Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.

Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a different
resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I assume
that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
translated to the appropriate video signal.

I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is affected.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>
> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
> to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
> different
> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
> assume
> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>
> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
> care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
> affected.
>
it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i every
1/30th second...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:d1vnjo$6p6$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu:

>
> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed
>>was
>> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>>
>> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect
>> there to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to
>> a different
>> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
>> assume
>> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
>> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>>
>> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I
>> don't care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate
>> is affected.
>>
> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
> every 1/30th second...
>
>
>

but if this is the case then the best framerates would be in 480i and if
they are already awful, then 480p+ would be downright unplayable.

my understanding of pc video cards is that the game and rendering engine
modifies a frame buffer while the ramdac converts that frame buffer to the
video signal. The ramdac is autonomous and always operating at the video
sync rate, but the video buffer does not change until modified. The frame
rate of the game is how fast it is modifying the frame buffer and
independent of the ramdac. the rendering rate can be 2fps or 250fps while
the ramdac is displaying whatever is in the frame buffer at 60hz (or
whatever the video sync is).

Kotor got framerates that were very unstable, sometimes as low as the
single digits, but there is no way that an NTSC tv could sync to anything
but a stable 60hz signal. so I think the same is true for consoles, the
game renders to the frame buffer as fast as it can while the ramdac
converts whatever is in the frame buffer to the video signal.

If this is true then the game is free to render to whatever it wants. It
could render at 720p all the time, letting the ramdac make a 480i or 720p
signal out of it and the game would run at the same rendered framerate
regardless of the output device.

TIA for any clarification...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

I have never heard of issues with 480p. There has been an occasional post
that some of the 720p games can stutter. There is a bit more on it at
http://www.hdtvarcade.com

"hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>
> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
> to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
> different
> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
> assume
> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>
> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
> care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
> affected.
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

hashi <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
>the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>
>Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
>to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a different
>resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I assume
>that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
>translated to the appropriate video signal.

Yeah. For the XB, I'm fairly sure any 480i mode is rendered 480p
internally. (and DC as well, not that you asked.) So I can't think of a
reason why 480p would have any lower a frame rate.

(The PS2 allows games to render half-frames, which obviously saves
frame buffer RAM, but then there is no chance to do even the two-lines-
into-one sampling that slightly smooths out (roughly horizontal) jagged
lines the way the DC and XB do.)

--
We learn that [George W Bush] regarded price controls on American natural gas
as European-style socialism, yet that he was perfectly willing to use the
state's power to seize property below market value in order to build a new
stadium for his baseball team. -- Lars-Erik Nelson
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d1vnjo$6p6$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>
> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
>> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>>
>> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect
>> there
>> to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
>> different
>> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
>> assume
>> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
>> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>>
>> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
>> care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
>> affected.
>>
> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
> every 1/30th second...

480i is not half the resolution of 480p. It's simply "interlacing" the
output. That it is alternates every other line. 480p outputs the entire
image every time. This tends to look more crisp and solid, but the game is
rendering the same graphic screen regardless. Now when you go up to 720p it
has to render more lines so a potential FPS hit may occur.

- Cryo
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

No it won't. But don't judge a game on a demo copy that isn't finished yet.
Often tweaking the settings is on of the last things to be done in game
development.


--
Jeremy Lawson

"hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
> I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>
> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
> to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
different
> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
assume
> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>
> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
> care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
affected.
>
 
E

Eric

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,373
0
19,280
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
> I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>
> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect there
> to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
different
> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
assume
> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>
> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
> care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
affected.

I have two XBoxes here. One that is hooked up a 16:9 HDTV with the
Microsoft HDAV pack and another hooked up to just a standard 4:3 TV with
component cables. My eyes see absolutetly zero difference in framerates
with playing the same games at 480p over 480i. There may a slight
difference, but my eyes certaintly can't distinguish it if there is.

Not completetly sure of this, but if one resolution would take a framerate
hit over the other wouldn't it be 480i? If my thinking is right, doesn't
the XBox (and PC video cards for that that matter) natively/internally run
at 480p, but do extra processing to interlace the video signal if you run
composite or S-video?

As for 1080i, the only game I have that supports such is "MX Unleashed" --
which I picked up mainly just to see the XBox at 1080i. I "think", at least
my eyes are leading me to believe, that "MX Unleashed" is putting out a
lower framerate at 1080i than at 480p. The environment textures in "MX
Unleashed" are pretty simple and there is also quite a bit of "hazing" that
is used. It seems that these were probably "tricks" that the developers did
in order to keep a decent framerate at 1080i. It still looks pretty good
and is, overall, a fun game though.

