texuspete00 said:You have a sqaure plasma? Coooool.
http://www.tasmanav.com.au/pages/DigitalProducts.html
It's the one on the right, and it's not square.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
2405FPW has no support for HD
- Thread starter Ummagumma
- Start date
http://www.tasmanav.com.au/pages/DigitalProducts.html
It's the one on the right, and it's not square.
John said:
First off, if it doesn't support HD, nothing will come up on 1080i at all, just like when you connect a progressive 100Hz tv with component input but without HD support. That alone defeats the statement "2405FPW has no support for HD".
Second, "don't display HD over component properly" meaning having jaggies? The appearance of jaggies is because of the hi rez of full HD 1920X1080 (when using 1:1 ratio) in Dell, which is not present in most LCD TVs or Plasma (which can have resolution as low as 852X480). If in doubt, try to hook it up on a full HD 1920X1080 LCD TV (e.g. the Sharp 45" LCD TV) and see whether the jaggies pop up like Dell.
googleli said:
Hmnm, hang on John. He might be on to something here. The thing that bugs me about the components not being HD is that the image is so sharp....sans the AA.
Do we have anyone out there with a 1080p LCD to compare with? Westy or something? Anyone?
Navy
Not necessarily - there are a few theories, all we know is that the quality is poor from X360 sources. (I haven't personally tested anything else, but it seems unlikely that it would be a problem with the X360 itself.) There's a loss of quality, and I've got no idea what's responsible for it.i5hawn said:
googleli has an interesting theory, but 1:1 VGA still looks better than 1:1 720p - and it's not a marginal difference, it's big.
John said:
Will try to shoot some pics tomorrow (it's 2a.m. here now) for the difference between 1080i and 480p with my crappy DC (max 1600X1200) but I am sure even with that crap DC everyone with eyes open will be able to tell the difference.
If the theory that the signal is down-converted to 480p and then somehow get upscaled again is true, then the picture quality of 480p and 1080i at "full" ratio should look exactly the same, which is very far from the case.
Would also be grateful if anyone could post a website which allows me to post pics at full res cos webshots would downsize and downsample my photos. Million thanks.
John said:
I'll have to shoot some 1:1 VGA and 1:1 720p/1080i later tonight or tomorrow as well. I had been leaning toward your thoughts and findings at first John, but this "more noticable blow up on the higher-res 2405" theory is making sense.
Either way, I'm not sure I can stomach teh washed out VGA. I've got both cables now and the vibrancy of component is killing me compared to the VGA. (It's all a personal preference thing tho ultimately of course
)Anyone have a 360 on another 1080p LCD (other than the 2405) able to take us some pictures to compare against?
googleli said:
Actually it does and it isn't uncommon... Check here: Tamlins post
You will also see why there is such a big difference between 480p and 720p even if it scales everything down to 480p.
You got it all backwards.
Higher resolution provides less jaggies due to more image detail and sharper lines. When using 1:1 you get a "pixel perfect" image. No pixel doubling or stretching of image. 1920x1080 on 1:1 gives a high resolution image with much less jaggies then a 852x480 at 1:1. Its like drawing a picture with a pencil instead of a big brush! The 2405 displays HD via my Comcast HD. That is for certain.
Maybe this was clarified above (I didn't want to read all 5 pages)... But not all HD cable boxes require HDMI. I use component cables on my HD TV so that obviously can't be a requirement at this time.
That is why teh 2405 can show HD content now.
When HD DVD comes out and HDMI is a requirement all of those with non HDMI HD TVs and Monitors will be out of luck and truly limited to 480p. Of course this is a limitation of the draconian copy protection not of the display technology.
Maybe this was clarified above (I didn't want to read all 5 pages)... But not all HD cable boxes require HDMI. I use component cables on my HD TV so that obviously can't be a requirement at this time.
That is why teh 2405 can show HD content now.
