t 100% clear as to whether these GPU scores are done at the ‘high’ preset, or the ‘ultra’, all settings maxed out preset… but with all raytracing off.

https://www.gpu-monkey.com/en/benchmark-amd_radeon_rx_6600-cyberpunk_2077

A 6600 can do the same, high or ultra preset, with no raytracing, at 2k, with 31 fps.

1080p at 51 fps.

So uh yeah, even with the top of the line PS5 variant, the PS5Pro’s graphical capabilities are a bit worse than a 6700, and a bit better than a 6600.

I have used many AMD cards, and yeah basically, if you only use raytraced local shadows?

At 1080p, or 2k?

Very roughly, you’ll get about the same fps with a ‘high’ preset, and only raytraced local shadows, as you would with no rt local shadows, but the game’s graphical preset bumped up to ‘ultra’.

There are now like 6 different raytracing options in the PC version of CP77.

They only work well with Nvidia cards… and the latest iteration of AMD cards, that now have basically their equivalent of RT cores, though they’re not as powerful, nor as expensive, as Nvidia cards.

Needless to say, PS5… normals, or whatever, are going to be even weaker than the ‘somewhere between an rx 6600 and rx 6700’ rough equivalence.

…

Playstation users only even see about 10% of all the graphical settings options that PC players see, really just the 4 post processing effects and motiin blur. PC players get many, many more settings they can tweak around.

Also, PS5 users generally seem to think CP77 is being rendered at 4k, in quality mode.

Uh, no, it isn’t, its rendered at 2k max, and that is likely using FSR 2.1,with a bit of dynamic frame upscaling within CP77, meaning the actual real render resolution is roughly 5% to 15 % lower than 2k, then FSR upscales to 2k,… then the PS5 does its own upscaling outside of the game, likely via an emulator style simple integer upscale algo, to display at 4k on a 4k TV.

… I am saying all of this with confidence because I have spent a considerable amount of time fucking with customizing dynamjc resolution scaling, and other graphical settings, in CP77, on different AMD cards, on PCs.

The PS5Pro is using the same dynamic resolution scaling that exists in CP77 on PCs. PCs generally do best with an ‘Auto’ mode for various frame upscalers, but the dynamic setting on PC basically lets you throw out the auto settings and fuck about with your own custom tolerances for max and min resolutions and frame rates.

Basically this is true, yes, without going into an exhaustive level of detail as to very, very specific subtypes and specs of different RAM and mobo layouts.

Shared memory setups generally are less powerful, but, they also usually end up being overall cheaper, as well as having a lower power draw… and being cooler, temperature wise.

Which are all legitimate reasons those kinds of setups are used in smaller form factor ‘computing devices’, because heat managment, airflow requirements… basically rule out using a traditional architecture.

…

Though, recently, MiniPCs are starting to take off… and I am actually considering doing a build based on the Minisforum BD795i SE… which could be quite a powerful workstation/gaming rig.

Aside about interesting non standard 'desktop' potential build

This is a Mobo with a high end integrated AMD mobile CPU (7945hx)… that all together, costs about $430.

And the CPU in this thing… has a PassMark score… of about the same as an AMD 9900X… which itself, the CPU alone, MSRPs for about $400.

So that is kind of bonkers, get a high end Mobo and CPU… for the price of a high end CPU.

Oh, I forgot to mention: This BD795iSE board?

Yeah it just has a standard PCI 16 slot. So… you can plug in any 2 slot width standard desktop GPU into it… and all of this either literally is, or basically is the ITX form factor.

So, you could make a whole build out of this that would be ITX form factor, and also absurdly powerful, or a budget version with a dinky GPU.

I was talking in another thread a few days ago, snd somekne said PC architecture may be headed toward… basically you have the entire PC, and the GPU, and thats the new paradigm, instead of the old school view of: you have a mobo, and you pick it based on its capability to support future cpus in the same socket type, future ram upgrades, etc…

And this intrigued me, I looked into it, and yeah, this concept does have cost per performance merit at this point.

So this uses a split between the GPU having its GDDR RAM and the… CPU using DDDR SODIMM (laptop form factor) RAM.

But its also designed such that you can actually fit huge standard PC style cooling fans… into quite a compact form factor.

From what I can vaguely tell as a non Chinese speaker… it seems like there are many more people over in China who have been making high end, custom, desktop gaming rigs out of this laptop/mobile style architecture for a decent while now, and only recently has this concept even really entered into the English speaking world/market, that you can actually build your own rig this way.

