Posts: 15.303
Threads: 431
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
352
Location: Athens,Greece
Nope. It uses up a very small extra portion of CPU power but it is 99% GPU power. Your test results show that the 4850 can't handle those resolutions for the games you tested.
Posts: 1.020
Threads: 2
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation:
10
07-06-2010, 10:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-06-2010, 11:33 AM by naoan.)
Hmm I suppose you're right, I guess with high scaling GPU matter more (though 4850 being insufficient rather come as a surprise). More thing to invest, worth it though. >.<
Posts: 4.504
Threads: 14
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
89
(07-06-2010, 09:18 AM)Bositman Wrote: Nope. It uses up a very small extra portion of CPU power but it is 99% GPU power. Your test results show that the 4850 can't handle those resolutions for the games you tested.
Actually it should be so and most work befalls really on the GPU, still it imposes a heavy toll on an already overloaded CPU as well, so it would not matter if one has a 5870 or a 480 there, he still get low fps from the bottlenecked CPU.
Albeit not directly acquainted with the actual code, i dare to suppose it being caused by the way PS2 uses the EE and VUs altogether with the GS itself and that need to be emulated.
That is particularly noticeable because it is the EE that goes skyrocket when the scaling under bottleneck occurs.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Posts: 1.909
Threads: 28
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
75
Is it possible to know what the actual resolution is for different configs? i.e. is 'native' always the same (and x2 is twice x and y, = x4 pixels?)? or does it change with each game? To my naked eye, it seems 'native' always looks the same. Also, does the resolution refer to the framebuffer?
Posts: 1.909
Threads: 28
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
75
07-06-2010, 12:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-06-2010, 12:30 PM by avih.)
Would selecting different PS2 display settings (default/480p/1080i/PAL=576i?/16:9) affect PCSX2/GSdx/GPU performance in any way? I tried (GT4, SotC) but couldn't notice a substantial difference (though 'native' at 1080i does seem higher res than the 480p native in GT4), but is there a theoretical difference?
Also, I couldn't quite understand how is interlacing treated (I'm pretty knowledgeable about interlacing, but not so about the PS2). I would guess that it could possibly be bypassed for 'pure' 3D output (=no deinterlace needed), but might affect outputs that have to be 'composed' somehow (framebuffer effects?), and might affect 2D 'sprites'.
But on some games I didn't see interlacing artifacts at all (Ico, SofC, MGS2/3, GOW1/2), while on others (GT3/4) it's clearly interlaced unless set natively to 480p. Ico ans SotC specifically clearly have framebuffer effects (blur, HDR) but I couldn't notice any interlacing even when not selecting progressive scan (SotC), and Ico doesn't even have this option and still no interlacing artifacts.
And one last thing, deinterlace mode in GSdx is not reflected at the window title as it used to be prior to 0.97.3113 (still the same in recent svn builds too), not when changing via GSdx config panel and not when using F5. It always says 'Interlaced (Frame)'.