xboxscene.org forums

Author Topic: New Article At Anandtech  (Read 151 times)

KAGE360

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
New Article At Anandtech
« on: June 24, 2005, 07:35:00 PM »

havent read the article yet so dont know which way it leads but im sure its a good read

http://www.anandtech...doc.aspx?i=2453
Logged

nj12nets

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 551
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2005, 10:26:00 PM »

very good, unbiased description of the consoles. no clear favorite but ms spending $$ on whats needed and sony spending it everywhere
Logged

Foe-hammer

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2288
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2005, 11:43:00 PM »

They fail to mention that 1080p is only 30 fps or 30Hz, while 720p's runs at 60Hz.  This refers to the refresh rate of the monitor.  While playing games at 60Hz is not too bad, it is the lowest you would want to play at.  I couldn't imagine playing a game with a refresh rate of 30Hz.  I find it rather odd that 1080p does not support 60 fps.  I thought that interlace only was 30Hz, while progressive was always 60Hz.  Strange.
Logged

Wedding-shirt

  • Archived User
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2005, 01:31:00 PM »

QUOTE(thax @ Jun 25 2005, 12:44 AM)
The article has a few problems.
Logged

Andy51

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 672
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2005, 02:00:00 PM »

I cannot read the entire article!!! SO LONG!!!!

MY HEAD HURTS!!!  sad.gif
Logged

Foe-hammer

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2288
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2005, 07:18:00 PM »

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Jun 25 2005, 09:28 PM)
1080p supports 24, 30 and 60 Hz.
Logged

incognegro

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1764
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #6 on: June 27, 2005, 11:42:00 AM »

im not good at this stuff, he mentions the advantage of blu ray being the fact that all the data is uncompressed taking the pressure of decompressing graphic data off of the cpu while the 360 would have to decompress data on the fly will affect performance. Would this make a big difference? since blu ray drives are slower at the moment wouldnt that affect anything in terms of performance?
Logged

incognegro

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1764
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2005, 12:22:00 PM »

QUOTE
I don't know how much graphic data will actually be compressed, if you are talking about textures


im talking about textures, will decompression affect gameplay like lower frame rates and stuff like that?
Logged

Wedding-shirt

  • Archived User
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #8 on: June 27, 2005, 12:34:00 PM »

QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ Jun 26 2005, 09:29 PM)
1080p does not support 60Hz, but only 24 and 30Hz; with 30Hz being the highest, like a stated above.
Logged

thax

  • Archived User
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 420
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #9 on: June 27, 2005, 04:57:00 PM »

QUOTE(Wedding-shirt @ Jun 27 2005, 08:45 PM)
You're talking about movies. HDTV's all support 1080p at at least 60 Hz.
What that ATSC chart was talking about was support as in movie standards.
Since the HARDWARE supports 60Hz in 1080p HDTV's, games can be programmed for that.
No, the standard encompasses the entire system.
1. SCOPE AND DOCUMENTATION STRUCTURE
The Digital Television Standard describes the system characteristics of the U. S. advanced
television (ATV) system. The document and its normative annexes provide detailed specification
of the parameters of the system including the video encoder input scanning formats and the preprocessing
and compression parameters of the video encoder, the audio encoder input signal
format and the pre-processing and compression parameters of the audio encoder, the service
multiplex and transport layer characteristics and normative specifications, and the VSB
RF/Transmission subsystem.


