3 reasons why to NOT buy a new 3DTV for gaming.

[Ssenkahdavic]

disolitude said:

Ssenkahdavic said:

disolitude said:

Thats interesting about Crysis 2. I can't wait to see it in action and the results...

The bolded is true for PS3 as well. PS3 doesn't have any special "3D compatibility" or drivers in the same form as X360 doesn't have one. The PS3 update was only a software update that emulates HDMI 1.4 since the console doesn't have it.

However any 3rd party multiplat games can easily be ported to 360 in 3D if develper wants to.  The only difference is that PS3 will automatically tell the TV which 3D format to use (due to HDMI 1.4 update) where on the 360, the user will most likely have to choose the format his TV supports manually.

Not completely.  Im pretty sure the Xbox 360S still has a HDMI 1.2 port (correct me if I am wrong) but even if not they will still need to worry about the older models.  

"HDMI Version 1.3 has brought about significant enhancements to the original HDMI specifications - with the most important being increasing the single-link bandwidth to 340 MHz or 10.2 Gbit/s data stream."  Souce.  That is a little more than double the 4.95 Gbit/s of 1.2 (on the 360)

The ease of 3D porting is based on HOW they are doing the 3D.  If they are already using frampackets @ > 3.95 gb/sec (max video bandw allowed on HDMI 1.2) it CANNOT be an easy port from one to another. It is all based on how they are implementing the 3D.  Any third part dev looking to do this will obviously choose a way that will support both easily.

Added: This has nothing to do with the internal hardware of the Xbox, nor am I bashing it in any way. This is simply a limitation bandw wise of HDMI 1.2 (which I think a good deal of people skip over)

HDMI 1.2 supports a max video bandwith of 1080p@60 hz...

Check the spec for gaming in 3D on the new 3D TVs. Its 720p@60 hz frame packing... Which is essentially 720p X 2 (2 720p images on top of each other) and is exactly the same amount of pixels as 1080p@60hz.

If it had a bluray drive, 360 wouldn't be able to play Bluray at 1080p@24p using HDMI 1.2 but it has enough bandwith to do 3D gaming according to their specs. Avatar did this exact 3D implementation last year on both PS3 and 360 last year (it has over/under option in the 3D select menu). It just didn't do it with the HDMI 1.4 lock out handshake.

Why the new TV's don't support 1080p@60 per eye jsut baffles me as the HDMI 1.4 cable supports the bandwith... I think it was jsut cheaper not to implement a pannel that can do 60 fps @ 1080p so the TV manufacturers said "fuck it" 720p for gaming it is it is.

Its pretty clear that the HDMI 1.4 "standards" which were introduced last year were made to lock out existing technology in order to maximize revenue, rather than improve 3D for everyone...

After working out the equation, they can both support the exact same 1280x720 @60x2 for all color depths (I was almost sure before doing the actual math that 32bit would be to much bandw for HDMI 1.2, but it isnt...barely)

1280x720 (pixels) x 60 (fps) x 2 (both eyes) x 32bit (color) = 3,538,944,000 gigabites/s  (HDMI 1.2 can support 3.95gigabites/s)

Just to be complete: 

1920x1080 (pixels) x 24 (fps) x 2 (both eyes) x 32bit (color) = 3,185,049,600 gigabites/s (HDMI 1.2 COULD support this...atleast it has the bandw to do so)  

1920x1080 (pixels) x 60 (fps) x 2 (both eyes) x 32bit (color) = 7,962,624,000 gigabites/s (HDMI 1.2 COULD not support this...but neither do todays supposed 1.4a HDMI tvs.... tho they do have the bandw)

1920x1080 (pixels) x 60 (fps) x 1 (regular 2D) x 32bit (color) = 3,981,312,000 gigabites/s (HDMI 1.2 COULD not support this, probably why most 1080p games are 24bit anyway)

1080@60x 32bit 2D > 720@60x 32bit 3D.  Interesting isnt it?

 

just for shits and giggles: Bandw here = TOTAL number of pixels x how many are drawn per second (frames) x how much space each takes up (16-32 bits per pixel based on color depth) 1080p@60 hz is NOT bandwidth