Just how powerful IS the 3DS anyways?

#111elheberPosted 8/7/2011 4:45:24 PM
abort_mission posted...
it isnt crap. its all to do with how the 3D effect is rendered. they use the parallax barrier method which essentially renders for two screens. there is no way to turn the barrier "off." it always needs to render an image for you left and right eye separately. even when the 3D is off they just render the same image for both screens which is still taxing on the system. technically speaking its not as taxing as rendering two different images but it still is taxing. this is why they can bump up the FPS in some games. however if anyone is expecting significantly better graphics they are deluding themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_barrier


The barrier turns off. We (meaning "I") discovered this shortly before the 3DS launch, and it was confirmed later when the 3DS was pulled apart. The parallax barrier is liquid crystal, and it has an on (opaque) and off (transparent) mode. It's also the reason why the 3DS drains more battery life in 3D mode than in 2D mode, since with the parallax barrier in the opaque mode it essentially cuts the light in almost half (and therefore the backlight brightness must be increased to compensate).

If you want proof, go to 3D mode and turn the 3DS left/right as you look at it with one eye open. You'll notice the screen gets darker and brighter as you pass from one viewing angle to another. That's the parallax barrier blocking columns pixels at about one column at a time. Now put it in 2D mode and attempt the same. You'll notice there is no change in brightness. This is because there is essentially no parallax barrier between you and the LCD now.

And, frankly, it's all beside the point. Even if the parallax barrier was on all the time, the system could still save processing power by rendering each image once and displaying the same image to both eyes in 2D mode, instead of having to render the same image twice from the exact same angle.
---
"A closet intellectual, he acts dumb to impress women."
#112cadmasterPosted 8/7/2011 5:31:59 PM
Slightly better than PSP but not by much.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/nintendo-3ds-specs-comparison/
---
Game Collection - http://users.ign.com/collection/ScourDX
Game Photos - http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v27/scourdx/collection/
#113gransPosted 8/8/2011 12:42:27 AM

From: cadmaster | #112
Slightly better than PSP but not by much.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/nintendo-3ds-specs-comparison/


That spec comparison is bull and inherently flawed for several very real reasons-

1- The comparison sheet doesn't mention that the Pica200 being used in the sheet is the oldest and weakest model, the actual model was never confirmed. All of the newer models are far more powerful than the older ones.
2- They're failing to mention that the polygon specs for the Pica200 model they're comparing are rendered at 4k resolution. The actual resolution of the 3DS is considerably less than a quarter of the official Pica200 specs, and when rendered at a lower resolution, polygon counts increase significantly
3- I don't know about the iPhone 3GS' vertex performance, but the PSP can't actually render anywhere near 33 million. Sony is now legendary for over estimating their systems' vertex performance. They did this for PS2 as well, claiming it could render something like 60 million polygons per second. The issue is that this number is totally unattainable in a real game scenario. It's benchmarked using 3D models devoid of textures or lighting effects at all. Adding in textures and basic effects reveals that the PS2 is actually only capable of well under 12 million polygons per second (real game scenario). PSP is in a similar scenario. Though it's even less powerful than the PS2 was.

Not to mention all the shader effects the system can do. The article also assumes the 3DS uses another ARM9 chip, showing how outdated and incorrect the writer is. The 3DS is definitely far above what the PSP could do. Whether a developer chooses to USE that power is another question entirely, but the potential is all there. We've already seen several already released 3DS games that would never have been doable on the PSP.
---
NEVER judge a game you have not played.
-Granville
#114Megaman OmegaPosted 8/8/2011 9:51:09 AM
abort_mission posted...
Megaman Omega posted...
abort_mission posted...
the way the 3DS architecture is setup it gains no extra power by disabling 3D. the 3D rendering is done through hardware and not software so the extra power will be used to generate 2 top screens. this is a limitation of the system.

What a bunch of crap, of course it can deliver a better picture with the 3DS disabled. There is twice as much "power" left for each frame because it only has to render one, not two.

it isnt crap. its all to do with how the 3D effect is rendered. they use the parallax barrier method which essentially renders for two screens. there is no way to turn the barrier "off." it always needs to render an image for you left and right eye separately. even when the 3D is off they just render the same image for both screens which is still taxing on the system. technically speaking its not as taxing as rendering two different images but it still is taxing. this is why they can bump up the FPS in some games. however if anyone is expecting significantly better graphics they are deluding themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_barrier


Just no. The way the parallax barrier works has nothing to do with how the graphics are being rendered. With 3-D, two pictures have to be rendered, and without the 3-D, only one picture has to be rendered. The screen sends that one picture to both eyes, simple as that.

Why the hell would it render the same picture twice? What kind of a backwards ass method would that be?
---
3D screens.. how do they work? are they similar to magnets? PS: Please no replies from scientists.. you're always lyin, and gettin me pissed.
~ Mario64DStyle