When HD DVD comes out and HDMI is a requirement all of those with non HDMI HD TVs and Monitors will be out of luck and truly limited to 480p. Of course this is a limitation of the draconian copy protection not of the display technology.
You got it all backwards.
Yes, higher resolution = less jaggies.. If the source is actually at the higher resolution. We have to remember we're talking about two resolutions here. At 720p, we're looking at 1280x720 blow up over 1920x1080 (if assumedly you use aspect). That's gonna highlight the jaggies more than a plasma panel or a 720p LCD that's closer to the source.
1080i on teh 2405 seems to back this up as well. In theory, 1080i is gonna be 1920x1080 source material upscaled and adjusted at teh Xbox as opposed to 1280x720 upscaled by the monitor. At 1080i, PGR3 looks slightly less jaggy to me. The Xbox seems to do the scaling a little more cleanly than the monitor.
There are some interesting findings coming up on the WGF thread here:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1971&start=100
I think the 2405 IS doing HD through the components now.
Navy
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,254
that's a good point. that would explain why the 2 other people in this thread (including myself) that run through a Comcast HD source are so adamant on it supporting HD. The cable box has 1080i native output. Wish we had more people using the 2405fpw through hd cable to give their thoughts.. It seems like most of the ???'s so far are concerning the xbox360.
If for some reason the 2405 scales 480p to 1080i.. and does not in fact support HD, the scalers are the most amazing thing I have ever seen. If so.. they should incorporate them in all non-HD sets.
If for some reason the 2405 scales 480p to 1080i.. and does not in fact support HD, the scalers are the most amazing thing I have ever seen. If so.. they should incorporate them in all non-HD sets.
magnetik said:that's a good point. that would explain why the 2 other people in this thread (including myself) that run through a Comcast HD source are so adamant on it supporting HD. The cable box has 1080i native output. Wish we had more people using the 2405fpw through hd cable to give their thoughts.. It seems like most of the ???'s so far are concerning the xbox360.
If for some reason the 2405 scales 480p to 1080i.. and does not in fact support HD, the scalers are the most amazing thing I have ever seen. If so.. they should incorporate them in all non-HD sets.
People mix up "HD" with "HD DVD". HD as it currently exists works at 1080i with Component, DVI and HDMI. Heck, something like 80% of HD TVs are non-HDMI.
When someone asked Dell if the 2405 works with HD, they were probably aware of the fact that upcoming HD DVD standard requires HDMI for true HD. The new HD DVD (either HD-DVD or Blue Laser) requires HDMI for true HD quality (1080i) otherwise it will only play the 480 version of the HD DVD.
This stupid issue will likely result in a very long delay for HD DVD to establish itself or potentially kill it. Think about it. Most HD owners (like myself --50" wide-screen with DVI but no HDMI) are enthusiasts. We are the very people they need as advocates and they will be making our TV's obsolete. Not a good thing to alienate your core early adopters.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,254
Windfire said:
heck, mine doesn't even have a dvi connection.. I bought mine back in early 2002 just before everything was switched over. It was about the time the screens were all going wide.
Windfire said:
yeah it's not like a video card.. chances are when people buy a big screen.. they aren't going to buy another one for a very long time. I wish I could have waited a few more months.
I usually wait for the early adopter test stages to wrinkle out all the issues.. but back then.. SD to HD was like going from horse and carriage to a vette and I just couldn't help myself. John said:
well at the fill/aspect settings up close the monitor displays 480p PS2 games and they look like crap. but most of you guys know that. about 3-4 ft away they are playable but artifacts are noticable. at 1:1 the games look great, hell even PIP they look great up close. Gran Turismo 4 however even at 1080i up close suffers greatly from jaggies and pixelation. But a lot of these things especially when talking about video games also relate back to development of the games as well. i can take pictures with my digital camera if anyone is interested in different titles and thier respective output to the 2405's component inputs.