Cheers,
-Eric
 
E

Eric

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,373
0
19,280
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Eric" <ericmau001a@hotmail.remove.com> wrote in message
news:izg1e.17568$rL3.7933@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
>
> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
> > I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed was
> > the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
> >
> > Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect
there
> > to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to a
> different
> > resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
> assume
> > that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
> > translated to the appropriate video signal.
> >
> > I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I don't
> > care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate is
> affected.
>
> I have two XBoxes here. One that is hooked up a 16:9 HDTV with the
> Microsoft HDAV pack and another hooked up to just a standard 4:3 TV with
> component cables. My eyes see absolutetly zero difference in framerates
> with playing the same games at 480p over 480i. There may a slight
> difference, but my eyes certaintly can't distinguish it if there is.
>
> Not completetly sure of this, but if one resolution would take a framerate
> hit over the other wouldn't it be 480i? If my thinking is right, doesn't
> the XBox (and PC video cards for that that matter) natively/internally run
> at 480p, but do extra processing to interlace the video signal if you run
> composite or S-video?
>
> As for 1080i, the only game I have that supports such is "MX Unleashed" --
> which I picked up mainly just to see the XBox at 1080i. I "think", at
least
> my eyes are leading me to believe, that "MX Unleashed" is putting out a
> lower framerate at 1080i than at 480p. The environment textures in "MX
> Unleashed" are pretty simple and there is also quite a bit of "hazing"
that
> is used. It seems that these were probably "tricks" that the developers
did
> in order to keep a decent framerate at 1080i. It still looks pretty good
> and is, overall, a fun game though.
>
> Cheers,
> -Eric

Er, sorry, the reference to the PC video card, I meant it was progressive
but obviously is a different resolution than 480.

Cheers,
-Eric
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Eric <ericmau001a@hotmail.remove.com> wrote:
>Not completetly sure of this, but if one resolution would take a framerate
>hit over the other wouldn't it be 480i? If my thinking is right, doesn't
>the XBox (and PC video cards for that that matter) natively/internally run
>at 480p, but do extra processing to interlace the video signal if you run
>composite or S-video?

The original poster probably assumed that 480i was actually
rendering a 640x240 image each frame... But as I said earlier, I'm pretty
sure the XBox doesn't do that.

On the other hand, the process of converting the 640x480 frame
buffer to an interlaced TV signal happens without the CPU or GPU -- I
forget the technical terms, but it's the electronics that read the frame
buffer and convert to a video signal.

--
"_Twelve Flatheads:_ As every student of history knows, the Twelve Flatheads
were the greater part of the Thirteen Significant Accomplishments of King
Mumberthrax the Insignificant."
-Encyclopedia Frobozzica.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9623ECC7DE8E3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:d1vnjo$6p6$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu:
>
>>
>> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>>>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed
>>>was
>>> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>>>
>>> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect
>>> there to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to
>>> a different
>>> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
>>> assume
>>> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
>>> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>>>
>>> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I
>>> don't care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate
>>> is affected.
>>>
>> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
>> every 1/30th second...
>>
>>
>>
>
> but if this is the case then the best framerates would be in 480i and if
> they are already awful, then 480p+ would be downright unplayable.
>
witness Republic Commando...480p in 4:3, only 480i in widescreen...
 
D

Dan

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,208
0
19,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

You are mixing up refresh rate with fps. Take for example, a pc monitor. The
refresh rate may be set at 60hz, but the game being played may not run at
60fps because of the hardware.
"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d55u1t$1dp$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>
> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9623ECC7DE8E3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:d1vnjo$6p6$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu:
>>
>>>
>>> "hashi" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9623BA59B9FB3776852d3f2@news.aioe.org...
>>>>I was just looking at jade empire demo and the first thing I noticed
>>>>was
>>>> the unstable framerate when you pan the camera.
>>>>
>>>> Does progressive scan make a difference in framerate? I would expect
>>>> there to be a difference between 480p and 720p if the game renders to
>>>> a different
>>>> resolution. I don't expect a difference between 480p and 480i. but I
>>>> assume
>>>> that the game renders both the same with the output video hardware
>>>> translated to the appropriate video signal.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not asking whether progressive scan looks better or sharper. I
>>>> don't care about graphics. I'm strictly asking whether the framerate
>>>> is affected.
>>>>
>>> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
>>> every 1/30th second...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> but if this is the case then the best framerates would be in 480i and if
>> they are already awful, then 480p+ would be downright unplayable.
>>
> witness Republic Commando...480p in 4:3, only 480i in widescreen...
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> >> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
> >> every 1/30th second...

It doesn't work that way. The game renders the whole frame no matter what,
the only difference is whether it outputs half of it or all of it to the TV,
but at that point, all the work's been done.

