List of all 1080P display devices for PS3 - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 06:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
TheFerret's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Swamps of Georgia
Posts: 10,004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
you already have a 1080P display if you have a CRT computer monitor.

You can buy a huge 22" high-quality one with DVI input for cheap, especially if its used/refurbished.
You are missing the point, and grossly, too. Why on earth would I want to buy into a much, much, much smaller display to increase resolution? I just stated that I wouldn't move down from 65" as I am now getting with my current display for console gaming.

The whole idea for me, and probably a great many others, is to add resolution to those large displays so things will not look pixelated, or like they were built with preschool ABC blocks. :)

I do not play console games on a PC monitor. I play PC games on a PC monitor. I want to play console games on something other than a PC monitor--like millions of other people. :eek:

When will D* stop pushing HD-Lite while charging us for full HD? Digital input on a CRT is a reality, not a possibility.
TheFerret is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Scotty L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 2,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
lol, you think 1080P will stress the ps3 at the expense of eyecandy?


Even though 1080P is a ridiculously high resolution for home theater, it is a very mediocre resolution for computers.


My video card is right now is doing much more than 1080P....
Lmao!! Echoing Low Roller what in the WORLD is your PC running games at?

If you're pumping out 60fps in Far Cry in a resolution above 1920x1080 I'm sure we'd all like to hear your system specs. :rolleyes:

"ANYONE who pc games that doesn't have a 360 controller for pc use, well frankly isn't a gamer at all."
Scotty L is offline  
post #93 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,880
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Methinks poster is FOS :)

If you're running your PC at a 1920x1080 standard resolution, you're hopefully running a 32 inch monitor and sitting 12 inches away from it :)

On my old 21" CRT I ran at 1280x1024...any higher and I'd be going blind from the eyestrain...but you know, some people love that microscopic text!

As for the nature of 1080i versus 720p or 1080p, I will say this:
What is often called out on paper does not translate into the real world with any appreciable benefit. When I see 720p and I see 1080i, unless they are side by side, the images look fairly identical to me. I've never noticed any of the artifacts that come from Interlacing on a 1080i display...artifacts that I HAVE seen at 480i.

I've seen threads here on the 1080i versus 720p discussion by people with bigger brains (and bigger mouths) than I, so I dont to go down that road here. I only know that at 1080i I dont see any of the problems that a progressive signal was supposed to fix, hence I question if 1080p is a "nice thing to have if you can have it" or if its "going to make 1080i look like VHS!".

I think its probably the former...and if you dont have it, you'll probably not miss it.

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is offline  
post #94 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
TheFerret's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Swamps of Georgia
Posts: 10,004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't know about that poster, but I'm on a 19" monitor running at 1600x1200 for its 18" viewable. The monitor is a ViewSonic Professional Series PS790. I run it at 72-Hz. But, there is no way in hell I am playing a console game on it. :eek:

When will D* stop pushing HD-Lite while charging us for full HD? Digital input on a CRT is a reality, not a possibility.
TheFerret is offline  
post #95 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 01:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I think the whole Sony 1080p thing is just marketing blitz. 1080p has been preached as the resolution nirvana, blending the best of full 1080i lines of resolution progressively scanned. Since 1080p tv's will only make up a small segment of the market at PS3 launch, it's to say that Sony will be future proof for everyone down the line, of course until the ps4 comes along and can support 2156p

as for 1080p vs 1080i, have you ever watched a sporting event shown on a channel broadcasting in 1080i on a 1080i display ? Lots of fast motion blur. This is the reason FOX and ABC broadcast in 720p, a pro-scan resolution eliminates fast-motion blur.

On the other hand, 1080i is the resolution of choice for film material because the more pixels the better.

Combine the two, and 1080p should look as well on fast-motion material (ie sports, video games) as well as film-based. Video games should be pro-scanned, whether it's 720p or 1080p, and again, the more pixels the better drawn to the screen at the same time
NorthJersey is online now  
post #96 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:17 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch
Methinks poster is FOS :)

If you're running your PC at a 1920x1080 standard resolution, you're hopefully running a 32 inch monitor and sitting 12 inches away from it :)

On my old 21" CRT I ran at 1280x1024...any higher and I'd be going blind from the eyestrain...but you know, some people love that microscopic text!

