Colbert
Banned
Literally the first line of the OP.
The first line is the most recent update! Just saying
Literally the first line of the OP.
It's a little more complicated than that, which it seems I'm not explaining with enough clarity. Let me try to be as direct as possible.So you do believe that native and checkerboard produce the same accuracy for the majority of the time.
I wouldn't say HUGE.
Native is better. Checkerboard is smarter. The end.
Native is better. Checkerboard is smarter. The end.
Native is better. Checkerboard is smarter. The end.
And what happens when later games become so demanding that Xbox One X games have to move to using checkerboard rendering?
I don't know about smarter (literally, don't know anything about development) but I think the processing power that is saved is totally worth it. I wouldn't mind if we continued to use CBR next gen instead of putting all the increased power into native 4K
They already are with AC Origins right?
The point is, saying native is better, checkeboard is smarter, is like saying 1080p is better, 900p is smarter....
I'm not sure, but I found this with a quick google search
Assassins Creed Origins runs at full 4K on Xbox One X without downscaling like PlayStation 4 Pro
The point is, saying native is better, checkeboard is smarter, is like saying 1080p is better, 900p is smarter.... no one was saying that during the PS4 vs Xbox One power debates, so why start now? X1X can also do checkerboarding, just like PS4 was also capable of going down to 900p when needed, but then Xbox One had to go down to 720p in those cases. The same will apply here, when X1X needs to use checkerboard because the game is too demanding to run native 4K, the PS4 pro counterpart will have to go even lower resolution which will not look as good.
I'm not sure, but I found this with a quick google search
Assassins Creed Origins runs at full 4K on Xbox One X without downscaling like PlayStation 4 Pro
The point is, saying native is better, checkeboard is smarter, is like saying 1080p is better, 900p is smarter.... no one was saying that during the PS4 vs Xbox One power debates, so why start now? X1X can also do checkerboarding, just like PS4 was also capable of going down to 900p when needed, but then Xbox One had to go down to 720p in those cases. The same will apply here, when X1X needs to use checkerboard because the game is too demanding to run native 4K, the PS4 pro counterpart will have to go even lower resolution which will not look as good.
The reason that CBR is smarter is because it has the same amount of pixels as native 4K but they are smart enough to sample the color buffer in a alternating checkerboard pattern while getting the full 4K depth samples & they are able to use the 4K ID buffer to get the color information for the color samples that they miss. plus PS4 Pro has some other hardware changes in the texture units that help with checkerboard rendering.
There is no difference in the resolution the deference is in the accuracy in the color samples & then there is the artifacts from using checkerboard rendering. Using the word native to differentiate from CBR is wrong but it's what people know so it's the simple way to talk about it but it also cause confusion for people who can't seem to understand that CBR 4K has the same amount of pixels as "Native 4K"
Just stop to spread this nonsense with "same amount of pixels".[/SPOILER]
There are CBR versions which do rasterize full sized Z and ID buffers.Just stop to spread this nonsense with "same amount of pixels".
The actual drawn pixels in the frame buffer are half the pixels with CBR compared to a full frame buffer. The other half of those pixels are derived by extrapolation or TI.
By rule this method is less accurate per pixel than drawing to a full frame buffer! That fact stands true even if you do a lot of post-processing to reduce those inaccuracies.
There is a reason why the performance requirements are much lower for 2160 CBR and the quality of the resulting image is subpar to a native output even with extra post-processing.
That said CBR delivers a decent quality and is an appropriate method to render a frame if the hardware is not able to fulfill the performance requirements for a native output.
This is the only response to you as I do not want to derail the thread again!
And you guys are still going on about that...
Seeing this thread on the first page I had hoped for just a second there was finally news.
His response reminds of that time when Greenberg insisted that 1080p output was the same as native res.
OnQ is almost always playing the strong (il) logical downplay game, failing that a strawman argument to shift focus. I can't quite figure out why though?
There are CBR versions which do rasterize full sized Z and ID buffers.
This means that opaque surfaces can have perfect edges without sawtooth artifact.
Would be interesting to see such version without temporal reprojection step, just a hole filling using ID buffer.
Any new news on what type pixels TW3 will run at? Smart pixels, or Highest quality pixels?
Everytime I see a bump I'm hoping for new info
As Id mentioned earlier in the thread, its worth noting that HDMIs current bandwidth limitations mean that 4K 60Hz HDR content is already inherently compromised. At least half the pixels dont have full chroma information transmitted (4:2:0 has full color only for 1/4 of the pixels, 4:2:2 has full color for 1/2, and only 4:4:4 transmits every pixel uncompromised, but isnt available for 4K HDR at 60Hz over an 18Gbps connection.)
TW3 will be based on "smart ass quality pixels"!
TCBR 4K has the same amount of pixels as "Native 4K"
This dumb debate got me thinking I wonder what looks better. 1800p native or 2160p checkerboard. Both obviously not true full 4k but I wonder what the best compromise would be.
