RSX and 1080p games.
- Thread starter RobertR1
- Start date
aldo said:ummm... I believe Titanio was commenting about the HD claims for Warhawk, not Sony's HD claim. You may want to go back and check the context before you start shushing people.
-aldo
The topic at hand that i'm reading is regarding the term "1080P being full hd" and then people saying Sony never said any such thing. I dont really see what the game matters. If its 1080P before E3 sony was pimping it as the start of true/full HD. Thats the entire topic of this thread; 1080P. Who cares what a single game uses. Sony did say 1080P was the start of real/true/full HD. The game title the term is linked to is absolutly meaningless. Sony has never once referred to 720P as "Full or true HD" they've always used it in conjunction with 1080P.
Last edited by a moderator:
mckmas8808
Legend
Again nobody ever said that Warhawk was 1080p.
Yup.. Kung-Fu Chaos used interlaced rendering. So, that was 640x240 for NTSC, or 640x288 for PAL. The reason for it was straightforward, in that it halved our fillrate cost. And we had lots of effects/particles that ate fillrate for breakfast. It also halved the amount of memory we needed for the display buffers. Of course, it meant that if you ever dropped out of 60Hz (50Hz PAL), the screen would look like crap, as you'd end up with the current field being duplicated (so it'd look like the resolution had halved for the period where you were out of a frame). But then I believe it was in our contract with MS that the game ran in a frame, so no real problem. Ahh.. so many memories.. :/Alstrong said:
I'm still pretty convinced that the reason Kung-Fu Chaos isn't on the X360 backwards compatibility list is because we used this.
For PS3 i'd say that the rendering cost of 1080 is likely to be identical, regardless of whether the display mode is 1080i or 1080p. I'm guessing that you'd always need to render the full 1080 lines.. because you wouldn't be able to guarantee that someone wouldn't add some cost that pushed your framerate over 60Hz by bringing up an OS component of some sorts. Kinda like the way framerate is affected on the X360 if you hit the X360 guide button during a game... you'll notice it gets choppy while it has that blade stuff on screen (for video anyway.. most games go into pause mode). So, I think the days of rendering-half-your-buffer hacks like we used in Kung-Fu Chaos are long gone.
Dean
Asher said:
Nope. Sony PR's "codeword" is "True HD". Dylan Jobe of Incognito referred to Warhawk's rendering as full HD, IIRC? Regardless, he's not a PR mouthpiece, and I've no doubt he considers 720p to be fully/truely HD. I argued this at the time, even when people wanted to believe that meant 1080p, but it was never a convincing argument to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry.. my bad.. when I said 'pushed framerate over 60Hz', I should have just said 'pushed it out of a frame' (eg: 30Hz). A half-size buffer for use in field mode relies on a new buffer being presented every field (eg: 60Hz). If your frame rate drops below 60Hz, then the display hardware simply fetches the same data for the other field, so - from a visual point of view - it would look like a non-interlaced (but low resolution) image being displayed..Alstrong said:
Dean
Thanks!!!! That gives a rough idea, it was the downscaling quality I wanted to simulate.Shifty Geezer said:
I understand that to truelly compare 1080p and 720p we really need two screens next to each other, which I may be able to do in some stores later this fall. I also understand that there is additional complexity when games are being displayed as you can use your GPU resources differently depening on the render target, i.e. longer shader programs for less pixels.
What does this really mean if we assume the PS3s GPU to be bandwidth limited?nAo said:
ihamoitc2005
Veteran
1080p
Question is for what is PS3 GPU bandwidth limited? We can see real-time E3 demo with 1080P no? So I think question is what is best way to have AA (or if to have AA) at 1080P.
Crossbar said:
Question is for what is PS3 GPU bandwidth limited? We can see real-time E3 demo with 1080P no? So I think question is what is best way to have AA (or if to have AA) at 1080P.
Fair point. I was kind of fishing for some approximation of the overhead for 1080p vs. 720p the PS3 may have. Perhaps the step is not as big as one might expect.ihamoitc2005 said:
Does the RSX have some properties that help keep the overhead reasonable? We know about the NV47 inheritage, the number of Pixel shaders, ROPs?, the quad organisation, the memory speed and bandwidth, working frequency? etc. What we (non PS3 developers) don't know is what kind of internal buffers or magic compression technology the RSX may have.
Will the games have some AA at 1080p is absolutely an interesting question.
Maybe the 1080p is an important checkbox function for Sony that will help them push BD and high-end TV sets? Perhaps more important in that sense than to provide stunning gaming graphics?
Whatever the case is I expect Polyphony Digitals to produce some amazing 1080p games later on (not GT4 HD), given the fact they produced GT3 so early in PS2s life cycle. Which I still think is an amazing game considering the constraints of the hardware.
Last edited by a moderator:
They were (IIRC they even pointed that out during the conference), and didn't they have more then 6 vehicles on road too?darkblu said:
Were there effects in GT2?
Anyway GT2k PR was the heatwave effect. GTHDs is 1080P - both were aimed at highlighting something about the new hardware.Point is both cases they took the existing game and mucked with it a little to make it run on new hardware. The minute details such as the supposed texture downgrades in GT2k (well at least if you believed DC fans), or taking off a few particles in GTHD, don't really change this fact.
Well at least that's on different platform
But then again in 1999 at least they had the good grace not to show 30minute movies of that demo...Well to be fair, there was a fair share of field rendered PS2 games that sometimes dropped resolution mid-game... so some devs might not be very concerned what happens to rendering when OS window is popped up.DeanA said:
Whether the console maker would allow to ship game like that is another matter.
Anyway, if you like those kind of tricks, there's always DS where you get to ditch the entire backbuffer and render straight to front.
Last edited by a moderator:
kyleb said:I'd say a developer who waste time tring to get 1080 without AA is rather insane.
Have you played a game on a 1080p display at 1080 without AA? It looks quite a bit better than 720 with or without AA. If you're one of those PC nuts who puts AA on even at 1600x1200 ( =p ) then I don't expect you'll agree, but as far as the console world goes (where resources are finite and limited), any developer would be nuts to go for AA at 1080 -- compared to the resources it'd take, it isn't worth the rather small amount of benefit you get from it.
Last edited by a moderator:
It looks sharper but jaggies still crawl across the screen with no AA regardless. Besides, with the internal scaler on the 360 and surely one in the PS3 as well, nothing is limiting developers to 720 or 1080 and they can always opt to do things like 1600x900 with x2aa which I use on my PC quite a bit and I assure you looks quite nice.Bobbler said:
Similar threads