As for the nature of 1080i versus 720p or 1080p, I will say this:
What is often called out on paper does not translate into the real world with any appreciable benefit. When I see 720p and I see 1080i, unless they are side by side, the images look fairly identical to me. I've never noticed any of the artifacts that come from Interlacing on a 1080i display...artifacts that I HAVE seen at 480i.

I've seen threads here on the 1080i versus 720p discussion by people with bigger brains (and bigger mouths) than I, so I dont to go down that road here. I only know that at 1080i I dont see any of the problems that a progressive signal was supposed to fix, hence I question if 1080p is a "nice thing to have if you can have it" or if its "going to make 1080i look like VHS!".

I think its probably the former...and if you dont have it, you'll probably not miss it.



I think at 60 Hz, it would be the latter.
ps24eva is offline  
post #97 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthJersey
I think the whole Sony 1080p thing is just marketing blitz.


Actually the real reason why they are doing 1080P has to do with the fact that the PS3 is a Blu-Ray high def movie player.


Thus they have to use 1080P.
ps24eva is offline  
post #98 of 218 Old 05-23-2005, 10:27 PM
Member
 
cyto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime
And Microsoft made another standout error. The 360 gpu can do 96 billion shader operations per second according to ATI but Microsoft is reporting it as 48 bsops.
That is no error. The GPU has a unified shader architecture which does 48 shader operations per cycle. Each of the shader pipelines is able to process two shader operations per cycle, one scalar and one vector, for a total of 96 shader ops per cycle.
edit: To explain what MS is saying is simply mathematical. Take 48 shader ops per cycle and multiply by 2(1 scalar+1 vector) = 96. Now you multiply the 96 with the GPU frequency, in this case it's 500 Mhz or 500,000,000 cycles. You end up with 48 billion shader ops per second.
cyto is offline  
post #99 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 12:37 AM
Member
 
cyto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
Actually the real reason why they are doing 1080P has to do with the fact that the PS3 is a Blu-Ray high def movie player.


Thus they have to use 1080P.
No, no, no. SCEA has stated that 1080p is the standard resolution for the system. The PS3 will be a game system first and foremost, the Blu-Ray capability is just an added bonus. Besides, 1080p has not been confirmed for Blu-Ray as a standard, which implies that PS3 will do games at 1080p. Sony would have already announced Blu-Ray's 1080p movie support had that been the case.
cyto is offline  
post #100 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 01:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFB
So, is this ubiquitous accross all 1080i capable display devices (including high end setups) and simply the nature of the spec? The image is going to be automatically down rez'ed to 700 lines? This sounds a bit over-generalized but I'd be interested.
All 1080i images have to have their vertical resolution decreased though it does vary. For video the vertical resolution loss varies depending upon the amount of vertical filtering that is done. This may be controlled by a person or based on the amount of movement in the video. With video game output the vertical filtering is done at set number which someone else may be able to tell you. The figure of 700 lines is the average of the amount of vertical filtering that is done on an average movie. As such different people have different figures for how much vertical resolution is lost by interlacing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFB
While that is absolutely true, range plays a big factor in whether or not the human eye can detect increased resolution i.e. 12 feet from a 42" display or 12 inches from the same display. There's also some diminishing returns at work here too. I can't remember who did it in the display devices forum but they calculated out the estimated distances of where most people would be able to perceive 1080p vs. 720p on a set of X inches. Might be worth a search.
Difference in viewing distance and the size of the screen does determine how important 1080p may be. That estimate of resolution does sound interesting and I will search the forums to see if I can find it. Do you remember which section of the forum it was in?


Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch
On my old 21" CRT I ran at 1280x1024...any higher and I'd be going blind from the eyestrain...but you know, some people love that microscopic text!
That is not really because of the resolution but because Windows does not handle high resolutions well. Windows has never been able to scale itself well to high resolutions and supposedly one of the improvements of Windows Longhorn is that it can scale itself to very high resolutions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch
As for the nature of 1080i versus 720p or 1080p, I will say this:
What is often called out on paper does not translate into the real world with any appreciable benefit. When I see 720p and I see 1080i, unless they are side by side, the images look fairly identical to me. I've never noticed any of the artifacts that come from Interlacing on a 1080i display...artifacts that I HAVE seen at 480i.
I still notice interlacing on 1080i displays but you do have to sit closer to see it. Except for small text that still looks bad even at 1080i.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch
I think its probably the former...and if you dont have it, you'll probably not miss it.
Many people don't mind the fact that they are listening to movies using the speakers on their TV. But when they buy their first surround system they wonder how they ever did without it. 1080p won't be that big of a leap but when people do go to 1080p they will notice the difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
Actually the real reason why they are doing 1080P has to do with the fact that the PS3 is a Blu-Ray high def movie player.


