PS3 General Discussion

So...there is a difference in PAL PS3's. They send certain machines there with the software to be compatable with old PAL PS2 games.
 
Some interesting infomation::dopey:


Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed

Introduction

Since its launch last November, Sony's latest gaming platform has given early adopters trouble when attempting to play certain titles in 1080i/p. The console did not automatically upscale its video output to desired resolutions; it was up to either the game software to support these resolutions natively or the internal scalers of users' HDTVs. This forced many people, developers and owners alike, to question the very existence of scaling hardware in the PlayStation 3.
Worse, it created a sour taste in the mouths of owners of older CRT-based HDTV sets, many of which are not capable of accepting a 720p signal at all, and thus only capable of displaying 480i/p and 1080i video signals. If they wanted to run their games in HD resolution, the solution for these disgruntled owners until now was to hope that developers would release their games with 1080i/p support --not a walk in the park for the developer-- or, simply, to buy a new HDTV. As one can imagine, the latter was not the most well-received solution in the history of CE devices.
The key words in that last paragraph would be “until now,” because with the latest PlayStation 3 software development kit (SDK) update, Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. (SCEI) has finally exposed part of the built-in hardware scaler to developers.
Will this mean that most, if not all, future games will support output at 1080p/i resolutions? Moreover --and this is the question that owners of 1080i-only CRT HDTVs crave to see answered--does this mean that current PS3 games may eventually support the native HD resolution of their televisions? Well, the answer requires some good old-fashioned explanation, so let’s start already!

The issue and its solution until now

For openers, let's talk about the way the PlayStation 3 outputs modern videogames. First, the console renders a frame buffer - called the back buffer - in which the drawing passes are executed. Following that, a second frame buffer is rendered, the front buffer. The front buffer is basically the final result of all the rendering operations that took place in the back buffer, and thus it is the picture that one sees on their screen. The front buffer is the optimal point in the display process where scaling solutions can operate.
Before the latest SDK update, developers working on PS3 wishing to support 1080p/i in their 720p-native games had very few options available to them. For 1080i, a theoretical possibility (since it’s not supported on PS3) would be to do “field rendering” -- a technique that consists of software scaling the 1280x720 backbuffer into a 1920x540 frontbuffer that will successively render odd and even interlaced lines. The problems with this technique are that it can only output in 1080 interlaced (not progressive), that it has image quality issues, and even more limiting, that it requires the game renderer to refresh at 60Hz (60 frame per seconds) at all times. If the renderer misses a single frame, the output image quality will be terrible. Clearly, field rendering is not an optimal solution for the video output issues of the PlayStation 3.
The only real option available to developers, though, was to upscale the front buffer in software to 1920x1080. This avoids the image quality issues associated with field rendering, and it is also capable of outputting 1080p as well as 1080i signals. Additionally, it is perfectly compatible with games that render at 30Hz, or with unstable framerates (yeah, we know that there’s a few of those out there.)
So, you may say, why don’t developers just upscale the front buffer to 1080p in software and be done with it? As simple as this sounds, the techniques described above are not free. They have a price in both computational resources and RAM. The computational issue--in the form of doubled fillrate cost--is a problem on its own, since fillrate is not one of RSX's fortes. But it’s not as stressful as it sounds, since a front buffer is being rendered in a single pass, unlike the back buffer, which requires numerous passes and is therefore more sensitive to resolution increases. The real deal breaker in this scenario is the larger footprint in RAM occupied by these upscaled buffers. It's a price that not all development houses can pay if they plan on their game fitting into the PlayStation 3’s memory.
To illustrate how serious the memory problem would be, let's look at the increased requirements that a software upscaler would impose. There are three main resolutions that comprise the common HDTV standards: 720p (1280x720 progressive), 1080i (1920x1080 interlaced) and 1080p (1920x1080 progressive). In order to output at 720p, a PlayStation game needs to render a 1280x720 front buffer; in the case of 1080i/p, it needs a 1920x1080 pixel front buffer. As you can see in the graph below, these different buffers have very different sizes.

