the idea of it improving battery is that generating frames is less performance intensive than running a certain framerate (e.g 60 fps capped game with frame gen at double the framerate consumes less power than running the same game at 120 fps). though its slightly less practical because frame generation only makes sense when the base framerate is high enough (ideally above 60) to avoid a lot of screen artifacting. So in practical use, this only makes sense to “save battery” in the context that you have a 120hz+ screen and choose to cap framerate to 60-75fps.

If one is serious about minmaxing battery to performance in a realistic value, people should have the screen cap at 40 hz, as it has half of the input latency between 30 and 60 fps, but only requires 10 more fps than 30 which is a very realistic performance target for maintaining a minimum on handheld.

itll more likely go into the XeSS route with alternative code path

the PS5 pro uses 60 CU rdna 4, so if you want to match that, buy the supposedly rumored 8800XT that amd is trying to pump more of as they forgoe top end end generation supposedly (basically similar to the RX 480 and RX 5700xt generations)

keep in mind, console and pc sales and cost differ because of where they focus on making money. Sony for example makes money off accessory sales (the ps5 pro is disk driveless and no vertical stand) ontop of never adressing the rampant stick drift problem the dualsense has, ontop of paid online, none of which is any signicant factor on PC, which generally speaking is more front loaded cost heavy but overtime has lower cost in games, services and such.

devs on pc have to decide which set of hardware to optimize for. it’s a step that they choose based on harwdare adoption trends. There is always a point where something is too hardware demanding that it would greatly hinder sales when making a decision. With a fixed hardware platform, devs have a concentrated point in hardware adoption to target.

For instance, say you developed a game where the minimum hardware requirement was slightly higher than a steam deck. If enough steam deck sales exist, the dev might have an incentive to optimize the game more just to get access to said market.

because itd be a pain for devs to optimize for a platform if said platform changes too often. one of the benefits of a console is that the platforms life is about 7-9 years so both audience and devs dont have to worry much about having to go through the decision of deciding which generation to support.

it would do a LOT of gen 1 steam deck buyers a disservice if a gen 2 one came out faster and a dev arbitrary targets the newer device as the baseline.

would they not have to have evidence that a review is fake? especially if you bought a product (e. g on amazon) its very easy to verify you have likely bought a product and have it in question to review.

state of play is sony’s counterpart to “Nintendo Direct”. With the death of E3, all major companies have their own showcase of shows digitally, while some of them will just announce it in the general show (Geoff’s Summer Game fest, the “generic e3 show”)

basically Sony if showing off their own games, has 2 shows:

State of Play is sonys version of, includes 3rd party companies producing content on playstation

Sony also has a different showcase called “Playstation Showcase” thats directed specifically to 1st party stuff

just for completion sake, Microsoft’s game info show is called “Xbox Game Showcase”

they showed it off at the May 30th state of play, and thats about it for advertising. if you were a pc player and didnt watch sonys presentation, you likely would have never known

basically specifically for AAA titles, development cost for them are soo astronomically high that the console platform isnt enough to support them alone (imo) both Sony and Microsoft basically have to decide to either scale back complexity of games (like what Nintendo would do) or release it to more platforms because 1 device platform is no longer enough for some titles.

Sony decides to port to PC, (and so does 3rd party companies like Square Enix and capcom who realize the need), while Microsoft is taking the subscription route which bolters both their cloud infrastructure numbers, and provides a subscriber count which investors like because subscriptions are content quarterly flow of money rather than peaks and drops based on game release.

basically how i see it is it only makes better sense from a consumer standpoint if the decreased developer cost is ALSO decreasing the upfront user cost to buying the game, as the worst policy that Valve has on steam is that the games base price has to be the same on all storefronts.

however in reality, most developers do not pass some of that savings to consumers and just take the cut for themselves. So devs are basically playing againt future benefits on growing a larger consumer base on a different platform for more upfront profit.

basically most of the investment money that epic throws is thrown at development and developers, and basically outside of free games, none of it is thrown back into making the platform better for consumers. Developers can complain however much they want that steam has a “consumer monopoly” (while ignoring the fact that other companies like Riot, and mobile game companies with PC clients like Mihoyo does fine without steam). this will continue to happen until epic reinvests some of that money into their client, or devs actually use the benefits of taking a lower cut and biting the bullet and regularly passing some of it off to consumers.

regardless of the situation, developers are stopping developers ultimately if they want to break the “consumer monopoly”

their advantages are purely for developer tools for games using Unreal. thats about it. the only thing it offers to consumers is their free games.

Ahh, the Dragon Hunter 2 situation

arc A750/770 was ~AMD RX 6600/XT or Nvidia 3050/3060 performance, just with (significantly) worse drivers where whether a game would run properly was a flip of a coin

theyll add AI, strictly for upscaling purposes. outside of the fact that they need to make more titles, the thing they need to do is commit to a proce drop of the base PS5 to get more people onto the device so that devs are actually incentiveised to make PS5 optimized titles rather than keep PS4 on life support.

bungie hasnt been affiliated with microsoft for almost 2 decades now.

the whole point of destiny was microsoft wanted them to keep working on Halo, but they wanted to work on something else, so they bought their independence

yeah im hoping rival 2 does well long term. also hope that custom content community if possible thrives with it.

also to bring a rudamentary comparison:

a cpu is a few very complicated cores, a gpu is thousands of dumb cores.

its easier to make something doing something low in instructions(gpu) faster than something that has a shit ton of instructions(cpu) due to like you mention, branch prediction.

modern cpu performance gains is focusing more on paralellism and in the case of efficiency cores, scheduling to optimize for performance.

GPU wise, its really something as simple as GPUs are typically memory bottlenecked. memory bandwidth (memory speed x bus width with a few caveats with cache lowering requirements based on hits) its the major indicator on GPU performance. bus width is fixed on a hardware chip design, so the simpilist method to increase general performance is clocks.

as far as platform fighters go, Brawlhala actually did decent.

genshin already runs on linux, as the anti cheat pressure lessened in genshin in like 3.8.

also the android version of both wuthering waves and genshin do not have controller support, so they would be very bad examples to port to linux

no, because the tegra x1 was a processor originally designed for nvidia shield tv and jetson developer boards. companies like nintendo for the switch and google for the pixel c tablet, used the tegra x1 as an off the shelf chip, which is why all of the listed devices are suscceptable to the rcm exploit, as they are the same chip.

semi custom means they are key functionality added to the chip from oem designs that fundamentally make it different. e. g valve has zen 2 + rdna 2 igpu instead of the off the shelf zen 3 + rdna 2 option. Sony for example has a memory accelerator on the PS5 to give the PS5 faster data streaming capability than standard designs. and supposedly have a compute block for the PS5 pro supposedly for better resolution scaling and ray tracing than standard amd designs.

Nvidia not doing semi custom is the main reason why Apple stopped using nvidia after the GTX 670 in their imac pro lines in favor of AMD, and for example, why nvidia is very strict on the form factor theor gpus are in (e. g theres a reason why a smaller egpu doesnt really exist much for nvidia gpus, while the AMD option is more common, despite being less bought by consumers)