Thus they have to use 1080P.
They did not need the PS3 to do 1080p for Blu-ray since they could have always had the video scaled down to 1080i. In fact Toshiba's $1000 HD-DVD player that is planned for this fall will be limited to 1080i output even though many HD-DVD movies will be in 1080p. It is more expensive to do 1080p output and not all Blu-ray/HD-DVD players will have it as a output.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cyto
No, no, no. SCEA has stated that 1080p is the standard resolution for the system. The PS3 will be a game system first and foremost, the Blu-Ray capability is just an added bonus. Besides, 1080p has not been confirmed for Blu-Ray as a standard, which implies that PS3 will do games at 1080p. Sony would have already announced Blu-Ray's 1080p movie support had that been the case.
Both Blu-ray and HD-DVD can do 1080p and if you follow this link and download the "BD ROM - Audio Visual Application Format Specifications" you can read about what is in Blu-ray.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #101 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 05:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jasman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,021
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
My 2 cents worth: Even though 1080i on my Benq 8700 has a "punchier" image, I experience more eyestrain/headaches with it, vs. DVD's upscaled to 720p on Bravo D1.

Jasman
Jasman is offline  
post #102 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 10:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisFB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul
Difference in viewing distance and the size of the screen does determine how important 1080p may be. That estimate of resolution does sound interesting and I will search the forums to see if I can find it. Do you remember which section of the forum it was in?
I'm basically going to give you everything I remember to help you find it and let you judge whether it's worth the effort. My take away was that at the mid/long viewing distance (based on the size of the display) 1080p might not be resolvably different from 720p to the human eye.

This was a while ago before there were any 1080p consumer sets other than the Mits Alpha around. I want to say it was posted in the Rear Projection forum but I can't be sure it wasn't somewhere else or copied into it in a post for reference - 1080p "might" have been in the thread title but I am almost positive this was not the first post and was a reply later in the thread. At the time I wasn't terribly interested other than a "that's interesting". I wish I could give you more and actually I would have searched for it myself if I could have remembered more. I don't recall it being ultra-detailed nor well sourced (i.e. references in lit to confirm assumptions) so I'm not sure how valid the calcs or conclusions were - and I'd never have checked them anyway for something like this. Also, if I remember right this was someone supporting 720p so there might be a conflict of interest or an agenda here (I imagine you are familiar with the "I love what I bought and it has to be the best because I own it so I'll support it with anything and everything until I die crowd" that is fairly ubiquitous and outspoken on these forums).

Panasonic 65" VT60 (calibrated by Jeff Meier), Marantz 6005, Kef Q towers/rears Kef Reference center, Win 7 Pro with XBMC, Harmony Ultimate One
Xbox Live: Arbitrage XXL
ChrisFB is offline  
post #103 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 12:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
I did find the thread you mentioned, but I would recommend this post since it has a table that gives you everything you need to calculate viewing distance based on resolution and screen size.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #104 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 12:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
TheFerret's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Swamps of Georgia
Posts: 10,004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wow, that bitmap graphic is interesting. Based on my seating distances relative to image width true HDTV is barely acceptable for what I can see if I had 20/20 vision.

When will D* stop pushing HD-Lite while charging us for full HD? Digital input on a CRT is a reality, not a possibility.
TheFerret is offline  
post #105 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 01:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,908
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I agree with Hellraiser on this- 1080p appears to be nothing more than a "Hey, let's throw the kitchen sink" approach by Sony. Even though both consoles may be technically capable of 1080p, who cares outside of the bunch here at AVS?

The answer is practically nobody.

"In spec" HD sets are just now becoming mainstream, and content is still limited to OTA, and basic cable/satellite content. The vast majority of people WON'T buy 1080p displays JUST so they can play games guys- get real.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a...
mobius is offline  
post #106 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,880
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 49
No, but DLP and LCD devices are inherently progressive by nature, and those are clearly the technologies of choice (besides Plasma, and who knows how long that will last) going into the future. So having an LCD or DLP that displays true 1080i is impossible, hence...1080p.