As the above graph illustrates, a 1920x1080 front buffer is twice the size of a 1280x720 buffer. With the difference in megabytes measured in the single digits, you could argue that in the grand scheme of things, the difference is not that large. But in reality, when dealing with any closed system, game developers are already trying to shoehorn their games into the available RAM. The PlayStation 3 is no exception, and many developers simply cannot afford to spend more RAM on an upscaled front buffer... and as the games already on the market plainly show, many of them didn’t.
In the best case scenario, a developer would wait for RSX to "vblank" (vertical blank--in other words, be left with only the front buffer loaded in memory) and then use RSX to upscale. Developers that seek to have RSX rendering the next frame in the back buffer as soon as possible have to store their front buffer as a 720p image and then upscale it when the GPU is available. In this case, at a single point in time, a 720p back buffer, a 720p front buffer, and a upscaled 1080p frame buffer are all resident in the PlayStation 3 video memory.
Fast forward to the day when a new SDK update was made available, and with it comes a new solution for developers.

The latest SDK: A scaler breaks its chains and is now running free. Well, almost.

And so we arrive at last to the most recent development, the late January PlayStation 3 SDK update. Amongst the newer versions of the various tools included in the SDK lies a new function: the ability for developers to use some of the functionality of the fabled hardware scaler, a scaler many previously doubted existed at all. Interestingly enough, "some" is the key word when describing the unlocked functionality; SCEI only gave access to hardware accelerated horizontal scaling. Horizontal scaling on its own cannot upscale a 720p image into 1080p/i --this would require both horizontal and vertical scaling. Hence, the newly exposed scaler functionality is not enabled in the PS3's user interface directly, but instead will still require developer support to work.

At the time of publication, the reasons why SCEI didn’t give developers access to both horizontal and vertical scaling are still unknown, as are the reasons they didn’t grant developers access to horizontal scaling until now. The video scaler itself remains shrouded in mystery, as strange as it may seem, but at least now we can say with confidence that it does indeed exist. There are multiple reasons for this continuing secrecy, and insiders are reluctant to discuss them even off the record, nevermind for publication. Nonetheless, the reasons behind SCEI's choices are not our subject today. While a great deal could (and will) be said about the nature of this scaler in the future, today's article will focus on the recently exposed functionality; the details of its hardware and the way that it is integrated into the PlayStation 3’s architecture will be reserved for a later article.
Now, let’s describe exactly how this added capability works. How can a developer implement a 1080p/i output mode in their 720p-native game for a low cost with this partial scaling? Simply, the developer needs to support one of the new resolutions that SCEI has added to the PlayStation 3’s rendering palette. Key among these is new support for a resolution of 960x1080. This results in a framebuffer with relatively few more pixels compared to the more standard 720p, and as a result enjoys a computational cost (fillrate cost) comparable to the one associated with 720p framebuffers to begin with (921,600 pixels for 1280x720 compared to 1,036,800 pixels for 960x1080). At the same time, it benefits from eligibility to be horizontally scaled by the resident hardware scaler.
Additional 1080 rendering modes also supported now include 1280x1080 and 1440x1080. These modes, similar to 960x1080, are capable of being upscaled by the hardware into 1080p/i.

As we can see in this graph, the RAM requirements of a single 960x1080 front buffer are extremely close to a 720p front buffer.
It is worth noting that as of today, support for one of these scalable resolutions is not yet a requirement of new game development; that decision is still in the hands of the developers themselves. However, it is already strongly rumoured that such support will become mandatory through future revisions of the PS3 technical requirements checklist (TRC).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the foretold yet hitherto unseen PlayStation 3 hardware scaler has made its entry onto the development scene with this SDK update. Its appearance should bring hope into the hearts of 1080i-only HDTV owners that all future games may support their television sets natively. They may also look forward to seeing patches to some of the currently released 720p-only games, should developers have the time and inclination to revisit their old code base and hack a new 960x1080 rendering mode into it.
As a postscript, we’d like to speculate about another point of debate concerning the PS3 video output capabilities --its lack of VGA resolution support, which itself could also be affected by this latest “horizontal revolution.” As one would deduce after reading this article, just as with HDTV resolutions, a hypothetical VGA resolution support - notably for 16:10 screens - would entail developer input as well. This would of course require a little more development work for said developers, and additional configurations to run rendering tests on, but the computational and memory costs associated should no longer hinder support of these resolutions in any meaningful way.
Thanks

All the members of the game development community who are always helpful and friendly when I come around bothering them with my pesky questions. Carl and Geo for their tremendous editing help. Stefan, Arun and the B3D Crew. Double thanks to Carl for the late night work I forced on him.
Maison du Café’s coffee, for keeping me awake long enough to fini

http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/ps3scaler/
Click to expand...
 