So the answer is no, there's no difference in framerate.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Leon Dexter" <leondexterNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4Cxde.3303$HL2.2013@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>> >> it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
>> >> every 1/30th second...
>
> It doesn't work that way. The game renders the whole frame no matter
> what,
> the only difference is whether it outputs half of it or all of it to the
> TV,
> but at that point, all the work's been done.
>
> So the answer is no, there's no difference in framerate.
>
>
please explain Republic Commando only being able to output interlaced
widescreen...
 
T

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Leon Dexter wrote:
> "Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>
>>>>it'd make sense, as 480p is pushing twice the number of pixels as 480i
>>>>every 1/30th second...
>
>
> It doesn't work that way. The game renders the whole frame no matter what,
> the only difference is whether it outputs half of it or all of it to the TV,
> but at that point, all the work's been done.
>
> So the answer is no, there's no difference in framerate.
>
>
not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403

> not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
> outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
> you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
> can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
> difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?


You're talking about refresh rate, not framerate. There are still 60 frames
even when the game is running interlaced. They're just made up of half as
many lines, so they're called "fields". But believe me, they are NOT two
halves of a whole frame. They do not make a picture when put together.
Movement does occur in between each field.
A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see better.
Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
twice as many numbers. :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> please explain Republic Commando only being able to output interlaced
> widescreen...

Most likely that's just incompetence--a feature they didn't implement in
time to ship. Or maybe it had a bug they didn't feel like fixing.
But there are exceptions. For example, Voodoo 2 cards could run in SLI
mode, with two cards each rendering every other line--and effectively
doubling the framerate. You don't absolutely HAVE to render full frames,
but not doing so is really rare.
It's possible, but extremely unlikely that LucasArts has pulled some
software trick to force the Xbox to render only half of each frame to
squeeze some more performance out of it. But that's really, really
reaching.
 
T

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Leon Dexter wrote:
> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>
>
>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>


There are still 60 frames
> even when the game is running interlaced.

so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
about?



> A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see better.
> Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
> twice as many numbers. :)



than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
news:eHJde.990$Jz2.358@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> Leon Dexter wrote:
>> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>>
>>
>>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
>>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>>
>
>
> There are still 60 frames
>> even when the game is running interlaced.
>
> so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
> about?
>
>
>
>> A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see
>> better.
>> Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
>> twice as many numbers. :)
>
>
>
> than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
> xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?


30 fps is about the maximum refresh rate of the human eye...I think movies
are shot at 24 fps, PAL is 25 fps, and NTSC is 30 fps...60 fps is the "holy
grail" if you will, as some scenes are more complicated to render in real
time than others, so if you shoot for 60fps, that should give you enough
headroom so that if you only hit 30fps during the complex scenes the
experience will still look seamless to the viewer...
 
T

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
> news:eHJde.990$Jz2.358@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Leon Dexter wrote:
>>
>>>"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
>>>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>>>
>>
>> There are still 60 frames
>>
>>>even when the game is running interlaced.
>>
>>so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
>>about?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see
>>>better.
>>>Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
>>>twice as many numbers. :)
>>
>>
>>
>>than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
>>xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?
>
>
>
> 30 fps is about the maximum refresh rate of the human eye...I think movies
> are shot at 24 fps, PAL is 25 fps, and NTSC is 30 fps...60 fps is the "holy
> grail" if you will, as some scenes are more complicated to render in real
> time than others, so if you shoot for 60fps, that should give you enough
> headroom so that if you only hit 30fps during the complex scenes the
> experience will still look seamless to the viewer...
>
>
I appreciate your feedback Khee but I don't want to negate those
specific questions such as:

How does 60fps come into picture with Interlaced when I've read (and
thought) interlaced maxed out at 30fps (something to do with the how the
scanlines are drawn as opposed to progressive) wich seems to be in stark
contrast to what Leon is telling me.

And if 60fps (as opposed to 30fps) is not perfomance hindering (as it
his in PC gaming) than why do so many xbox games fail to do it very well.

thanks.
 
T

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Leon Dexter wrote:
> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>
>
>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>
>
>
> You're talking about refresh rate, not framerate. There are still 60 frames
> even when the game is running interlaced. They're just made up of half as
> many lines, so they're called "fields". But believe me, they are NOT two
> halves of a whole frame. They do not make a picture when put together.
> Movement does occur in between each field.
> A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see better.
> Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
> twice as many numbers. :)
>
>
Okay, I understand what you're saying about fields but it takes two
fields to complete a full frame. One field is painted on the screen
every 1/60th of a second; even lines, odd lines.

So in the case of NTSC I understand that it runs at 60hz which seems
like a contradiction in terms to me between the former and 60. So is
each field projected twice to achieve the 60hz?
 
