By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - PS3 PAL SDTV performance is subpar compared to 360.

kiefer23 on 28 July 2009
Untamoi said:
Wait... PAL standard has always had 50 Hz frequency while NTSC has 60 HZ. PAL has NEVER been 60 Hz, 60 Hz only came to Europe with HDTV. Most old CRT TV's in Europe only supports 50 Hz so they can't even do 60 Hz. Games have been slower in PAL because TV's there can't even do 60 Hz. Better CRT TV's has 100 Hz but not even those always could do 60 Hz so supporting 50 Hz serves only very small audience (mostly newer LCD SDTV's).


What? I have always had 60hz SDTV's since the 90's. I know there is a difference in resolution (or used to be) NTSC was 720x480 where as Pal was 720x576.



Around the Network
TWRoO on 28 July 2009
kiefer23 said:
Untamoi said:
Wait... PAL standard has always had 50 Hz frequency while NTSC has 60 HZ. PAL has NEVER been 60 Hz, 60 Hz only came to Europe with HDTV. Most old CRT TV's in Europe only supports 50 Hz so they can't even do 60 Hz. Games have been slower in PAL because TV's there can't even do 60 Hz. Better CRT TV's has 100 Hz but not even those always could do 60 Hz so supporting 50 Hz serves only very small audience (mostly newer LCD SDTV's).


What? I have always had 60hz SDTV's since the 90's. I know there is a difference in resolution (or used to be) NTSC was 720x480 where as Pal was 720x576.

There are 3 screen modes available for the Wii:

576i (50Hz)
480i (60Hz)
480p (classed as EDTV)



Tallgeese101 on 28 July 2009
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
Im torn,

I want to say who gives a shit about SDTV performance.
But so many people still have to play it like that, my mate uses his PS3 on a 15" SDTV in his kitchen.


Does your friend live in a country where electrical eqiuptment costs more than a castle?

 

Well England is expensive but not that expensive.

He just doesn't have a lot of money and his family needs come before his own.


LOOOOOL

You say he is poor and his family needs come before his own and yet he owns a PS3 presmungly not a neccesity in life? Biggest contradiction of the year by you congrats!

 

Are you trying to be an arsehole or just a teenager?  He could afford a PS3 when he bought it (presents, savings, credit w/e I dont know).  He cannot however justfy spending another £100+ and if you look at Squiliams post you can see that about 1/2 of people have made a similar decision.



ph4nt on 28 July 2009

That's pretty interesting, but I don't think the difference would be big enough to be noticeable for the average person.

Also, anyone know the breakdown of TV sales thesedays?

As in, how many people are still buying SDTV's.



TWRoO on 28 July 2009
ph4nt said:
That's pretty interesting, but I don't think the difference would be big enough to be noticeable for the average person.

Also, anyone know the breakdown of TV sales thesedays?

As in, how many people are still buying SDTV's.

I don't know the breakdown... but I doubt many SDTVs are being bought anymore for the simple reason that it is difficult to find any (other than small portables)

However, many who are buying HD don't really know what it is... and many still have working SDTVs like me, and won't be buying HD till they break. (I won't have much choice when they do break anyway)

Actual ownership of HD vs. SD for the main living room TV is probably about 30-40% in the UK (this is a random guess in reality, but I can't see it being over 50% or under 20%)

TV sales (another random guess) are probably 90% HD for anything 30" and bigger... dropping to 40%ish for 15" portables



Around the Network
FootballFan on 28 July 2009
Tallgeese101 said:
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
Im torn,

I want to say who gives a shit about SDTV performance.
But so many people still have to play it like that, my mate uses his PS3 on a 15" SDTV in his kitchen.


Does your friend live in a country where electrical eqiuptment costs more than a castle?

 

Well England is expensive but not that expensive.

He just doesn't have a lot of money and his family needs come before his own.


LOOOOOL

You say he is poor and his family needs come before his own and yet he owns a PS3 presmungly not a neccesity in life? Biggest contradiction of the year by you congrats!

 

Are you trying to be an arsehole or just a teenager?  He could afford a PS3 when he bought it (presents, savings, credit w/e I dont know).  He cannot however justfy spending another £100+ and if you look at Squiliams post you can see that about 1/2 of people have made a similar decision.
Yes, i see that people choose to have a SD televison. But, saying that he wanted to put his family before him financially, fair enough. A PS3 should be the last purcahse you make if your family is not secure financially. I just presmumed he lived in a 3rd world country because the costs of electronics are relativly cheap in England compared to your average wage or compared to benefits off the government.


ph4nt on 29 July 2009
TWRoO said:
ph4nt said:
That's pretty interesting, but I don't think the difference would be big enough to be noticeable for the average person.

Also, anyone know the breakdown of TV sales thesedays?

As in, how many people are still buying SDTV's.

I don't know the breakdown... but I doubt many SDTVs are being bought anymore for the simple reason that it is difficult to find any (other than small portables)

However, many who are buying HD don't really know what it is... and many still have working SDTVs like me, and won't be buying HD till they break. (I won't have much choice when they do break anyway)

Actual ownership of HD vs. SD for the main living room TV is probably about 30-40% in the UK (this is a random guess in reality, but I can't see it being over 50% or under 20%)

TV sales (another random guess) are probably 90% HD for anything 30" and bigger... dropping to 40%ish for 15" portables

Intersting, and it makes sense, thanks!

I don't know anyone in their right mind who would buy a new TV today that wasn't HD.



Kantor on 29 July 2009

But...but...EuroGamer hates the PS3!

D=



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

Zlejedi on 29 July 2009
Tallgeese101 said:
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
FootballFan said:
Tallgeese101 said:
Im torn,

I want to say who gives a shit about SDTV performance.
But so many people still have to play it like that, my mate uses his PS3 on a 15" SDTV in his kitchen.


Does your friend live in a country where electrical eqiuptment costs more than a castle?

 

Well England is expensive but not that expensive.

He just doesn't have a lot of money and his family needs come before his own.


LOOOOOL

You say he is poor and his family needs come before his own and yet he owns a PS3 presmungly not a neccesity in life? Biggest contradiction of the year by you congrats!

 

Are you trying to be an arsehole or just a teenager?  He could afford a PS3 when he bought it (presents, savings, credit w/e I dont know).  He cannot however justfy spending another £100+ and if you look at Squiliams post you can see that about 1/2 of people have made a similar decision.

If i remember british prices correctly then the beer in a pub there costs like 3-4 pounds so getting new monitor is around 25-30 beers.



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

ksv on 29 July 2009

As a previous poster mentioned, 99% of PAL SDTVs do support 60 Hz. I've used several early 90s PAL TVs over the years that ran PAL 60 without problems, tho one or two had slight flickering in the edges.

The Wii's PAL support is indeed good, but the problem is that the Virtual Console games (except Turbografx 16 games) all run in 50 Hz!! This was the reason why I imported my Wii from North America, in 2009 I shouldnt have to play Sonic the Hedgehog, Majora's Mask or Super Mario Bros 3 at 17% reduced speed! Huge oversight by Nintendo Europe, unfortunately, the regular Wii games almost always support 60 Hz (as did most good gamecube games).