1080P, what's the meaning?

[Shifty Geezer]

Is it worth the premium or sacrificing of other effects to get a game to render at the higher res? Nope, not at all. Both the Xbox and PS3 dont have all this GPU power to spare in my opinion to just do it in every game or even alot of games. Will games have it? Sure, its called marketing, and it works very well as you've proven to us all here.
....

This is the common 'chicken and egg' argument for new technology though. At the moment there's hardly any HD sets out there. In which case, it doesn't make sense to target the tech. Why create HD games, HD TV programmes, and HD movies, when 90+% of the world's population won't benefit? The reason is to push technology forward (and create a new standard, and sell new technology!). Without the content, the technology won't sell. So the content has to come. Seems to me the industry as a whole is taking a move towards 1080p as the ideal HD solution, good for another 15+ years, and they're creating content towards that. With Sony being a CE company, it's more of interest to them than MS, so for MS they could target the more-popular-but-still-vanishingly-small-proprtional-to-SD-set-users-720p-market.

None makes sense from a performance for the install base, but they want to look forward thinking. If no-one were to target the rare cutting-edge, we'd never get any technological progress. No-one would be producing HDTVs as no-one would produce content for them, and no-one would produce content for them because no-one would produce HDTVs.

 

[croc hunter2]

Cows.

I DON"T UNDERSTAND THE HATE. Some of you prefer 640x480? Its not the end of the world. It's a choice and if you can't resolve that res on your monitor you get free FSAA. at 480p you get lots of it.

My TV can't resolve all the parts of the real world, but the real world does look good on it. (It's a super fine pitch Sony CRT) I expect 1080p PS3 games to be pretty good looking too.

1080p will be the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray resolution of choice, games at that res won't be alone.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I DON"T UNDERSTAND THE HATE. Some of you prefer 640x480? Its not the end of the world. It's a choice and if you can't resolve that res on your monitor you get free FSAA. at 480p you get lots of it.

For the record, that's not confirmed. This is something expected (and claimed for) XB360, but unfortunately that hasn't been the case. I don't know how more modern XB360 titles are, but early on it was certainly apparent that SDTV output was rendering at a lower resolution rather than downscaling the 720p output. We can't be sure that SDTV users get supersampling, but if not I certainly won't get a PS3 before I get an HDTV, which won't be for years (if I ever get one!)

 

[London Geezer]

For the record, that's not confirmed. This is something expected (and claimed for) XB360, but unfortunately that hasn't been the case. I don't know how more modern XB360 titles are, but early on it was certainly apparent that SDTV output was rendering at a lower resolution rather than downscaling the 720p output. We can't be sure that SDTV users get supersampling, but if not I certainly won't get a PS3 before I get an HDTV, which won't be for years (if I ever get one!)

I really hope so cause i'll be in the same situation. Not sure about 720p to 480i conversion as that ratio is a very weird number, but still, this is one thing that Sony should really think about as SDTV owners are still the vast majority and will be for a long time.

 

[Bigus Dickus]

No thats not the question. Thats changing the question to lead to the answer desired.

I think he hit the nail on the head. That has always been the penultimate question when discussing resolution tradeoffs in graphics, whether on the PC, PS2, Xbox, GC, PS3, X360, Wi....

The question still remains; Will 1080P provide better image quality and clarity comparedt to 720P.

That's the same question he asked. And you can't answer it without addressing what has to be SACRIFICED in order to produce 1080p rendering.

As for the effect it has on effects thats is upto the developers to decide on how we use our budget. We could argue the same comparing 480P to 720P.

We did. We still do. The argument will never stop, because it is an appropriate and relevant argument to have. Rendering at higher resolutions requires sacrificing other aspects of IQ, whether that be shader effects, texture detail, AA, HDR, framerate, whatever.

Sure you can add more "effects" to 480P but the overall presentation would be better on 720P.

Nonsequitar. You are jumping to an illogical conclusion, because you are assuming an implicit "all things being equal" clause. There is no such assurance in the graphics rendering realm. Nearly everything is a tradeoff.

To illustrate your fallacy - I think everyone here would agree that "Cars" or "Monster's Inc." have a "better overall presentation" at 480p than any videogame ever created on any platform to this date. Higher resolution output does not necessarily lead to better image quality. Information density per pixel can be increased through smart AA and AF instead of higher resolutions or supersampling, and pixel quality can be improved through better shaders, better lighting models, better textures, higher framerates, etc. Most (all?) of those are significantly affected by higher resolutions, thus the concept of a tradeoff.

Here's another illustration. What looks better - PGR3 at 480p, or the original Pole Position at 1280 x 1024? "All things are NOT equal."