Don' spread fake news about 900p having the same amount of pixels as 1080p if you upscale the image. You are comparing 2 resolutions that render natively to what CBR does. It is not a simple upscale method like what your TV does. There's a reason you can still pixel count a full 4K buffer on a 4K Checkerboard solution. If you try to pixel count a 900p image into a 1080p upscale (or even a 4k upscale) you are still getting 1600*900 on your count.900p scaled in a 1080p TV has the same amount of pixels than native 1080p. Just saying.
Does this look like something that you can reduce to a simple "lol guys it's like 900p lmao"? Pixel count that image. You are gonna get a full 4K image resolution. I get you guys have no idea what the difference between upscaling and things like CBR, Temporal Injection or Image Reconstruction are, but that's no reason to misinform people.
That isn't a completely fair comparison. If you look at the "fully rendered" pixels, you getI wonder what looks better. 1800p native or 2160p checkerboard. Both obviously not true full 4k but I wonder what the best compromise would be.
Who cares...can y'all argue about the differences in another thread I just want to know when I'm getting a Pro patch.
Who cares...can y'all argue about the differences in another thread I just want to know when I'm getting a Pro patch.
Who cares...can y'all argue about the differences in another thread I just want to know when I'm getting a Pro patch.
Lol, this.
Don' spread fake news about 900p having the same amount of pixels as 1080p if you upscale the image. You are comparing 2 resolutions that render natively to what CBR does. It is not a simple upscale method like what your TV does. There's a reason you can still pixel count a full 4K buffer on a 4K Checkerboard solution. If you try to pixel count a 900p image into a 1080p upscale (or even a 4k upscale) you are still getting 1600*900 on your count.
Here's Deus Ex MD running at 4K CBR on PS4Pro:
Does this look like something that you can reduce to a simple "lol guys it's like 900p lmao"? Pixel count that image. You are gonna get a full 4K image resolution. I get you guys have no idea what the difference between upscaling and things like CBR, Temporal Injection or Image Reconstruction are, but that's no reason to misinform people.
I'm not sure that image proves your point, perhaps there's CA on top of checkerboarding, but the IQ is not really great in that image.Don' spread fake news about 900p having the same amount of pixels as 1080p if you upscale the image. You are comparing 2 resolutions that render natively to what CBR does. It is not a simple upscale method like what your TV does. There's a reason you can still pixel count a full 4K buffer on a 4K Checkerboard solution. If you try to pixel count a 900p image into a 1080p upscale (or even a 4k upscale) you are still getting 1600*900 on your count.
Here's Deus Ex MD running at 4K CBR on PS4Pro:
Does this look like something that you can reduce to a simple "lol guys it's like 900p lmao"? Pixel count that image. You are gonna get a full 4K image resolution. I get you guys have no idea what the difference between upscaling and things like CBR, Temporal Injection or Image Reconstruction are, but that's no reason to misinform people.
We really should open a CBR and native resolution thread, sorry guys! I'm sure that thread would be over flooded with warriors though and not people looking for a real discussion.
Just stop to spread this nonsense with "same amount of pixels".
The actual drawn pixels in the frame buffer are half the pixels with CBR compared to a full frame buffer. The other half of those pixels are derived by extrapolation or TI.
By rule this method is less accurate per pixel than drawing to a full frame buffer! That fact stands true even if you do a lot of post-processing to reduce those inaccuracies.
There is a reason why the performance requirements are much lower for 2160 CBR and the quality of the resulting image is subpar to a native output even with extra post-processing.
That said CBR delivers a decent quality and is an appropriate method to render a frame if the hardware is not able to fulfill the performance requirements for a native output.
This is the only response to you as I do not want to derail the thread again!
That would the case regardless of CB or native.
2160Cb would look sharper and more resources can go to a better framerate and better graphical settings with 4K CB..I would choose 4k CB everytime...You should google 4k CB vs 4k native comparison for watchdogs 2 on PC...Most people could not make the distinction and you get 50-60 fps with CB vs 30fps and below at 4K native...This dumb debate got me thinking I wonder what looks better. 1800p native or 2160p checkerboard. Both obviously not true full 4k but I wonder what the best compromise would be.
NO, they don't have the same number of pixels. You will still count 900p as opposed to CB where you count 2160p....900p scaled in a 1080p TV has the same amount of pixels than native 1080p. Just saying.
This is the most vague article I've ever read......At E3, the dev said it was running at 4K. That was proven to be CB.....Even now they say it's dynamic resolution, dynamic CB perhaps? Nothing is clear or conclusive from these quotes...When they started the playthrough at MS's conference....They said "Play it in 4K Ultra HD and HDR". The only time we will be getting the real/final receipts on this one, beyond all the marketing hubbub from Ubisoft, is when the title hits storeshelves and the full product is analyzed....I'm not sure, but I found this with a quick google search
Assassin's Creed Origins runs at full 4K on Xbox One X without downscaling like PlayStation 4 Pro
NO, they don't have the same number of pixels. You will still count 900p as opposed to CB where you count 2160p....