That was stupid of them to do. Think of all the old PS2 games that people from other counties would buy...KA-CHING. I like Sony but this one on the surface doesn't sit well with me.
shakehead.gif
 
03R1
That was stupid of them to do. Think of all the old PS2 games that people from other counties would buy...KA-CHING. I like Sony but this one on the surface doesn't sit well with me.
shakehead.gif
Click to expand...

right....

You do realize that the 360 is the same way, and that the Wii isn't region free AT ALL. At least with the PS3, all PS3 games are region free.
 
KENJIusa
Some interesting information::dopey:
Click to expand...
While it is great that Sony has finally addressed this issue for those with CRT displays that can not accept a 720p or 1080p signal, for everyone else, especially the majority of HDTV owners with 720p displays, you do not want to have the PS3 scale it to 1080i/p. Feeding a display the native resolution is almost always preferable to scaling - especially if the native resolution of the source is the same as the display.

For owners of 1080p & 720p displays using the PS3 to play DVD's or any games with native resolutions less than their display's resolution, I recommend that you not set the PS3 to upscale to your display's resolution, such that the PS3 is passing the native resolution source to your display and letting the display's video processor do the scaling instead of the PS3. Then switch the output so that the PS3 is doing the scaling to your display's native resolution. Then compare the quality of both. The reason for this is that some displays, especially the latest higher end 1080p displays have superior video processors, and may end up doing a better job than the PS3's processor.

However, from my own comparisons, the PS3 video processor is quite impressive, and the only processors that I know of that could out-perform it are those using Silicon Optix's Realta HQV chip.

Here are some of the displays that have that chip:
In addition, there are some external video processors that use the Realta HQV chip (which for anyone who really wants to get the best possible performance from their displays, any of these would be highly recommended):
 
Jeremy Ricci
right....

You do realize that the 360 is the same way, and that the Wii isn't region free AT ALL. At least with the PS3, all PS3 games are region free.
Click to expand...

Yeah...thats what I've heard, besides the fact that I've never played an xbox or 360. The 360 isn't backwards compatable at all...right? Region free or not.
 
ah heck...thats plenty of games to get you through the slow times.

On a side note. I wasn't trying to bite off your member name. 01R6 = 03R1. I didn't even know there was a similar name to the one I picked out. You were here first.:bowdown: Now...If I ever change it to Colorado03R1 you could pimp slap me.
afro.gif
 
Minnesota01R6
Original Xbox Games Playable on Xbox 360

quite a few, but not the entire library by any means.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm....

Note: A software emulator is required for each original Xbox game you play on your Xbox 360™ console.
Click to expand...

1This list of titles that have passed hand certification for compatibility with Xbox 360 is provided for informational purposes only and is subject to change without notice. To ensure the highest quality gaming experience, in the event that an unforeseen technical issue is discovered after hand certification is completed, Microsoft® reserves the right to remove any game name from this list. Please check back often to see the most current list of games.

2Currently the North American versions of these games are the only ones supported as backward compatible titles on Xbox 360.

3The December 2005 update includes the Monk Zeng content from the limited edition of Jade Empire.

4Offline version only; versions included with Xbox Live Starter Kits or as a bundled game with other Xbox Live titles do not yet play on Xbox 360.

5Currently the Japanese version of this game is not supported as a backwards compatible title on the Xbox 360.
Click to expand...
 
03R1
That was stupid of them to do. Think of all the old PS2 games that people from other counties would buy...KA-CHING.
Click to expand...
While it would have been relatively easy to allow the use of region-free games for all three systems (I'd imagine, form my experience with Sega CD game hacking that it would only require adding the stamps for all regions in the console), it probably would have violated publisher contracts with said games.
 
