By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
cannonballZ said:
Captain_Tom said:
jlmurph2 said:
Can anybody give me an example of another game that does this? Because all I'm seeing is that "Its not REALLY 1920x1080, but it's still 1080p".

Dat damage control.


It is 1080p just like the MP IS 60 FPS.  GG is just too honest.

For instance COD usually runs in the upper 40's, but they act like it's 60.  GG on the other hand tells the full truth and says that there may be dips.

 

At the end of the day it is 1080p.  If this isn't 1080p, then the PS3 doesn't have 7 cores (Hint: it does, but some fanboys argue otherwise on technicalities). 


I thought they were "sub-cores" , no?

 

"The PS3 has a general logic (PPE) PowerPC main controller and 7 SPE "sub-cores." These sub-cores are not general logic cores - unlike Core 2 Duo's "2" cores or 360's "3" cores... Therefore they cannot function independently without the main core "

 

Not being a fanboy either, just trying to understand the tech a bit.


Based on the definition of a core, they are a core.  Sure they may be missing a few things most "full" cores have, but the parts that are required for it to be considered a "Core" are there.

 

As for the resolution thing, it is 1080p.  All games render certain onscreen things at resolutions lower than the main one.  For instance Borderlands 2 on PC renders shadows in 720p (Like Killzone SF does).  Does that mean BL2 isn't in 1080p on PC?  No!