 

[jb]

Well I am not sure how easy this will be to tell. Some of the LCDs out there now have good scalers so I would bet most here would be hard pressed to tell the difference in comparing two ideal and identical games (ie one at 720p then upscalled to 1080p vrs the other all at 1080p and assuming art assets and everything else were equal) games while playing it. I am sure it would be easier once you hand over the controller... But sitting in the couch 5+ feet away while playing? Maybe my eyes are just to' old now

 

[swanlee]

It' now a moot point. Both the 360 and PS3 will be able to display 1080P natively for games and HD disc media or upscale 720P games to 1080P. It's up the the devs to build games for native 1080P. The options are there for both.

 

[Powderkeg]

COD3 is 720p, that much I am sure of. Its been stated multiple times by various websites that the game was running at 720p. Marvel on the otherhand, I'm 99% sure it's 1080p native.

But thats besides the point, the context of the question you were asking if there was a difference, and I replyed with an answer to your question.

That's not besides the point, that IS the point.

As you said, COD2 is running at 720p, so when they saw it running on the PS3 at 1080p it was being upscaled, in which case it won't look any different than the 360 upscaled to 1080p.

Marvel is still somewhat questionable, but the point still stands. Unless you can say with absolute 100% certainty that it's 1080p native then it may too look no different from the 360 version upscaled.

So again, going back to .Melchiah.'s post, yes, those quotes are basically just PR, as at least with one, and possibly with both games the 1080p output is achieved via scaling, which can be done with the 360 just as easily as the PS3 with no noticable graphical difference between the two as far as resolution goes.

 

[Bad_Boy]

That's not besides the point, that IS the point.

As you said, COD2 is running at 720p, so when they saw it running on the PS3 at 1080p it was being upscaled, in which case it won't look any different than the 360 upscaled to 1080p.

Marvel is still somewhat questionable, but the point still stands. Unless you can say with absolute 100% certainty that it's 1080p native then it may too look no different from the 360 version upscaled.

So again, going back to .Melchiah.'s post, yes, those quotes are basically just PR, as at least with one, and possibly with both games the 1080p output is achieved via scaling, which can be done with the 360 just as easily as the PS3 with no noticable graphical difference between the two as far as resolution goes.

What is this damage control day or somthing? I was simply answering your question no matter what context it was in. You asked a question, and I answered it. I never said anything about the ps3 version of cod3 looking better than the 360 version in this thread, cause I knew from another thread that it was 720p. And we really could do without a 360vsps3 debate. As for marvel, its been stated it is in 1080p, and theres some slight shader differences between the game that makes it look better than the 360 version. Nothing game changing of course, but I'm just stating what another website has. So in this case there is a difference besides just resolution. Not that it makes no difference, the game isnt what you call amazing looking or anything in the first place. The other difference that was noted was that the 360 version was running at a smoother framerate, but the ps3 version should be fixed in that respect before release.

edit: from the other thread
http://360.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=8614&pg=2&comments=&preview=

Graphically, the PlayStation 3 version looked the best of the three and sported some interesting distortion and blur effects that were absent from the Xbox 360 and Wii versions. Powerful attacks on the PS3 caused ripples of invisible energy to distort the area around the attack momentarily. When asked why this was absent from the 360 version, a developer told us that it was due to the PS3’s ability to handle shaders differently than what can be done on the 360 or Wii. Both the 360 and PS3 versions made use of impressive lighting techniques, particle effects, hi-res textures, and impressive character models while the Wii looks to be a mild step up from the current-gen efforts; though that is certainly to be expected at this point. Also, the PlayStation 3 version of the game was shown running in 1080p, which looked absolutely incredible and sharp while the Xbox 360 was running at a respectable 720p and the Wii version running at 480p. All three versions supported 16:9 widescreen modes.

 

[mrboo]

As you said, COD2 is running at 720p, so when they saw it running on the PS3 at 1080p it was being upscaled, in which case it won't look any different than the 360 upscaled to 1080p.

If you had a multiplat game runing on both PS3 and 360 and BOTH console's were rendering it nativly at 720p, but upscaling the image and out putting it as 1080p then the only difference should be a slightly sharper/clearer image from PS3 because HDMI vs Component. Beside's its still not known how good PS3's scaler is, or if its a dedicated scaler like 360's or the SPE that handle's the OS is doing it. The only way to be certain is to wait till PS3 arrives.

 

[Powderkeg]

If you had a multiplat game runing on both PS3 and 360 and BOTH console's were rendering it nativly at 720p, but upscaling the image and out putting it as 1080p then the only difference should be a slightly sharper/clearer image from PS3 because HDMI vs Component.