The Advanced Television Systems Committee, chaired by James C. McKinney, was formed by
the member organizations of the Joint Committee on InterSociety Coordination (JCIC)1 for the
purpose of exploring the need for and, where appropriate, to coordinate development of the
documentation of Advanced Television Systems. Documentation is understood to include
voluntary technical standards, recommended practices, and engineering guidelines.
Proposed documentation may be developed by the ATSC, by member organizations of the
JCIC, or by existing standards committees. The ATSC was established recognizing that the
prompt, efficient and effective development of a coordinated set of national standards is essential
to the future development of domestic television services.
On June 5, 1992, ATSC provided information to the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) outlining proposed industry actions to fully document the advanced television system
standard. The FCC has recognized the importance of prompt disclosure of the system technical
specifications to the mass production of advanced television system professional and consumer
equipment in a timely fashion. The FCC has further noted its appreciation of the diligence with
which the ATSC and the other groups participating in the standardization are pursuing these
matters.2
Supporting this activity, the ATSC Executive Committee requested that the T3/S1 Specialist
Group on Macro Systems Approach meet and suggest which portions of an advanced television
system broadcasting standard might require action by the FCC and which portions should be
voluntary.
Subsequently, T3/S1 held meetings and developed recommendations in two areas:
1) Principles upon which documentation of the advanced television system should be
based
2) A list of characteristics of an advanced television system that should be documented
The list tentatively identified the industry group(s) that would provide the documentation
information and the document where the information would likely appear.
The recommendations developed by the T3/S1 Specialist Group were modified by T3 to
accommodate information and knowledge about advanced television systems developed in the
period since June 1992. Some of the modifications to the recommendations ensued from the
formation of the Grand Alliance. The modified guidelines were approved at the March 31, 1994,
meeting of the T3 Technology Group on Distribution and are described in Section 4.4.
4.1 Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Service (ACATS)
A “Petition for Notice of Inquiry” was filed with the FCC on February 21, 1987, by 58
broadcasting organizations and companies requesting that the Commission initiate a proceeding
to explore the issues arising from the introduction of advanced television technologies and their
possible impact on the television broadcasting service. At that time, it was generally believed
that high-definition television (HDTV) could not be broadcast using 6 MHz terrestrial
broadcasting channels. The broadcasting organizations were concerned that alternative media
would be able to deliver HDTV to the viewing public, placing terrestrial broadcasting at a severe
disadvantage.
The FCC agreed that this was a subject of utmost importance and initiated a proceeding (MM
Docket No. 87-268) to consider the technical and public policy issues of advanced television
systems. The Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Service was empaneled by the
Federal Communications Commission in 1987, with Richard E. Wiley as chairman, to develop
information that would assist the FCC in establishing an advanced television standard for the
United States. The objective given to the Advisory Committee in its Charter by the FCC was:
“The Committee will advise the Federal Communications
Commission on the facts and circumstances regarding advanced
television systems for Commission consideration of technical and
public policy issues. In the event that the Commission decides that
adoption of some form of advanced broadcast television is in the
public interest, the Committee would also recommend policies,
standards, and regulations that would facilitate the orderly and
timely introduction of advanced television services in the United
States.”
The Advisory Committee established a series of subgroups to study the various issues
concerning services, technical parameters, and testing mechanisms required to establish an
advanced television system standard. The Advisory Committee also established a system
evaluation, test, and analysis process that began with over twenty proposed systems, reducing
them to four final systems for consideration.
4.2 Digital HDTV Grand Alliance (Grand Alliance)
On May 24, 1993, the three groups that had developed the four final digital systems agreed to
produce a single, best-of-the best system to propose as the standard. The three groups (AT&T
and Zenith Electronics Corporation; General Instrument Corporation and the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology; and Philips Consumer Electronics, Thomson Consumer Electronics, and
the David Sarnoff Research Center) have been working together as the “Digital HDTV Grand
Alliance.” The system described in this Standard is based on the Digital HDTV Grand Alliance
proposal to the Advisory Committee.
4.3 Organization for Documenting the Digital Television Standard
The ATSC Executive Committee assigned the work of documenting the advanced television
system standards to T3 specialist groups, dividing the work into five areas of interest:
• Video, including input signal format and source coding
• Audio, including input signal format and source coding
• Transport, including data multiplex and channel coding
• RF/Transmission, including the modulation subsystem
• Receiver characteristics


The standards document is explicit, it covers all components, and it covers all HDTV equipment in North America.  Can you cite any evidence that is contrary?
Logged

incognegro

  • Archived User
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1764
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2005, 12:01:00 PM »

dry.gif
Logged

blackchild1101

  • Archived User
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 325
New Article At Anandtech
« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2005, 09:34:00 PM »

uhh.gif .

I read the article a couple of day ago and found it to be quite a interesting read.

The "Cell" processor is a powerful chip, and indeed the future of PC's, not just gaming consoles. I commend Sony for bringing this technology out now instead of 5-10 years from now.

The Cell chip on the PS3 is a down graded version of their Cell server processor.  Is the PS3 Cell chip better then the 360's Tri-core processor? Yes and No but I'm not going to discuss that now, seeing that it has been posted millions of times before.

Can Cell render two 1080P signals at the same time that actually look good? No one really knows, well except maybe Sony. I know for a fact that the Cell server processor can do 40 Live feed HD TV screens at 720P without a hiccup.

As for the cache on Cell, that's an entirely different beast that I must admit has me wondering how Sony is going to manage the data flowing from the Cell SPE's to memory to Video to etc. etc.

All in all more info is needs to be released from MS and Sony to completely compare these next gen consoles. Also lets not forget about Nintendo laugh.gif.

And remeber, NONE OF THESE SPECS RELEASED SO FAR ARE FINAL. So anything can happen from now to release time. GOoD NiGhT. beerchug.gif
Logged