Why? There's no option to turn off vsync in the PS3 version of GTAIV.
The Technology of GTA IV/RDR *Rage Engine*
- Thread starter babcat
- Start date
Because if you're conducting a test where you want to compare two things, in the interests of fairness you'd want to account for the effects of vsync.
Typing "vsync" into Google came up with a couple of articles which could act as a starting point:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=928593
www.tweakguides.com/Graphics_9.html
So how does this affect the reported framerates? That's a question that article should be asking IMO.
true but the max it could of achieved was 30fps
u cant compare vsync enabled vs not enabled
its very possible that one with vsync turned on can have a much higher min fps bt a lower average fps
eg in fps
A/ 30,30,30,29,26,25,30, = ~28fps
B/ 80,75,50,25,20,15,50, = ~52fps
Hm... if memory serves me properly, I believe you're referring to these slides.
Xbox 360 GPU Performance Update
http://download.microsoft.com/downl...324bad9b1/Xbox 360 GPU Performance Update.zip
Indeed!
Mintmaster
Veteran
From what grandmaster is saying, very few frames on 360 show tearing. There's a good chance that V-sync is enabled with some conditions disabling it.
You can't have 26 fps average in two tests without v-sync and not notice tearing.
grandmaster, do you have the source code for the frame counter? As long as the hardware is drawing slower than 60fps, it wouldn't be hard to modify the code so that it took lack of v-sync into account.
Yeah he did skip that part very fast didn´t he
This bit:
Wouldn´t the texture filter stuff have to replaced by something else to provide for the DOF effect?
u do agree with the following statement
platform A vsync on, B vsync off
if A has higher fps than B then is is definitely is faster
if B has higher than A it perhaps is faster (maybe some readers think than by perhaps i mean 90% but no i mean theres anywhere from a 0-100% chance, we just cant tell )
u cant compare something with vsync off to vsync on
the eurogamer article glosses over this, in fact platform A vsync on + B off, its logical to deduce that B is slower.
look at the vast majority of pc games which they benchmark, the framerate varies greatly depending on whats happening on/off screen
eg average might be 40fps but ingame its going between 20-100fps btw in this case the median framerate is prolly ~30fps which is a far more accurate measurement than average fps (*)
(*)aside, why do most(all) review sites use average!!!!!!! fps in benchmarks
(for those that dont know statistics wiki median)
they should be using median or lowest fps, as this is far more useful
Possibly, but it strikes me as rather odd given how many sync options there are available for the PS3 innards.joker454 said:
I mean I'm coming from perspective of machines where we did self-synchronizing, self-looping DMA lists with real-time list modification, and the hw-supported sync mechanisms were FAR more primitive.
That said, it's always a matter of software design more then anything - so yea, who knows.
Sure you can - I've done loads of testing in that respect. But it's one thing what you see on screen when playing, and another counting captured frames one by one.Mintmaster said:
Actually yea - it should be measured in time units rather then frame counts.
Eg:
1 Solid frame ~ 16.7ms.
2 solid frames ~ 33ms.
1 Solid frame + 33% of frame ~ 22.1ms
... well you get the idea. All you really need to add is logic to pixel measure height of torn frames.
Should be possible to construct a min/max fps graph from this too.
Last edited by a moderator:
What we know for sure is 360 version was always the lead, at least in terms of progress.
It also looks like assets ended up being same in both versions.
I don't know what other conclusion can be there.
Things like post processing differences, or a couple of parameter tweaks don't really make a game "parallel developed", me thinks.
Good question, but I'm not convinced ps3 development scales linearly with money.
Cool, so I'm not insane
"The upscale and resultant blur helps to make the game look a touch more movie-like; less rendered and less 'gamey' if you will - a good combination for a mainstream audience."
Thats kind of what I was thinking, that perhaps some people viewed it as more cinematic. If true though, then it does not bode well for blu-ray movies when viewed against regular upscaled dvd's.
Well, that's kinda silly. Movies on Blu-ray still look filmic by virtue of having been shot on film, or if shot digitally, by virtue of the fact that such cameras use film as their reference point. There may be something to what you're saying as far as CGI is concerned. Special effects can look more obviously artificial in HD (although I'm not sure if this isn't the result of compression technology on the movies I've seen).
At any rate, HD movies generally reveal more detail. What you're seeing in GTA4 is an effect that obfuscates the lack of detail in the environment.
ihamoitc2005
Veteran
How does upscaling cause blur? If I take a PS2 game like ridge racer and upscale it will still look the same. Jaggies will not go away. The blur must be some extra post processing effect.
By the same reason a photo that is upscaled looks blurrier and thus losses detail.
A pixel that is an average between two or more pixels that are further away than adjacent can be considered a blur. In the case of upscaling, the original pixel values are moved apart and averaged fill-ins space them out. As Nebula says, grab a picture and enlarge in a photo program. The more you enlarge it, the more blurred it becomes - the amount of information contained in the image is being spread over a wide area.
You are right, though upscaling to a similar resolution may cause blurring on parts of the image, that's not why PS3 version looks non-game like.
If you're upscaling from 640x480 to 1280x960, then the 1280 image can look exactly the same as the 640 image, with four pixels making up the exact same shape as the original one pixel.
However, if you have to do 640 to 720, then you have to figure out something a little more intelligent to decide how to distribute the information over 720 pixels. That would be your post-processing effect right there. Typically it is done really basically with a certain fixed pixel being added or whatever, which is why Quaz can fairly easily pick up the upscaling.
However, this game also has depth of field effects and it may be that there is a blur effect going on even on the most close up pixels. I'm not sure it does though (haven't looked at it) and the depth of field effect may make it look a lot less bad because there simply at least significant amount of pixels in the distance that are blurred for depth of field.
However, if you have to do 640 to 720, then you have to figure out something a little more intelligent to decide how to distribute the information over 720 pixels. That would be your post-processing effect right there. Typically it is done really basically with a certain fixed pixel being added or whatever, which is why Quaz can fairly easily pick up the upscaling.
However, this game also has depth of field effects and it may be that there is a blur effect going on even on the most close up pixels. I'm not sure it does though (haven't looked at it) and the depth of field effect may make it look a lot less bad because there simply at least significant amount of pixels in the distance that are blurred for depth of field.
Yer I've played both versions now (15hrs Ps3, 2hrs 360) the 360 does have a better framerate and is crisper...
But somehow I still like the look of the Ps3 version (Bias maybe) it just looks more gritty and realistic (maybe the blurring helps ) this is after doing a side by side comparison...
The 360 version has a plasticky look to it.
If only the Ps3 version had a better framerate
We need a interview with the dev, what are they using the spu's for besides euphoria
But somehow I still like the look of the Ps3 version (Bias maybe) it just looks more gritty and realistic (maybe the blurring helps
) this is after doing a side by side comparison...The 360 version has a plasticky look to it.
If only the Ps3 version had a better framerate
We need a interview with the dev, what are they using the spu's for besides euphoria
ihamoitc2005
Veteran
Blur
If I make a 640x480 picture that is half white and half black, then upscale to 1600x1200, it will have no blur.
If I make a 640x480 picture that is half white and half black, then upscale to 1600x1200, it will have no blur.
ehh, I was moderated with my picture, telling truth too straight . . . so again PS3 version over day is blurry because it is artistic intent. Over night is everything clear and sharp, look at picture below, photo of 40" screen from 1 meter. And to be politically correct all this is my opinion of course.