Explain please. Because technically there is virtually no difference between HDMI and Component other than one is digital and the other analog. Quite often the analog is percieved as better by professionals, which is why almost all professional level video editing equipment still uses analog over digital.

Beside's its still not known how good PS3's scaler is, or if its a dedicated scaler like 360's or the SPE that handle's the OS is doing it. The only way to be certain is to wait till PS3 arrives.

At best you are talking about miniscule differences.

 

[Powderkeg]

What is this damage control day or somthing? I was simply answering your question no matter what context it was in.

No, you were answering a question while ignoring the context.

The context was referring to 2 specific games under a specific set of circumstances. Your one-size-fits-all answer was in fact incorrect when taken in context of my question.

The correct answer would have been "No, there would be no noticable difference." But that wasn't your original answer, was it?

 

[Powderkeg]

Don't go off point. Its not a debate on which games render at 1080P or 720P. Its not about XBOX360 vs PS3. Its about whether 1080P can offer improved clarity and image quality compared to 720P on your flat panel TV at home. If you want to debate whether or not X, Y or Z game render at a specific resolution then start a seperate thread and stop turning this into a ****** argument.

Who went off point?

Read my first post. Pay attention to the fact that it's a response to a quote. Go read the original post that I quoted.

My response was directly relevent to that post, was it not? And I wasn't the one who brought up "PS3 vs 360" either, was I?

Now, as to whether 1080p can offer improved clarity and image qualty over 720p, that is precisely my point. If the source is 720p and then the image is upscaled then you would expect to see the same improvement regardless of the console. Therefore, the insinuations made in the post that I quoted are moot.

 

[Bad_Boy]

No, you were answering a question while ignoring the context.

The context was referring to 2 specific games under a specific set of circumstances. Your one-size-fits-all answer was in fact incorrect when taken in context of my question.

The correct answer would have been "No, there would be no noticable difference."

Your ignoring the fact that one of the games is 1080p native and looks better/sharper than the other version (not even counting the extra shader effects absent on one version). There would be a noticable difference in this case. Your assuming both games are 720p upscaled, which is not the case.

http://360.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=8614&pg=2&comments=&preview=

Also, the PlayStation 3 version of the game was shown running in 1080p, which looked absolutely incredible and sharp while the Xbox 360 was running at a respectable 720p and the Wii version running at 480p.

please read my post again.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=847930&postcount=14

 

[Powderkeg]

Your ignoring the fact that one of the games is 1080p native

Show me where it says it's 1080p native.

I see where it says it was shown at 1080p, but COD3 was also shown at 1080p on the PS3, and you've already said that's a 720p game.

If I upscale a 720p game to 1080p and show it to you is that not showing the game at 1080p?

please read my post again.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=847930&postcount=14

Please read your own posts. Find the part where your source says either game is running at 1080p internally or that the displays were using a 1080p native input signal and no scaling was used.

 

[Rolf N]

today we hear a lot of talks about 1080p, the ps3 is capable, now x360 is capable too, but what really means 1080p for the graphical POV?

1080p is more than twice the number of pixels compared to 720p (2.07M vs 921k). That's what it means.

a) Is 1080p a better choice over 720? (Es. which have less aliasing, 720p 4x MSAA or 1080p without AA?)
1080P = 2.073.600 Samples (Pixel)
720P 4x MSAA = 3.686.400 Samples

AA can be applied at any resolution, not just 720p. There are other modes of anti-aliasing than 4x.

You're forcing a meaningless choice.

b) Is 1080p a way to limit aliasing when HDR is turned on without using NAO32'ish routines (Es. we can't on a consoel GPU run 720p antialiased + HDR FP, so we'll go with 1080p without AA + HDR)

Wtf. 1080p is a way to have more pixels in a frame.

c) Is resolution the only factor? will we have 1080p 16 color-bit over 720p 32 color-bit games?

Now you're making sense.
No, we won't. The days of 16 bit per pixel are long gone.

I really think that 1080p is not more than a PR words, not better than when the people says that a console was powerful because of its bit (Es nintendo64 is more powerfull of xbox1 because this is a 64 bit console), but take this as my personal opinion.

I just wonder how many of this 1080p-games will have 24-16 color-bit, and how many of this will be without AA at all.

Yeah right.
*twitch*

Okay. So this week is 720p appreciation week. We all love 720p. It's A Well Known Fact(TM) that The Average Consumer(TM) clearly benefits from the HD Era We Usher In(TM), and by that we mean, of course, by 720p. People can take advantage of 720p. It makes images much prettier.

