NA Playstation Hardware News

Really glad I waited and didn't replace my original with a PSP-2000.

Joystiq:
Our friends at Engadget Japanese have learned a few more details straight from Sony about how exactly the screen has improved. Compared to the PSP-2000, the new 3000 model has twice the color gamut, five times the contrast ratio and, what we're most excited about, a response time that's twice as fast. The PSP-3000 is arriving on North American shores in mid-October.

I really wanted that Red God of War PSP though. Well, the red more so than the GoW silk-screen.
 
Really glad I waited and didn't replace my original with a PSP-2000.

Joystiq:

Brighter screen is nice out-door. Does it fix the bleeding ? The launch batch Sharp screen was the best (bright, sharp and fast). I lost mine and got a Samsung one (still first gen). Would like to know how the latest screens compared to the launch screens. And of course battery consumption.

I really wanted that Red God of War PSP though. Well, the red more so than the GoW silk-screen.

Yeah, I saw it over the weekend in Gilroy, red hot and sexy. If only SCEA invest in PSP services like SCEE.
 
I will wait till the psp 4000. I just hacked my psp and the battery lasts so much longer now

Hmm...

If that's what you're planning on, then you'd better wait for PSP2 instead :LOL:

P.S.

Which reminds me, there could be an announcement for the next PSP before the decade ends (possibly starting 2009).......since the first PSP launch December 2004

:)
 
I buy all my games though. They just use less battery life on the memory stick than in umd. I also don't have to hear that god awfull noise coming from the disc drive.
 
Current PSPs aren't Pandorable, supposedly. Doesn't mean PSP piracy will end, there's still ~40mil easily hackable ones out there but we might see the return of the mod-chip.
 
Current PSPs aren't Pandorable, supposedly. Doesn't mean PSP piracy will end, there's still ~40mil easily hackable ones out there but we might see the return of the mod-chip.


If your speaking of the madden one , that is no longer true , its been confirmed that they are hackable.
 
Comparison between PSP-3000 and PSP-1000/2000 Samsung screens: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12488117&postcount=245

I can't get to the Famitsu link in the post.

Definitely vibrant, but my immediate impression is a huge red and green push, more so than actual improved color detail and accuracy. Looks like the "Vibrant" settings on a screen versus "Normal" or properly calibrated

The reduced glare, however, is definitely a step in the right direction and very noticeable.

Oh, and great find!

EDIT

It appears you have to copy-and-paste the Famitsu link into your browser. Clicking on it seems to bring up a 403 Forbidden error.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Definitely vibrant, but my immediate impression is a huge red and green push
It's a picture of strawberries! There's no other colours than red and green to intensify! The quality is much improved in that pic. Contrast (minimum black level) and refresh rate are the big decider though. Still, on the stength of that pic I'd say it's worth an upgrade for media enthusiasts.
 
It's a picture of strawberries! There's no other colours than red and green to intensify!

:D True, but my point was the color quality doesn't look improved to me (based on that image). I just looks like they've intensified the colors (over-saturated), without necessarily adding any detail or accuracy. Accuracy is hard to determine w/o seeing the display with the image and the source of the image in person (or test patterns w/ proper equipment :p). But the strawberry (and its leaves) exhibits the distinct look of being shown on a display with heavy red and green push.

EDIT

To put it another way, it looks a lot like a display you would see at your local electronics store, set to torch mode, in order to attract attention in a room w/ bad lighting and in a sea of other displays also set to Vibrant.

EDIT 2

Of course, I'm viewing a picture of the display on another display that's not even calibrated, so.... its hard to draw any real conclusions about color.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:D True, but my point was the color quality doesn't look improved to me (based on that image). I just looks like they've intensified the colors (over-saturated), without necessarily adding any detail or accuracy. Accuracy is hard to determine w/o seeing the display with the image and the source of the image in person (or test patterns w/ proper equipment :p). But the strawberry (and its leaves) exhibits the distinct look of being shown on a display with heavy red and green push.

EDIT

To put it another way, it looks a lot like a display you would see at your local electronics store, set to torch mode, in order to attract attention in a room w/ bad lighting and in a sea of other displays also set to Vibrant.

