Some devs create the source art at high resolution and scale it down as necessary to fit into memory. Keep in mind, they'll be working with a smaller memory footprint anyway because of the increase in the size of the frame buffers, so some textures would potentially be lower in resolution.
[B3D Article] "Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed"
- Thread starter Arun
- Start date
Some devs create the source art at high resolution and scale it down as necessary to fit into memory. Keep in mind, they'll be working with a smaller memory footprint anyway because of the increase in the size of the frame buffers, so some textures would potentially be lower in resolution.
Folks, "horizontal scaling" does not require what people conventionally think of as a scaler. VGA cards and videogame consoles have been doing "horizontal scaling" for decades now. That's how 720x480-, 640x480-, 512x448-sized buffers from the PS2 all had the same horizontal size (more or less) on your TV. To "horizontally scale" your video output, you merely have to adjust the ratio of the RAMDAC's pixel clock to the horizontal scan rate. These are fundamental registers in every video circuit.
So, sorry, news of this "horizontal scaling" says absolutely nothing about the presence of a usable scaler in the PS3.
Phat
So, sorry, news of this "horizontal scaling" says absolutely nothing about the presence of a usable scaler in the PS3.
Phat
Why bother posting garbage? There is no 1080P checkbox and they have no presure to be 1080P. Half the games are 720P and clearly state that as the resolution. It's the 360 that likes to list every possible resolution (now 1080P on Lost Planet) on the back of the box with no indiction that all but one (in some cases like PGR, all) are scaled.
That indicates what output resolutions the game supports. It isn't necessary the resolutions it natively runs at. But you are right, it is misleading.
Is there a possibility the scaling chip has anything to do with that mystery SCC in the other thread?
Now about the article, if I undrstood well, Sony will unlock the scaling features gradually giving horizontal and vertical scalig in the future?
And also how costy is this to the performance by doing so?
Now about the article, if I undrstood well, Sony will unlock the scaling features gradually giving horizontal and vertical scalig in the future?
And also how costy is this to the performance by doing so?
Phat I have to mention though also that the possibility of a hack through the RAMDAC does nothing to disprove the presence either. Details on what exactly the means is (in terms of hardware utilized) will be forthcoming. I'm not saying you're flat-out wrong either, but I *am* saying that I think we just need to wait for some more detail to come out before determining it is one thing or another in an absolute sense.
Clearly for most things Cell itself is the scaler, so I agree that whatever the method here is, it's not likely to be through any robust HW method. At the same time, I'm not sure the clock hack is the method used here.
Last edited by a moderator:
london-boy said:
Maybe they're taking an SR-71 approach to things; they don't tell you how fast it CAN go, they just bring it out to take the record back any time it gets broken.
I agree with London Boy. It's like:
* Kutaragi found partially working PS3 buried in Area 51/Aztec lost city/Atlantis/South Pole
* Sony tech team tries to reverse engineer and mass produce PS3
* Every time there is a minor breakthrough, they release a patch to enable partial functions
We now have a second team at B3D trying to figure PS3 out. Is there an ETA for the next article (about where the scaler is physically) ?
We now have a second team at B3D trying to figure PS3 out. Is there an ETA for the next article (about where the scaler is physically) ?
All we have are the coordinates for the stargate.
All we have are the coordinates for the stargate.
One thing bothering me though, has it acually been confirmed that there is a hardware scaler, the functionality behind what's been revealed in the SDK could be anything (or is there more that's known by the article authors than they can reveal?) if the scaling is being done on cell would that not be software scaling?
edit: I see that this point has been made a few times already so I'll add a bit.
It's obvious from the article and the comments here that little is known publicly about this scaling functionality, but what are the options for where it is, I would have thought the following:-
1. Additional functionality in RSX
2. O/S Reserved SPU's on cell doing the work.
3. Some method of processing the framebuffer via the southbridge (SCC)
4. Wizardry
Can some of the more knowledgable guru's on here list the pro's con's of each of those approaches?
Last edited by a moderator:
They're all much of a like. A hardware scaler in RSX or 'SCC' means no extra RAM consumption. OS reserved SPU would use RAM, but that'd be taken from the OS pool presumably, so not cost the devs any more available RAM. However, that'd prevent later downsizing of OS RAM requirements, so long-term it'd cost more.
Of course a hardware scaler, not the OS SPE, is adding silicon and cost to the machine. If the SCC was included in part for it's scaler, that'd be quite substantial I think. And a plus with using the OSP (OS SPE. See what I did there? Huh? Oh - Ess - Spee. OSP. Huh?
) is you can change the scaling algorithm to suit.Edit : Not that I'm replying in the context of a knowledgable Guru! I'm more an Interim 1st year Padawan
I'm pretty sure PGR3 had 4xAA on SD because of this...
Such a technique would force a game to run at 60 fps, if you simply skip a frame you might no be able to correctly display even or odd scanlines.
I read the article, I swear!