KENJIusa
Some interesting infomation::dopey:
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting that. 👍
03R1
That was stupid of them to do. Think of all the old PS2 games that people from other counties would buy...KA-CHING. I like Sony but this one on the surface doesn't sit well with me.
shakehead.gif
Click to expand...
Not really ka-ching. What'd they import, some US government mech game from Japan? Some soccer game from Europe?
Jeremy Ricci
At least with the PS3, all PS3 games are region free.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. I see a Region 1 symbol on my Resistance and FNR3 boxes. I looked at the Blu-ray Wikipedia page recently, and it said that Japan and NA are region 1, Europe, Australia, etc, is region 2, and the rest of Asia is region 3.
03R1

Yeah...thats what I've heard, besides the fact that I've never played an xbox or 360. The 360 isn't backwards compatable at all...right? Region free or not.
Click to expand...
The 360 is compatible with a third of Xbox games.
Digital-Nitrate
Hmmmm....
Click to expand...

...And your point is? MS almost never removes games from the list, not to mention BC games are rendered at 720p/1080i/1080p with x4AA.
 
Duck Tracy
not to mention BC games are rendered at 720p/1080i/1080p with x4AA.
Click to expand...
Really? I understood they were scaled, not rendered. For them to be rendered at a higher resolution then they were originally programmed for would require an entirely new edition of the game. However, if you have some confirmation of this from the developers that would be very helpful, thanks.
 
I don't know what kind of proof is out there, but I've seen with my own eyes that the games are indeed rendered at 720p and not simply upscaled. There's a HUGE difference between an emulated Xbox game and a straight-through PS2 game. You know the debate about GT4's graphics versus Forza? If you run Forza through the 360 (and I have), that argument is now moot.. Forza stomps GT4 now.

Emulation itself is what makes it possible. Remember that bleem! could render PS1 games in higher resolutions than it was originally encoded for. It's the same thing here.
 
Duck Tracy
Not really ka-ching. What'd they import, some US government mech game from Japan? Some soccer game from Europe?
Click to expand...
There is a few racing games that never got released in the US. I don't know if worked the other way.
 
Jedi2016
I don't know what kind of proof is out there, but I've seen with my own eyes that the games are indeed rendered at 720p and not simply upscaled.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I'm not buying it, not as far as games that were not originally programmed to be rendered at 720p, 1080i, or 1080p. It is my understanding that developers program games to be rendered at a specific resolutions (as has been brought up many times before with interviews with developers, but it also makes perfect sense from a video engineering standpoint)... that programming is in on the disc. For it to get rendered at a different resolution it must be programmed that way. However, scaling, which is what is really going on can be applied once the data is rendered.

Just think for a moment... if a game was programmed to be rendered at 480p, graphics are designed with that resolution, and for specific items, characters, places, artists create these things with a pallet of roughly 340,000 pixels. To then play the same game years later and supposedly render it in a higher resolution, how could it create more detail that was never programmed to begin with?

The answer is simple, the picture is simply being scaled up. Now with improved scalers, the picture will look better than the original... but in no way is it magically turning the game into a native 720p/1080i/1080p game... that's simply impossible without graphic designers, artists, and programmers re-writing the game.
 
Digital-Nitrate
Really? I understood they were scaled, not rendered. For them to be rendered at a higher resolution then they were originally programmed for would require an entirely new edition of the game. However, if you have some confirmation of this from the developers that would be very helpful, thanks.
Click to expand...

Actually, it seems you're partially right. I found this article, and he says they're upscaled. However, I don't know how the x4AA is achieved (possibly rendered). My bad.

I would think the few 720p games on the original Xbox would be native, however.
 
Duck Tracy
Actually, it seems you're partially right. I found this article, and he says they're upscaled. However, I don't know how the x4AA is achieved (possibly rendered). My bad.
Click to expand...
No problem, I have found that many many many people use the term "render" when what they really mean or are seeing is "scaled". After all, rendering can be a form of scaling when the processor is rendering at a different resolution than what a game was originally designed for.

Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and many developers do not go out of their way to educate consumers on this, as they would just as well have us all think that just because a game can output in 720p, 1080i, or 1080p that it also has graphics that were created at that resolution... when in fact they may not have been, and all we are seeing is an improved scaled image.

BTW: I found this review of the ATI Radeon 9800 PRO that also helps explain how the images from some older games can be improved.


I would think the few 720p games on the original Xbox would be native, however.
Click to expand...
As long as they were originally created and rendered in 720p, yes - but unfortunately, there is no law that forces the developers to reveal the actual native resolution. 👎
 
DN:

Bleemcast_comparison_RR4.jpg


If what you say is true, then how can that screenshot even exist?