EDIT 2

Of course, I'm viewing a picture of the display on another display that's not even calibrated, so.... its hard to draw any real conclusions about color.

I can agree.

The biggest thing to me is the removal of glare but the colors on the original PSP looks more natural and seem to provide more detail and range as the colors of the little strawberry seeds (is that what they are?) make them stand out more, while the reds and greens of the 2nd PSP maybe more vibrant, the range of color has been narrowed (the seeds are much more closer in color to the flesh of the berry).
 
I can agree.

The biggest thing to me is the removal of glare but the colors on the original PSP looks more natural and seem to provide more detail and range as the colors of the little strawberry seeds (is that what they are?) make them stand out more, while the reds and greens of the 2nd PSP maybe more vibrant, the range of color has been narrowed (the seeds are much more closer in color to the flesh of the berry).
How can it happen with twice the color gamut? I see no such thing. In addition to that it's pointless to reach your conclusion about image fidelity without seeing the source image in a monitor that can represent it in its truer state.
 
Lol at everyone here making comments about what quality they perceive. I've looked at these images in the PS3 browser on my big full rgb television completely zoomed to full screen and apart from clearly better contrast levels without loss of detail and definitely less glare, I very clearly notice ... JPEG compression artifacts. You can see the bloody squares very clearly and there's lots of typical JPEG red-bleed ... So let's not get over ourselves in determining the quality of the screen through this lousy picture, shall we? ;)
 
How can it happen with twice the color gamut? I see no such thing. In addition to that it's pointless to reach your conclusion about image fidelity without seeing the source image in a monitor that can represent it in its truer state.

Lol at everyone here making comments about what quality they perceive. I've looked at these images in the PS3 browser on my big full rgb television completely zoomed to full screen and apart from clearly better contrast levels without loss of detail and definitely less glare, I very clearly notice ... JPEG compression artifacts. You can see the bloody squares very clearly and there's lots of typical JPEG red-bleed ... So let's not get over ourselves in determining the quality of the screen through this lousy picture, shall we?

I was making commentary on the pic itself. While true that it might not be the best image to make a true analysis, I am not trying to make a definitive comparsion on the 2000 versus 3000 but rather what I observe from the image.

What does every image posted on here have to go through some sort of certification process and only viewed through qualified equipment before someone can make a comparsion of what they see?

We are a posting commentary on a hobbyist/fan forum not articles in a science journal. We talking about a 4.3 inch LCD with a resolution of 480 x 272, so we are not talking about jaw dropping image quality anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We are a posting commentary on a hobbyist/fan forum not articles in a science journal. We talking about a 4.3 inch LCD with a resolution of 480 x 272, so we are not talking about jaw dropping image quality anyway.

Compared to other portable player screens of similar size, the PSP one stands out really well.

Also, when held in my own hands, I could easily tell there was a difference between the original Sharp and Samsung screens: http://img20.exs.cx/img20/7670/sharpsamsung8dl.jpg
(...even though I did not compare them side by side). The Sharp one was more expensive and had some dead pixel issues in the early days.

Looking at the new specs (2x faster response time, 2x color gamut, 5x contrast), this one should be noticeably better too. I am just not sure how much better/worse PSP-3000 screen compares to the Sharp one. I really liked that panel.


Nonetheless, I consider the PSP-3000 a minor revision of PSP-2000 (from consumer point of view).
 
Compared to other portable player screens of similar size, the PSP one stands out really well.

Yeah, I love my PSP simply due to fact that it has great functionality, produces a good picture and provides for a pretty big LCD for its price.
 
I was making commentary on the pic itself. While true that it might not be the best image to make a true analysis, I am not trying to make a definitive comparsion on the 2000 versus 3000 but rather what I observe from the image.

What does every image posted on here have to go through some sort of certification process and only viewed through qualified equipment before someone can make a comparsion of what they see?

We are a posting commentary on a hobbyist/fan forum not articles in a science journal. We talking about a 4.3 inch LCD with a resolution of 480 x 272, so we are not talking about jaw dropping image quality anyway.

That second quote is from Arwin, not one. >.>
 
Back
Top