However, The Same Cannot Be Said(TM) about 1080p because It's A Well Known Fact(TM) that The Average Consumer(TM) is short-sighted in exactly such a way that he will be unable to detect a single nuance of resolution above 720p. The extra pixels in 1080p will blend together on his retina.

In fact Nature Itself will always maintain that equilibrium of not being able to see anything above 720p in accordance to the specimens' screen size, viewing distance and actual eyesight. Because Nature Agrees.

Thanks.

 

[darkblu]

Okay. So this week is 720p appreciation week. We all love 720p. It's A Well Known Fact(TM) that The Average Consumer(TM) clearly benefits from the HD Era We Usher In(TM), and by that we mean, of course, by 720p. People can take advantage of 720p. It makes images much prettier.

However, The Same Cannot Be Said(TM) about 1080p because It's A Well Known Fact(TM) that The Average Consumer(TM) is short-sighted in exactly such a way that he will be unable to detect a single nuance of resolution above 720p. The extra pixels in 1080p will blend together on his retina.

In fact Nature Itself will always maintain that equilibrium of not being able to see anything above 720p in accordance to the specimens' screen size, viewing distance and actual eyesight. Because Nature Agrees.

Thanks.

*rotfl*

my, zeckensack, and i thought you were not of the sarcastic type.
..but here're always individuals who manage to get the best out of you ; )

 

[mrboo]

Explain please. Because technically there is virtually no difference between HDMI and Component other than one is digital and the other analog.

PC monitors spring to mind - VGA vs DVI is no contest, DVI just beats it.

HDMI video advantages over component -

1. No signal degrade over a set distance of cable run.
2. No intererence from RF equipment, thus removing mosuqito noise and artifacts
3. Perfect geometry, getting "perfect" geometry from an analog signal is hard as again RF interferance degrades signal quality.
4. Having more support, compare the amount of displays that accept a 1080p signal over component vs HDMI?
5. Full HDCP support, thats gonna kill component when it comes into full swing.
6. Possibility for greater colour range and even higher resolutions then 1080p

Component signal path - Digital signal from DVD, gets converted to analog, gets sent to a display, gets converted back to digital, picture is displayed on screen.

HDMI signal path - Digital signal from dvd, gets sent to display, picture is displayed on screen.

Everytime an analog signal goes though a A/D - D/A conversion you sacrifice signal quality, HDMI cuts that requirement out of the picture ( no pun intended ) completely.

Now in relation to the topic, yes a 1080p game will look alot better clear'er/sharper then a 720p one.

 

[Bad_Boy]

Show me where it says it's 1080p native.

I see where it says it was shown at 1080p, but COD3 was also shown at 1080p on the PS3, and you've already said that's a 720p game.

If I upscale a 720p game to 1080p and show it to you is that not showing the game at 1080p?

Are you honestly doubting that the ps3 version is 1080p native? I mean its not really a technically impressive game by any means. If it was just upscaled why couldnt the 360 version be upscaled through the tv? Not to mention the website noted it had a sharper picture, and as you say if they were both upscaled they would both look the exact same, but they indeed did not.

Anywho...
COD3 (which was not shown in 720p, they just noted they had 1080p tv's on site)
http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/callofduty3/news.html?sid=6159452&tag=topslot;action;1

You'd be hard pressed to say which version looks better, especially since they're both running in 720p resolution, but neither one is a slouch in the visual department.

Marvel
http://wii.ign.com/articles/737/737682p1.html

Now that we've seen the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions of the game, the latter of which runs in 1080p

^note, not just "shown in" but runs in.

Why would activision note that COD3 is 720p, but not note Marvel was upscaled if that were the case. The PS3 can upscale any game to 1080p if needed so it wouldnt be any technical bulletpoint if they said the game was upscaled 1080p.

I think you are just believing what you want to believe in.

Now in relation to the topic, yes a 1080p game will look alot better clear'er/sharper then a 720p one.

thank you good sir.

 

[mrboo]

Ive just hooked my 360 up to my 720p display and played PGR3 to test the machine's scaleing capability and i must say im disapointed, although the game is out-putted at 720p ( its actualy rendered at 600p ) the game looks no were near as sharp as it should do, it has a washed out look to it that other native 720p 360 games dont have. Giving the indication that 360's scaler is not a good quality one IMO, maybe it will fair abit better when converting 720p to 1080p

Also :

NBA 2007 TGS 06 technical enhancements interview can be found here

To sum the video up the game is running on PS3 in FULL 1080p and at 60fps, the developer makes quite a fuss about it.