اقا من اشتباه کردم
ببخشید ولی این جدوله چی می گه آخه؟
:confused:
[LTR]
3D Over HDMI – Defines input/output protocols for major 3D video formats, paving the way for true 3D gaming and 3D home theatre applications[/LTR]
[LTR] Back in January, Sony announced that the PS3 would support 3D Blu-ray movie playback. But at the same time, it was announced that in order to get 3D from your Blu-ray player to your TV, you’d need HDMI 1.4 to connect them. Considering how you can’t exactly upgrade a physical port with firmware, the two statements seemed to be slightly at odds with eachother. Turns out there’s a loophole…
Within the HDMI 1.4 specification, there are lots of subsections – one for HDMI ethernet channel, one for audio return channel, one for 4K support… and one for 3D over HDMI. Turns out that while you need all of those features to be capable of calling yourself a HDMI 1.4 standard device, the current 1.3 standard is capable of playing back 3D content. Obviously the PS3 will need a firmware update in order to be able to register that information, but after that it’ll give you 3D pictures for your 3DTV… although there is a catch.
When it comes to 3D Blu-ray playing from your PS3, you won’t be getting 1080p signals to each eye, you’ll only be getting 1080i. Without HDMI 1.4’s speed, version 1.3 just can’t push dual 1080p images through the pipes.
Still, it can push dual 1080i signals, and that’s still pretty decent. You’ll still need to upgrade your TV, but at least you can stick with the PS3 as your Blu-ray player of choice… [/LTR]
[LTR]HDMI 1.3 and HDMI 1.4 use the same plug but the latter has two more wires connected. HDMI 1.4 also uses high speed certified cable. Besides the Ethernet and audio return lines, the only non-hardware differences are handshaking routines, 3-D, extended color palette and 4kX2K resolution support which in the PS3 can be implemented by a software update.
The bandwidth (transfer speed) of 1.3 and 1.4 HDMI ports is the same. Hdmi 1.3 cable comes in standard and High speed. At lengths of less than 3 feet, the bandwidth should be the same.
Standard (catagory 1) is the equivalent of a 720p/1080i signal.
High Speed HDMI cables can handle 1080p signals at increased color depths, higher refresh rates and resolutions.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/hdmi_1_4_faq.aspx
HDMI 1.4 requires 3-D resolution support: 1080P@24Hz and 720P@60Hz other modes and frame packing methods may be supported but are not required.
For a device to be rated as HDMI 1.4 requires a framepacked (two frames and meta data) 1080P and 720P signal. The TV takes the two frames and displays them at 120Hz (or faster) so you have two sequential frames in the time it takes for one 60Hz frame. The shutter glasses alternate turning (on-off) (off-on) at this rate (120Hz). This results in very little flicker and with good glasses almost no reduction in brightness or contrast. The framepacking method can vary. A device can support some of the HDMI 1.4 required standards but can not call it'self compliant. .
The output from the 1.4 display device (PS3 for instance) is 60HZ or less not 120Hz. Without support for 3-D built in, no HDMI 1.4 3-D mode, required or optional, will work. The fact that a TV has a refresh rate of 120Hz does not enable 3-D support.
The HDMI 1.4 source device outputs a 60Hz or less video signal. When 3-D is active the framebuffer in the PS3 doubles in size and two frames are packed into, (timing) at double the transfer rate, the timing window that represents the 60-24 Hz frame rate associated with TV. The HDMI 1.4 TV recognizes this and pulls the two frames out of this "window" and displays the two frames alternately at 120Hz resulting in two 60 HZ (right and left) images for 3-D appearing to occur simultaneously because of persistence in the eye. The double 1080P resolution also supported by HDMI 1.4 is possible because the frame buffers in a HDMI 1.4 device have to be twice as large for 3-D so why not make these buffers available for double res if you are not doing 3-D.