Here are some new comparison pictures from Framerateuk at WSGF comparison pictures
What has puzzled me most in the whole discussion is the little difference between 720p and 1080i. On some of the games I can understand it, since they are natively 720p and are upscaled to 1080i. It would make a difference, but minor compared to native 1080i. The game above, NFS: MW has native support for 1080i. When looking at the pictures, the PC had much higher detail. Look at the background especially and also the rest of the picture. Notice how much the pc pictures increases level of detail the higher resolution compared to the components!
On a still picture, we are talking about a resolution switch from 1280x720 to 1920x1080!!! 1080i@60fps is 1080p@30fps after it has passed the deinterlacer and have become a progressive signal on the 2405fpw.
Therefore I wanted to ask you guys who run HD over comcast: do you get this big resolution jump? can you display any still pictures of it if so? That might be very enlightning to this thread!
What has puzzled me most in the whole discussion is the little difference between 720p and 1080i. On some of the games I can understand it, since they are natively 720p and are upscaled to 1080i. It would make a difference, but minor compared to native 1080i. The game above, NFS: MW has native support for 1080i. When looking at the pictures, the PC had much higher detail. Look at the background especially and also the rest of the picture. Notice how much the pc pictures increases level of detail the higher resolution compared to the components!
On a still picture, we are talking about a resolution switch from 1280x720 to 1920x1080!!! 1080i@60fps is 1080p@30fps after it has passed the deinterlacer and have become a progressive signal on the 2405fpw.
Therefore I wanted to ask you guys who run HD over comcast: do you get this big resolution jump? can you display any still pictures of it if so?
That might be very enlightning to this thread! Of what I have seen so far, I don't think it supports HD over components. But, some claim that it does, and even "heavyweights" like Magnetik, so it might be that some revisions support it. I am not sure. But, should it support HD over components, then this is how a HDTV signal at 1080i looks like: from HDTV Pub Lets hope I am wrong! I hope I get an answer and some footage that shows the difference between a still picture of 720p and 1080i of HDTV. That is a resolution change of more then double!
2 073 600 vs 921 600 = 1 152 000 pixels!!!Ummagumma said:
I hope I get an answer and some footage that shows the difference between a still picture of 720p and 1080i of HDTV. That is a resolution change of more then double!
Theoretically, sure. But there can be so many variables.. (how much the provider is compressing any given feed, etc). Given two screenshots of a 720p and a 1080i source, you SURE you can spot the difference without being told? There's a difference, but under certain circumstances I don't think it's always totally obvious (especially TV feeds I'd wager).
Regarding NFS:MW natively supporting 1080i (1920x1080 in framebuffer).. do you have a link? Tisn't that I don't believe ya. I have been looking for info about the games that can truly do 1920x1080 natively and I haven't had much luck.
Navy
Ummagumma said:
Continuing a brain storm... You have to factor the following in on the PC side
- what is the texture level? (ie, "medium"? "high"?) If the PC has texture detail set to "high" for example...we maybe making apple to oranges comparisons. The 360 might be the equivolent of "medium" texture detail. (Who knows, right???)
- ansiotrophic filter... not sure if framerateuk had this on or not. I CAN tell you that most consoles (Xbox 1 for sure, 360 as well) use very low ansiotrophic filtering levels. This means that texture detail is very sharp near the POV, but quickly loses sharpness as distance increases.
- finally, I know this sounds obvious; keep in mind that the games are different games. The PC version and the 360 version use alot of the same code base I'm sure. Some of the configuration settings/options/behavior may be different though since 360 programmers can simply assume the same hardware across the board and PC programmers cannot. (Ie, perhaps the PC version automatically adjusts some LoD settings and such if you raise the resolution and the 360 version doesn't?)
Who knows.
Navy
NavyH16,
You have some valid points there. Let me take a brainstorming (after I have proven that NFS support 1080i):
On this page you will see what the game support (480p, 720p and 1080i). Still, its hard to know if they mean support as in scaling or support as in native. So, here is Kameo link where they state the game support (720p). Hopefully we agree that NFS:MW support natively 480p, 720p and 1080i, while Kameo supports only 720p natively and scales on rest.
