best for 6x native?
#11
(02-10-2013, 12:02 AM)dralor Wrote: I didn't say anything about new data being created. However the image is sharper simply becuase of the fact it is rendering more pixels directly not upscaling/stretching and using an algorithm to to interpret what it thinks should be there.

You are confusing two things rendering resolutuion and texture resolution. The first can go up adinfinum as long as you have the power to do so. Yes at a certain point it is diminishing returns but you can still raise it. What you are thinking about is testure resolution which is fixed by the assets used by game at time of creation. This data can be interpolated to appear to creat an increased resolution but as you say it can't create data out of nothing. Just like you can't create more polygons on a model etc. However increasing rendering resolution will create an image that appears sharper then a lower resolution and has other nice effects such as supersampling if it needs to downscale back to your screen.

Please, read carefully my posts. I'm not confusing the internal resolution (upscale) with nothing else than itself. Actually it increases texture resolution, just it is not the same thing than "real" greater texture resolution where small details makes all the difference.

My post was meant to answer the user who seemed to believe the upscaling was going to give him greatly detailed textures and maybe show the fine grain of skin with all glorious pores perfection and flaws. Sadly it's not so, the final image would be so flat and smooth as the original, flatter and smoother even.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
I think you ran a little too far with a bit of sarcasm\gross overexaggeration by the original poster.
Reply
#13
(02-10-2013, 12:36 AM)dralor Wrote: I think you ran a little too far with a bit of sarcasm\gross overexaggeration by the original poster.

Let's set in a compromise, stating it does not increase the original texture resolution (at my first post) was confusing also since I meant just not bringing any detail to the original image it hasn't already, for the actual texture, as in number of dpi indeed increases, just than repeating and interpolating points is not really making the image any sharper/detailed.

Now, what sarcasm did you see on my posts?
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply
#14
(02-09-2013, 11:05 PM)Kains Legacy Wrote: Sorry... it's just 6x native resolution requires a ton of horsepower.
Most people's rigs just don't have the power.

gtx 660ti or an 7870 is basicaly enough to play at 6x native, but not all games will run fullspeed, but my guess is the lighter games will run just fine but the more demanding games will se fps drops (dragonquest 8, shadow of the collosus, metal gear solid 3 etc)
Reply
#15
Upscalling requirements can be somewhat confusing, couse people forget x6 native actually means 36 times more pixels than native res;p. PS2 games almost never use GS full potential, and GSdx often removes heavy effects, soo we're used it's nothing special. Modern GPU's are optimized for higher res textures and different limitations that GSdx hits soo not really something easy to compare either. In some terms through GS chip was as fast as modern mid range gpu's. Multiply that by 30 and you'll see a gpu of such power doesn't exist nor is planned(at least not for desktops;p), in other words no modern GPU will allow running ALL PS2 games on x6 native, soo nobody can guarantee anything, but yeah unless having high quality ultra high res laser projector(or cheaper - eyefinity, but that's just a poor man choice isn't it?;p) the higher upscalling you set the less visible the change will be and anything above x3 will just be a very subtle antialias.
All this effor isn't really worth as the textures will still be as bad as ever, model will still have laughable polycount and there'll be no graphic enhancements we're nowadays used to with DX games. Nobody sane plays ps2 games for their graphics. Apparently I'm not sane O.o, I love Odin's Sphere graphics(and oh yeah x6 in that game does alot xD).
Reply
#16
Depending on the game, I can run 6x with a 3770K and GTX 670, both moderately overclocked.

Usually it caps out at 5x for playable framerates. 4x is optimal.

Though, anything above 3x creates nasty artifacts, which is a shame, because 3x is a bit too small.

@Kain: Is memory bandwidth really required for high resolution stuff? I've had issues with streaming above 1080p45 (even just capturing 1080p30 content), despite my CPU/GPU usage being nowhere near maxed out. If I actually need high memory bandwidth for high resolution transfers, then it's time to upgrade my RAM. (If so, shame, because I have 1600MHz CL7 RAM; always been a low latency person; this kit cost me $300, don't want to give it up soon. Sad )
Reply
#17
(02-09-2013, 05:34 PM)nosisab Ken Keleh Wrote: Remember that up scaling does not actually increase the original texture resolution, so you can't get any detail that was not in the original picture. Still, by blending adjacent points to create new ones it filters and smooths the image and can even act like a kind of antialiasing (albeith not acting only on the edges).

PS: for the sake of cleanness, upscaling does not sharpen the image but actually blurs it to an extent.

(02-10-2013, 12:02 AM)dralor Wrote: What you are thinking about is texture resolution which is fixed by the assets used by game at time of creation. This data can be interpolated to appear to create an increased resolution but as you say it can't create data out of nothing. Just like you can't create more polygons on a model etc. However increasing rendering resolution will create an image that appears sharper then a lower resolution and has other nice effects such as supersampling if it needs to downscale back to your screen.

I like these two reads... theres one very important thing to remember though with PS2 games. They were created, drawn and rendered on PC, in a lot higher resolutions than the PS2 can render. FFX is a perfect example... the 'asset's', as in the data/files, 3D images on the disk are made and rendered in high resolution's on a PC, pumped out to the PS2 it tries its best and renders them at a low 512x416 pixels. In the case of this game and many others, you are not actually upscalling until after a threshold, alot of the 'assets/files' on a PS2 disk are 2-4x the resoultion of what the hardware in a PS2 has the power to render them at...

(02-10-2013, 09:11 AM)miseru99 Wrote: All this effor isn't really worth as the textures will still be as bad as ever, model will still have laughable polycount and there'll be no graphic enhancements we're nowadays used to with DX games. Nobody sane plays ps2 games for their graphics. Apparently I'm not sane O.o, I love Odin's Sphere graphics(and oh yeah x6 in that game does alot xD).

So in the case of a lot of PS2 games, until you ask PCSX2 to push for upwards of 3+ times the native resolution you are not up-scaling the images drawn and saved to the disk, you are giving the work on the disk the same horse power that it was created, drawn and saved with! When you ask PCSX2 to render at 2+ times the native resolution you are indeed getting a picture with a higher 'polygon' count than the PS2 would send to your TV, with ofc graphical enhancements!
Reply
#18
@Miseru
Thanks, I could not tell better what you expressed in your post Smile
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply
#19
to get 60fps at 6x you'll need a 7950/7970 with overclock.

my 7870 1200/1300 and 7950 can play games at 5x scaling. i dont think a nvidia card would be suitable due to lower memory bandwidth. also 6x prob uses loads of vram
Reply
#20
thanx to All of you
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)