You’ve got that a bit backwards. Integrated memory on a desktop computer is more “partitioned” than shared - there’s a chunk for the CPU and a chunk for the GPU, and it’s usually quite slow memory by the standards of graphics cards. The integrated memory on a console is completely shared, and very fast. The GPU works at its full speed, and the CPU is able to do a couple of things that are impossible to do with good performance on a desktop computer:

• load and manipulate models which are then directly accessible by the GPU. When loading models, there’s no need to read them from disk into the CPU memory and then copy them onto the GPU - they’re just loaded and accessible.
• manipulate the frame buffer using the CPU. Often used for tone mapping and things like that, and a nightmare for emulator writers. Something like RPCS3 emulating Dark Souls has to turn this off; a real PS3 can just read and adjust the output using the CPU with no frame hit, but a desktop would need to copy the frame from the GPU to main memory, adjust it, and copy it back, which would kill performance.

Because without full access to your PC, anti-cheat is essentially useless and easily bypassed by cheaters.

This is false.

Many functional AntiCheats work well without Kernel Level access… and many Kernel Level AntiCheats… are routinely bypassed by common, easily purchaseable hacks… which, again, only work on Windows.

I used to play GTA V Online (and RDR2, and FiveM, and RedM…) on linux all the time, literally for years… untill they just decided to ban all linux players.

Because of cheaters.

That’s not an idea that anyone is saying though, other than you right now.

Uh… you are also basically saying this, with that combination of statements.

So… please refrain from obviously contradictory, gas lighting arguements, thanks!

Anyway: GTAV uses BattleEye.

BattleEye works on Linux.

Rockstar just … chose not to use that Linux support.

It’s also one of the only ways to try to stop cheaters.

There are many other ways to stop cheaters that are quite effective, namely, actually designing your game more competently and more cleverly, with less client side authority and more server side authority, less intrusive system client side AC that is more reliant on randomized realtime logging and verifications of game files, server side hereustics that pick up ‘impossible’ player input patterns, etc.

You know, all the other methods that have been used for decades, and still work.

No AntiCheat method will ever be 100% effective.

As I already mentioned, Kernel Level AntiCheats are defeated all the time, and you can easily find and purchase such cheats/hacks… which only work on Windows… after maybe 30 minutes of web searching or jumping around discord communities.

Beyond that, its not that hard or expensive to setup your own, or just purchase a tiny microcomputer that plugs into your PC, then you plug your mouse/keyboard into that, and then the microPC middleman performs aim hacks and otherwise impossible movement macros like stuttersteps and such.

Kernel ACs are routinely defeated by competent executions of this concept.

You can never stop all hackers.

It is always a trade off of exactly how much you inconvenience and degrade the system integrity/stability/security of the user, versus how many hackers you believe you are likely to stop.

…

Kernel Level AntiCheat is basically going to 99.99% effective from previous methods being 99.9% effective… and the cost is literally you are now installing a rootkit on your own system that could very well be reading all your web history and saved logins and passwords.

The code is black box, and tech companies lie all the time about how much data they gather from you… and then sell to every data broker they can.

The only actual numbers and statistics anyone has to work with, when justifying or arguing against effectiveness levels of different kinds of AC… are the claims put out by AC companies.

And even then, most people, such as yourself, aren’t even aware of or refuse to acknowledge that AntiCheats have worked on linux for years.

It is a “something is wrong with linux” issue if Linux doesn’t allow/provide for something that game developers - and game players - want, which is anti-cheat that does the absolute best it can to stop cheaters.

I see how you just completely did not address how I stated that EAC and BattleEye both support linux, other ACs have and still do as well… certain game publishers just don’t use these features that have existed for years.

Valve Anti Cheat, for example?

You can find more info if you look, but I’m guessing you won’t.

You just have an idea, of ‘the idea’.

Have you ever written a hack?

Written game netcode, and other client/server game code?

… I have! … back when I still used Windows, ironically.

Best way to test your own design is to try to defeat it.

…

Installing a rootkit onto your personal computer… to protect you from hackers in a game… is like trying to fight a stomach flu you got from Taco Bell by intentionally infecting yourself with Covid.

Oh and uh, after the whole… CrowdStrike fiasco, where Windows just allowed CrowdStike to write and update kernel level code without actually doing their own testing or validation… and then they pushed a bad update… and that took out basically 1/4 of the world’s enterprise Windows machines for a week or two?

Yeah… Windows is now removing direct kernel level access from third party software.

They’re making everything move up a level or two, kind of inventing a new interface layer/paradigm…

Becauase it is in fact, empirically, objectively, way, way, waaaay too dangerous to just let every ‘verified’ third party partner fuck with the kernel.

So… your idea of ‘the idea’ of Kernel Level AC is no longer valid, as it is no longer able to run at such a low layer, and will thus be more vulnerable to… the kinds of hacks Kernel Level AC is supposed to be necessarry for dealing with.