Of course there are differences between PC and components. This we agree upon. Gamma settings, color settings, brightness and contrast. Also we don't know if he had AF on while he had AA off...
What we do know, is that when double the resolution on a picture regardless if AA and AF is present, there is a BIG change.
If 921 600 pixels make a 720p picture (1280x720=921 600), wouldn't you notice if you add another 1 152 000 pixels? I do. If I have my screen at 1280x720 in windows and then switches to 1920x1080 I see a BIG difference. Don't you all?
You have some valid points there. Let me take a brainstorming (after I have proven that NFS support 1080i):
On this page you will see what the game support (480p, 720p and 1080i). Still, its hard to know if they mean support as in scaling or support as in native. So, here is Kameo link where they state the game support (720p). Hopefully we agree that NFS:MW support natively 480p, 720p and 1080i, while Kameo supports only 720p natively and scales on rest.
Of course there are differences between PC and components. This we agree upon. Gamma settings, color settings, brightness and contrast. Also we don't know if he had AF on while he had AA off...
What we do know, is that when double the resolution on a picture regardless if AA and AF is present, there is a BIG change.
If 921 600 pixels make a 720p picture (1280x720=921 600), wouldn't you notice if you add another 1 152 000 pixels? I do. If I have my screen at 1280x720 in windows and then switches to 1920x1080 I see a BIG difference. Don't you all?
I agree a resolution jump of that size should be rather obvious.
If TXB's page is why everyone is sure NFS:MW and CoD2 are able to source at 1920x1080, I'm not so sure... If you wanna go with more "official", these links only show 720p:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/n/needforspeedmostwantedxbox360/
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/c/callofduty2/
Any developer comments or publisher statements one way or another on this?
Navy
If TXB's page is why everyone is sure NFS:MW and CoD2 are able to source at 1920x1080, I'm not so sure... If you wanna go with more "official", these links only show 720p:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/n/needforspeedmostwantedxbox360/
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/c/callofduty2/
Any developer comments or publisher statements one way or another on this?
Navy
I did find this:
"Xbox 360 offers choice for both the game developer and the end consumer. The game developer can create their game in any resolution. The consumer can request any output resolution (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i). The Xbox 360s advanced video scaler will scale the games native resolution to the end consumers requested resolution with extremely high quality output."
- Todd Holmdahl, VP of Xbox Product Group
And it seems like those distinctions on the box would indicate different resolution outputs (as opposed to scaling)... Why is it so hard to find someone definitively stating it? Wouldn't programmers/publishers want to brag that they're all the way up at 1920x1080??
I'm sure feeling like there's could be a lot of monkey business/marketing going on here.
Edit: What we need is someone other than a 2405 owner that has a 1080p set to compare their 720p and 1080i output over component. That oughta definitively answer a bunch of questions when compared against the 2405 picture sets that are already out.
Navy
"Xbox 360 offers choice for both the game developer and the end consumer. The game developer can create their game in any resolution. The consumer can request any output resolution (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i). The Xbox 360s advanced video scaler will scale the games native resolution to the end consumers requested resolution with extremely high quality output."
- Todd Holmdahl, VP of Xbox Product Group
And it seems like those distinctions on the box would indicate different resolution outputs (as opposed to scaling)... Why is it so hard to find someone definitively stating it? Wouldn't programmers/publishers want to brag that they're all the way up at 1920x1080??
I'm sure feeling like there's could be a lot of monkey business/marketing going on here.
Edit: What we need is someone other than a 2405 owner that has a 1080p set to compare their 720p and 1080i output over component. That oughta definitively answer a bunch of questions when compared against the 2405 picture sets that are already out.