The Xbox has some limitation due to it's fixed 10Meg video buffer and can with much effort display HD 3-D at 720P. The data transfer rate is also limited by the HDMI 1.2 port. The XBOX GPU has issues when displaying 1080P-60Hz. It becomes difficult to display a 1920X1080 24 bit image in one pass as required by progressive scan (interlace has two fields each being half the image and interlaced). There is a software technique called "tiling" where system memory is used to generate portions of the video in tiles (blocks) and these are moved and assembled in the 10 meg GPU video buffer for display. Front buffer then becomes/is system memory and back buffer is in the 10 Meg E-Dram so the Xbox can display a 1080P picture. But AA and other functions of the GPU become difficult to implement because of the 10 meg video buffer in the GPU. 3D game graphics requires up to 19 meg when displaying 1080P because the entire game field which includes portions of the scene that may be scrolled into the field of view by the user. 3-D game graphics would requires something LESS than twice that. Progressive scan pushes the system because the entire image (not half) has to be buffered for display.
1) The XBOX can not do 1080P 3-D at 60Hz due to the 1.2 HDMI ports transfer speed limits but the HDMI 1.2 port may be able to do 1080P 3-D at 24Hz.
2) The Xbox hardware GPU advantage over the PS3 RSX is lost when doing 1080P 2-D and 720P 3-D. The PS3 then becomes, by contrast, more efficent and easier to program and every bit counts when two frames must be generated in the same time. This was the reason the PS3 has a configurable frame buffer and some of the graphics processors in the Nvidia 7800 were removed in favor of the CELL SPEs.
How did the Xbox do the 3-D games Avatar and Gen Tao. Those were done half resolution 720P. Another interesting point is that the game Avatar rendered at 30Hz on both the Xbox and PS3 but packed (two frames at half resolution) into, depending on display device, 60 Hz frames. My DLP required 60HZ checkerboard (slightly more than half resolution) double frame (packed) and the DLP pulled the two frames out and displayed at 120 Hz.
With checkerboard DLP there is only one frame but it consists of alternating (checkerboard) video from the right and left images. The DLP TV pulls the alternating video apart to produce the two frames for 3-D. This results in slightly greater than 1/2 resolution due to processing (smooth motion) in the TV.
MS has stated that the Xbox can do 3-D, the whole truth is that it can only do something like half 720P resolution 3-D. At higher resolutions game developers are on their own as "legal" system calls to the XBOX OS do not currently support 3-D due to timing and at some resolutions, hardware limitations. While the discussions I've read indicate it is possible, many were questioning the PS3 ability to do this as the assumption was the PS3 was less powerful due to comparisons in frame rate between Avatar 3-D running on the Xbox and PS3. The difference here is SONY did not provide 3-D SDKs for Avatar but is now providing the SDK calls for 3-D and developers will now have proven code to write 3-D games. MS may do the same at some point.
The XBOX half resolution 3-D will be enough for the streaming 3-D being proposed for current set top boxes (HDMI 1.4a addendum). Some of the proposed standards for HDMI 1.4 will probably be supported by the XBOX. The PS3 can support all HDMI 1.4 display modes, some of which are NOT possible for the XBOX due to the HDMI 1.2 port.
The PS3 RSX uses the 256 meg of Gddr3 shared memory for video buffers. The Xbox uses 10 Meg of very fast video ram INSIDE the xbox GPU for a buffer. This makes it easier for the xbox to do things like AA but makes it less flexible. The design criteria of the Xbox was for a very efficient 720P game machine. The PS3 was designed to be more flexible and for this flexibility the PS3 takes a hit in efficiency at lower res. But it allows software configuration for things like new video modes including 3-D and double 1080P res.
Each of the 6 Cell SPE processors is faster/more efficient at video processing than each of the Power PC processors in the Xbox. You have to think of them as idiot savants, faster at repetative tasks. This makes the Cell faster where it counts and the choice of memory that is 2 times faster than the XBOX GDDR3 supports the faster speed necessary for 1080P and 3-D on the PS3.
Games that can make use of 3-D and motion control like tennis will not require much processing power. I expect some of the games porting from the Wii will be in 720P 3-D but only the ball will then require on-the-fly calculations. The background will of course have 3-D effects but will not require much in the way of calculation. The avatar representing the player will require calculation but that is such a small object and moves so slow that it will not stretch the PS3.
I can imagine 5.1 sound, 3-D and superior motion control like inducing spin in the ball (tennis, pool, bowling, baseball, golf) with rotation of the controller in casual PS3 games.
Sword fights with on-line users displayed as 3-D avatars and your camera image with sword in hand fighting the on-line avatar. PS3 converts body movements to 3-D avatar movements on each end (your opponent sees you as an avatar too). It would be too difficult to send the real image via the internet. [/LTR]