So Sony and whoever else is going to say "you know what, your OTA signal may only ever reach 1080i in your lifetime, but because your LCD and DLP sets do everything progressively anyhow, we're going to let our system output at 1080p".

And by the way...lots and lots and lots of gamers will upgrade to a 1080p display if Sony and Microsoft support it, because there will be plenty of people who will always assume that a game at 1080p is "better looking" than that same game at 1080i, which may or may not ever be the case. But dont discount gamers.

IF they'll drop $400 bucks on a console, bet your ass they'll drop $2000+ on the right display to use with it.

And since there are millions of gamers out there...that means at the very least a few hundred thousand will ugprade to the high-tech display.

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is offline  
post #107 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 01:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,908
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 18
That's fine, but we're talking about the immediate future. The aggregate population of gamers will overwhelmingly choose what looks the best for the least amount of money. That means 720p or 1080i, not 1080p sets because once 1080p does hit the market in sufficient quantities, prices for 720p and 1080i sets will drop accordingly.

If game publishers and developers have no 1080p audience, and they won't for probably 3-4 years, then they won't even bother making their games 1080p capable.

I'm all for 1080p, it's just not ready for prime time yet.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a...
mobius is offline  
post #108 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,880
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Well immediately there is nothing but a PC that outputs a 1080p signal, but thats really not the point since LCD and DLP are inherently progressive.

PS3 wont be here until the spring of next year. If Sony is saying that 1080p is the default resolution for its game designers to focus on, which some are claiming, then that means that 1080p will be the highest resolution that all PS3 games run at....and gamers will want that for the same reason gamers bought 720p displays to run XBOX on.

Now, maybe Microsoft changes its tune and also steps up to the 1080p bat. Assuming the system can render that man pixels (given its specs it should be able to), thats two of the major game makers saying that 1080p is the way to go. More gamers will buy into 1080p sets instead of 720p sets. ED sets will just drop off the planet.....thats what your average grandmother will buy for $200 dollars at Wal Mart.

The vast majority of gamers will choose whatever is cheapest, I agree. However remember something. There are 1080p sets already appearing in the $2000 range. Thats dirt cheap for Brand New technology compared to where the 720p sets started at ($5000 and up).

So many will say "Gee, spending $1000 on a 720p set seems stupid when for $2000 I can get a 1080p set and have a huge jump in resolution!" so I think more gamers will go that route than perhaps you are giving credit for.

But...all of this discussion is really academic. First we have to see what Microsoft does, and if Sony really is going to make 1080p the rule and not the exception. That will go alot towards how rapidly those are adapted. Personally, if I do go with a new gaming-only set, it'll be LCD...and it'll be the biggest size I can afford with a 720p resolution. 1080p? Nice, but frankly...as it does with PC games...there reaches a point where resolution upgrades dont mean much.

1024x768 is fine for 80% of gamers. Sure you can go 1280x1024, you can go 1600x1200, but the visual improvement isn't as dramatic as it is when...say...you go with anti-aliasing and ansiotropic filtering at 1024x768, at least to my eyes.

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is offline  
post #109 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 02:22 PM
mdv
AVS Special Member
 
mdv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
What the heck are you talking about? DVI can do any resolution at least up to 1600 x 1200 with a utility like Powerstrip. I've seen video cards which claim 2048 x 1536 with VGA.

[quote=Hellraiser]there is no such thing a san input that can take an 1080p input signal...the answer to this thread should be a simple.....NOTHING.

1080p is not an input standard as of now and wont be for a while....DVI nore HDMI can't display it...so your talking about an upgrade to these ports...and thats going to take a while.
mdv is offline  
post #110 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 02:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mobius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,908
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I agree, it is all academic at the moment.

I just don’t think what Sony or Microsoft will do regarding 1080p will have any meaningful effect on the acceptance rate of 1080p displays in the aggregate. It may within a small subset of the gaming population, ergo, gamers with nice jobs; but on the whole no. ;)

IMO, the story changes significantly when we start seeing a bunch of 1080p content from the movie and TV content producers. I just hope the transition is smoother than the initial HD transition has been thus far.

