nightsurge said:
Groucho said:
The reason the PS3 has such an easy time doing 3D is due to the fact that it can render to multiple targets in a single frame (see: deferred rendering, the reason KZ2 looks so good, and the major advantage the PS3 has over the 360, in terms of rendering horsepower).
The 360 cannot do that efficiently, but it can do it -- especially if most of the data was pre-processed, and didn't have to be rendered on the fly (i.e. a movie frame). The GPU is likely taking a pair of "depth textures" and two source movie frames, and using them to generate a "3D image", which the special glasses separate for your eyes. In the PS3s case, if can actually render the scene from two points of view in a single frame (whereas the 360 cannot, without horrid performance issues), and then combine the images.
|
Where does all this "360 cannot do that" come from? I wasn't aware MS did any tampering with 3D gaming yet for people actually see how it performs. Nvidia does it with just their GPU and drivers... so why couldn't MS do it on the 360 with the GPU and updated firmware? If I remember correctly, the 360 GPU is actually quite decent, and is better than the PS3's, so why would this cause "horrid performance issues" on the 360 using it's GPU for 3D gaming?
|
Something about the unified memory architecture keeps the X360 from being able to render to multiple targets easily (or efficiently), as I recall. You'd have to ask a 360 graphics pro to really get the detailed scoop on why that is.
edit: its actually the 360 GPU's eDRAM that's the issue.