Navy
The brain dump flood continues...more food for thought:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=615709
I know we technical types dismiss anedotal stories as fools not understanding how stuff works... but you'd think guys with 1080p displays would notice a difference between 720p and 1080i (effectively 1080p on LCDs) if the resolution were truly 1920x1080. From reading around, I'm now thinking 1080i is actually slightly less quality and has the horizontal lines doubled to round out the picture 1920x(540x2).
Like one of those posters said in that thread.. the system has 512MB of RAM TOTAL. Do you really think it's possible for them to have crammed all the data/AI/textures/etc for 1920x1080 in a space that small?
Navy
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=615709
I know we technical types dismiss anedotal stories as fools not understanding how stuff works... but you'd think guys with 1080p displays would notice a difference between 720p and 1080i (effectively 1080p on LCDs) if the resolution were truly 1920x1080. From reading around, I'm now thinking 1080i is actually slightly less quality and has the horizontal lines doubled to round out the picture 1920x(540x2).
Like one of those posters said in that thread.. the system has 512MB of RAM TOTAL. Do you really think it's possible for them to have crammed all the data/AI/textures/etc for 1920x1080 in a space that small?
Navy
magnetik said:
Looks like your wish about comparing with alternate sources to the xbox is about to come true!
link
A comparison between PC -> Components -> 2405fpw and PC -> VGA -> 2405fpw both running at 1920x1080 would definitly convince me in either way! If there is no loss of detail between such comparison, how can the 2405fpw NOT be HD through components, and if there is a loss of detail, how can it then be HD through components?
1080 downscaled to 480 and then upscaled to 720/1080 is one thing and there are many ways to explain difference in PQ. But, true 1080 vs. downscaled then upscaled 1080 would be easy to see the difference IMO! If level of detail is the same, then I am convinced, and if not, then I am convinced there too!!!!!
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,254
Ummagumma said:Looks like your wish about comparing with alternate sources to the xbox is about to come true!
link
A comparison between PC -> Components -> 2405fpw and PC -> VGA -> 2405fpw both running at 1920x1080 would definitly convince me in either way! If there is no loss of detail between such comparison, how can the 2405fpw NOT be HD through components, and if there is a loss of detail, how can it then be HD through components?
1080 downscaled to 480 and then upscaled to 720/1080 is one thing and there are many ways to explain difference in PQ. But, true 1080 vs. downscaled then upscaled 1080 would be easy to see the difference IMO! If level of detail is the same, then I am convinced, and if not, then I am convinced there too!!!!!
wow.. navyh17 got a response from John Carmack?!?!
those pics of NFS:MW over component from the PC at 1080i are the best pics I have seen yet!
sanitystream
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 144
Er... so for us, uh, laymen, what's the verdict so far? Does the 2405 do acceptable 720p?
Flying Fox
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2002
- Messages
- 406
Is there a table with checkmarks that gives us an overall picture of which resolutions the 2405 supports and which not?
Cool. If VGA was better I would have to have a VGA switcher as ive git VGA going into my 2405 already.NavyH16 said:That's what I've come to decide (just took back teh VGA cable). And yep..Carmack.
Navy
Now ill have DVI, VGA, and component, and can use the built in switcher.
I got my PGR3 today and tried on Dell 24". Hell it was crap. I am quite sure the source is 480p and then get upscaled by the xbox360 then output as 1080i, just by judging from my eye. The thing is, if the source is at low res, the higher res you upscale that low res source into, the more jaggies you got. Try to run a pc game, run it at 640X480 full screen on the Dell 24" and you'll know what I mean. Then try Dead or Alive 4 and you will know the difference and truly know that Dell does support 1080i over component.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,254
It looks like it has been confirmed that it does in fact support HD.. and limitation looks to be the 360.
There is a slight sharpness difference between DVI & Component.. but they look almost exactly the same.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/abw3/Images/360/comparison.htm
There is a slight sharpness difference between DVI & Component.. but they look almost exactly the same.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/abw3/Images/360/comparison.htm