I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree and see how the next episode of Our Lives as Geeks turns out. :)

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a...
mobius is offline  
post #111 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 02:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisFB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul
I did find the thread you mentioned, but I would recommend this post since it has a table that gives you everything you need to calculate viewing distance based on resolution and screen size.
You are the search engine man. It was so long ago (and like I said, a very passing interest) I'm not 100% sure that was the post but I'm 70-80%.

Now I have to figure that table out.

Panasonic 65" VT60 (calibrated by Jeff Meier), Marantz 6005, Kef Q towers/rears Kef Reference center, Win 7 Pro with XBMC, Harmony Ultimate One
Xbox Live: Arbitrage XXL
ChrisFB is offline  
post #112 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,880
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Actually I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I think that 1080p among gamers will become the resolution of choice, and in that regard Sony and Microsoft will hold alot of adoption-power.

Among the general public, assuming more than a few hundred dollars difference between 1080i sets and 1080p sets, they wont care either way and will go with the cheaper of the 2 technologies. However, I also think by that time, in a few years, there wont be any technologies besides plasma that display a 1080i signal.

DLP and LCOS and LCD and whatever else will all be doing internal deinterlacing to progressive, based on their display requirements. So maybe 1080p will be the only
game in town, except that only recorded medium will be able to take advantage of it (again, assuming broadcasters dont push for a new 1080p standard).

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is offline  
post #113 of 218 Old 05-24-2005, 10:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyto
No, no, no. SCEA has stated that 1080p is the standard resolution for the system. The PS3 will be a game system first and foremost, the Blu-Ray capability is just an added bonus. Besides, 1080p has not been confirmed for Blu-Ray as a standard, which implies that PS3 will do games at 1080p. Sony would have already announced Blu-Ray's 1080p movie support had that been the case.

I GUARANTEE you that Blu-Ray is 1080P, if it wasn't already announced already.


and IMO, that is why ps3 is 1080P
ps24eva is offline  
post #114 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 12:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 17,883
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
I GUARANTEE you that Blu-Ray is 1080P, if it wasn't already announced already.


and IMO, that is why ps3 is 1080P
Accord to this spec at the Blu-ray Disc Associations' site, Blu-ray supports 1080/50i/60i/24p and 720/50p/60p/24p.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #115 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 06:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
TheFerret's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Swamps of Georgia
Posts: 10,004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
I GUARANTEE you that Blu-Ray is 1080P, if it wasn't already announced already. and IMO, that is why ps3 is 1080P
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott
Accord to this spec at the Blu-ray Disc Associations' site, Blu-ray supports 1080/50i/60i/24p and 720/50p/60p/24p.
Maybe we should get his address just in case he's wrong? :rolleyes:

When will D* stop pushing HD-Lite while charging us for full HD? Digital input on a CRT is a reality, not a possibility.
TheFerret is offline  
post #116 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 06:45 PM
Senior Member
 
mike_j_johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 385
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
hmm...

so does that mean that a 1080/24p picture will appear less stable than a 720/60p picture?

Too bad they cant do 1080/60p.


Also, does this mean 1080p PS3 games will only be 24 FPS???
mike_j_johnson is offline  
post #117 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 09:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Scotty L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 2,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
I GUARANTEE you that Blu-Ray is 1080P, if it wasn't already announced already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva
Even though 1080P is a ridiculously high resolution for home theater, it is a very mediocre resolution for computers.
My video card is right now is doing much more than 1080P....
We should start logging his quotes. :p

"ANYONE who pc games that doesn't have a 360 controller for pc use, well frankly isn't a gamer at all."
Scotty L is offline  
post #118 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 10:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am doing more than 1080P

I have two 6800Gt's in SLi mode on a DFI infinity mobo.

(Acutually they are more like ultras, since I OC'd them using rivatuner).
ps24eva is offline  
post #119 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 10:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just got this setup piecemeal used off ebay.
ps24eva is offline  
post #120 of 218 Old 05-25-2005, 10:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott
Accord to this spec at the Blu-ray Disc Associations' site, Blu-ray supports 1080/50i/60i/24p and 720/50p/60p/24p.

Like I said

the ps3 is made to be 1080P to support Blu-ray
ps24eva is offline  
Closed Thread PlayStation Area

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off