Or perhaps you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.. I'm not implying that it somehow makes the textures higher resolution or whatever. It doesn't add anything, but it does definitely improve the overall image quality.

We've been through this before, you and I... I know a hell of a lot about video in every form, and I know what I'm seeing. The 360 is not just upscaling the games. If that were the case, it wouldn't look any better than my TV upscaling PS2 games. But it does look better. A lot better.
 
Yes, that is the advanatge of the improved graphics processor, but it does not have a higher native resolution. The processor is just doing a better job with the graphics models programmed into the game.

This is why many hardcore home theater enthusisats own $20,000 video processors... they really do make a difference. 👍
 
Jedi2016
DN:

Bleemcast_comparison_RR4.jpg


If what you say is true, then how can that screenshot even exist?

Or perhaps you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.. I'm not implying that it somehow makes the textures higher resolution or whatever. It doesn't add anything, but it does definitely improve the overall image quality.

We've been through this before, you and I... I know a hell of a lot about video in every form, and I know what I'm seeing. The 360 is not just upscaling the games. If that were the case, it wouldn't look any better than my TV upscaling PS2 games. But it does look better. A lot better.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the 360 does not render these games at 720p, in fact I'm 100% positive.

You say it looks better than your TV upscaling PS2 games...aaaand...maybe that has something to do with FSAA??? 💡

http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=49789

http://www.ntsc-uk.com/feature.php?featuretype=hdw&fea=Xbox360

http://markharrison.co.uk/blog/2005/11/original-xbox-games-playable-on-xbox.htm

There's about 100 other stories about this all over google. Basically, it upscales, not renders :)
 
All the upscaling in the world can't eliminate a 480i fuzzy edge and make it sharper than what was originally rendered. It's a physical impossibility.

You guys can quote all the articles you want. Most of the people writing them probably don't even know what upscaling actually is. I would wager most people on this very forum don't know.

I'll continue to believe what my own eyes tell me. If you want to come over and count pixels on my TV screen, you're welcome to.

Let's get this back on topic, shall we? I'm not talking about this anymore unless you people want to continue it.
 
Jedi2016
All the upscaling in the world can't eliminate a 480i fuzzy edge and make it sharper than what was originally rendered. It's a physical impossibility.

You guys can quote all the articles you want. Most of the people writing them probably don't even know what upscaling actually is. I would wager most people on this very forum don't know.

I'll continue to believe what my own eyes tell me. If you want to come over and count pixels on my TV screen, you're welcome to.

Let's get this back on topic, shall we? I'm not talking about this anymore unless you people want to continue it.
Click to expand...

You're right, but FSAA can, and since the 360 implements that to Xbox titles prior to upscaling, it makes those edges smoother :) NOW you can say the discussion is over, since we can finally all agree (hopefully) that the 360 simply takes the game, implements FSAA via Software emulation, and that ANA takes the reigns and upscales it. Case closed.
 
If anyone is looking to buy a 1080p LCD HDTV, then wait for the 120Hz ones, because 120Hz is the only method to run 1080p in full motion on a LCD.
 
Toronado
Not necessarily on-topic per se, but would that by chance be a Bleemcast image? It looks like one of the stock photos they used to show the picture differences.
Click to expand...

Yes.

TVRFF, that would be a 1080p24 TV, then? Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't those exist already? I was under the impression that certain TVs could back down their refresh rates to mesh up with a solid 24fps, rather than holding at a single rate. So a TV could run at 48Hz instead of the usual 60Hz.

Still, while an improvement, I don't know how many people would be able to see the difference. It would probably be transparent to most people, including me, and I know what to look for.
 

Similar threads

Famine
F1 Manager 2024 Announced for Summer 2024 Launch, With New "Create a Team" Mode
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
EngieDiesel
EngieDiesel
Famine
“My First Gran Turismo” Demo Discussion
20 21 22
Replies
659
Views
90K
Meythia
Meythia
Famine
RIDE 5 to Launch August 24 for PC, PlayStation 5, and Xbox Series
6 7 8
Replies
225
Views
37K
Speedster911
Speedster911
Scaff
Retro Rewind - Retro Racing Titles Reviewed and Revisited
2 3
Replies
71
Views
10K
Scaff
Scaff
Terronium-12
PlayStation 5 "Long-Term Supply Issues" Are Resolved, says Jim Ryan
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Veinz
Veinz

Latest Posts

Back