T

theone

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2001
584
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

Khee Mao wrote:
> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
> news:eHJde.990$Jz2.358@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Leon Dexter wrote:
>>
>>>"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete frames
>>>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>>>
>>
>> There are still 60 frames
>>
>>>even when the game is running interlaced.
>>
>>so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
>>about?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see
>>>better.
>>>Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
>>>twice as many numbers. :)
>>
>>
>>
>>than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
>>xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?
>
>
>
> 30 fps is about the maximum refresh rate of the human eye...I think movies
> are shot at 24 fps, PAL is 25 fps, and NTSC is 30 fps...60 fps is the "holy
> grail" if you will, as some scenes are more complicated to render in real
> time than others, so if you shoot for 60fps, that should give you enough
> headroom so that if you only hit 30fps during the complex scenes the
> experience will still look seamless to the viewer...
>
>

also 30fps can't be the pinnacle of what the human eye can see. Because
if it were 60hz refresh rates (on pc monitors) wouldn't have noticeable
flicker which obviously isn't true. Ideal for the human eye would be
between 72 and 75hz.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
news:SYRde.1150$Jz2.346@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> Khee Mao wrote:
>> "theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message
>> news:eHJde.990$Jz2.358@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Leon Dexter wrote:
>>>
>>>>"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:rUxde.403
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>not getting what you're saying.. I know the game renders complete
>>>>>frames
>>>>> irrespective of what the I/O (TV) can display but progressive scan
>>>>>outputs 1 COMPLETE frame every 1/60 of a second whereas with interlace
>>>>>you're aonly getting 30fps (every other scanline). So if the hardware
>>>>>can keep up, games will run better. So how would I intrepret no
>>>>>difference in FPS when there is a distinct difference in FPS?
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are still 60 frames
>>>
>>>>even when the game is running interlaced.
>>>
>>>so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
>>>about?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>A game running in 480p doesn't "run better". It just lets you see
>>>>better.
>>>>Nor does it run worse due to some strenuous difficulty in squeezing out
>>>>twice as many numbers. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
>>>xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?
>>
>>
>>
>> 30 fps is about the maximum refresh rate of the human eye...I think
>> movies are shot at 24 fps, PAL is 25 fps, and NTSC is 30 fps...60 fps is
>> the "holy grail" if you will, as some scenes are more complicated to
>> render in real time than others, so if you shoot for 60fps, that should
>> give you enough headroom so that if you only hit 30fps during the complex
>> scenes the experience will still look seamless to the viewer...
>
> also 30fps can't be the pinnacle of what the human eye can see. Because if
> it were 60hz refresh rates (on pc monitors) wouldn't have noticeable
> flicker which obviously isn't true. Ideal for the human eye would be
> between 72 and 75hz.


60hz can look flickery to some people because its a multiple of 30, google
"interference patterns", but I promise you that you can't tell the
difference between a true 30 fps and 200 fps.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"theOne" <theOneOne@dodgeit.com> wrote in message news:eHJde.990

> so where does this 30fps come into the picture that I'm always reading
> about?

Semantics. 30 "frames" per second because each of the 60 fields is only
half a frame.


>
> than why do a majority (or it would seem by the number of complaints) of
> xbox games always perform poorly at anything higher than 480i?

That's the first I've ever heard of it. Unless you're talking about 720p
performance being bad, which is another case entirely. 480p and 480i
performance will always be identical, barring glitches or broken hardware.
Of course 480p looks much nicer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Khee Mao" <big_bad_buddha_daddy@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> 30 fps is about the maximum refresh rate of the human eye...I think movies
> are shot at 24 fps, PAL is 25 fps, and NTSC is 30 fps...60 fps is the
"holy
> grail" if you will, as some scenes are more complicated to render in real
> time than others, so if you shoot for 60fps, that should give you enough
> headroom so that if you only hit 30fps during the complex scenes the
> experience will still look seamless to the viewer...

That's a complete myth, and I can disprove it for you right now. The human
eye can distiguish well over 60 fps, though it varies by person.
Set your monitor to 60 hz, and choose a white desktop. You may be able to
see it flickering right away (I can), but if not, look a little off to the
side and you should be able to see the monitor flickering very easily. If
you can't, you're in the minority and really can't distinguish 60 fps.
But change your refresh rate to 75 hz and that same white background will
look completely solid, with no hint of flickering (unless you're a freak who
can see above 75 hz, like a friend of mine).

I do this sort of thing at work all the time. I can spot a monitor set to
60 hz at a glance, no matter what image is on it (white is easiest, though).
The reason movies, for example, look smooth at 24 fps is because each frame
has blurring, and an image projected as it's done in theaters fades more
slowly than a single frame on your computer monitor. The same is true of
TVs--the picture on a normal CRT tube fades fairly slowly, so 60 hz doesn't
give you a headache the way it will on a monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom