Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My specs:

Intel i7 920 d0 overclocked to 4.2 GHz (Turbo enabled)
Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P motherboard
12 GB OCZ DDR3 RAM at 6-6-6-18 timings
EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 Co-Op Edition Video Card
Precision Overclock: 684/1458/1215/fan 100
Corsair 850W Power Supply
Prolimatech Megahalem heatsink, AS5 compound
Antec 1200 Full Tower Case
Windows Vista 64


Now, when I run the game (iso), I get this type of graphical output (I've circled in red some egregious errors from the getgo. Hair's clipping).

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/2628/glitchy.jpg

I am basically trying to get it to look like the following video:
YouTube - Final Fantasy X Intro Theme

Here is a big screenshot of all my emulator settings:
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7689/ps2settings.jpg


Clearly my computer should be able to tear this game apart -- however, I can't get the graphics to look right. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
download the beta r1888.
Turn off all speed-hacks.
Set your Advanced Options to best (nearest, extra+preserve sign)
Report back.

You should know that the idea of a speed hack and advanced options are to give you a trade-off between fidelity and performance.

As far as I know, no consumer grade computer can run PCSX2 with absolutely no optimizations. These little glitches you see are because the game runs, period.

I don't even know if these graphical bugs can be fixed. As far as I know, if you actually look at PCSX2 videos (and not native PS2) YouTube - PCSX2 Final Fantasy X Prewiew LQ you always get this error.

That's all the help I can give you. Personally I run with every speedhack on, as I've played the game too many times, and I find it kind of slow. I can live with the glitches.

PS, since you have a ubber computer, you should set the direct3D internal res to 3840x2400. If you run in a window of 1920x1200, you'll basically get native resolution + 16XAA
 

·
From Love and Limerence
Joined
·
6,574 Posts
Why do you have speed hacks on if you have such a fast PC? You do know the nature of speed hacks is essentially "break the normal operation of things in order to net more speed", right? Sure, many don't have major side effects, or much of one at all in some games, but your PC doesn't need them on, at all. Mine doesn't.
PS, since you have a ubber computer, you should set the direct3D internal res to 3840x2400. If you run in a window of 1920x1200, you'll basically get native resolution + 16XAA
Now wait a minute. That's not how I thought supersampling worked. I thought supersampling internally used a larger resolution than the display, and then "scaled" it down to make it appear antialiased. That would mean 1600x1200 scaled down to 800x600 is half, so that'd mean using 800x600 with 1600x1200 would be 2xAA, right? Or perhaps it'd be 4xAA since there's 4x the pixels.

If using 3840x2400 with a resolution of 1920x1200, I'm pretty sure that's equivalent to 2xAA or 4xAA, depending on which way it worked.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it's one or the other of those two. I don't know how you'd get 16x out of double the resolution.

I use 800x600 fullscreen, and with 1600x1200, it sure in hell no way looks any higher than 2xAA or possibly 4xAA, but there's no way it's 16xAA.
Vurec bug, of the mysterious kind.
To fix it, disable VU1 recompilation (and see how your uber pc slows to 3fps! :D ).
Heh, yes, that's a good one (though to be picky, he may get a few frames more, since I got ~5FPS or 6FPS, if I remember right, but it's single digits unbearably slow to say the least).

As for the issue itself, yeah, this and Tidus' hair can't be fixed on the end user level unless the team decides to fix it (which I heard may be alot of work/not worth it). Welcome to emulation, where a fast PC does not equal perfection. Anything over, well, about what I have (maybe a bit less even) is very diminishing returns. We had alot of people coming into the ePSXe section a few years back doing the same thing, wondering why everything and anything isn't perfect because they have such an awesome PC that should be many times stronger than the console they're emulating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
I downloaded the beta, changed all settings as instructed (kept the VU recomp on though :p My system crawled to 5 FPS... depressing). For some reason the CD plugin isn't working with me on this version. Going to copy over some of the older ones.

Alright, it runs with Gigaherz' plugin... one sec.


GAH. Hair's still doing the same thing. Do all of you guys experience this hair flicker effect? If so, I am not going to worry about it. I just want this to be the best that it can be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Why do you have speed hacks on if you have such a fast PC? You do know the nature of speed hacks is essentially "break the normal operation of things in order to net more speed", right? Sure, many don't have major side effects, or much of one at all in some games, but your PC doesn't need them on, at all. Mine doesn't.Now wait a minute. That's not how I thought supersampling worked. I thought supersampling internally used a larger resolution than the display, and then "scaled" it down to make it appear antialiased. That would mean 1600x1200 scaled down to 800x600 is half, so that'd mean using 800x600 with 1600x1200 would be 2xAA, right? Or perhaps it'd be 4xAA since there's 4x the pixels.

If using 3840x2400 with a resolution of 1920x1200, I'm pretty sure that's equivalent to 2xAA or 4xAA, depending on which way it worked.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it's one or the other of those two. I don't know how you'd get 16x out of double the resolution.

I use 800x600 fullscreen, and with 1600x1200, it sure in hell no way looks any higher than 2xAA or possibly 4xAA, but there's no way it's 16xAA.
Heh, yes, that's a good one (though to be picky, he may get a few frames more, since I got ~5FPS or 6FPS, if I remember right, but it's single digits unbearably slow to say the least).

As for the issue itself, yeah, this and Tidus' hair can't be fixed on the end user level unless the team decides to fix it (which I heard may be alot of work/not worth it). Welcome to emulation, where a fast PC does not equal perfection. Anything over, well, about what I have (maybe a bit less even) is very diminishing returns. We had alot of people coming into the ePSXe section a few years back doing the same thing, wondering why everything and anything isn't perfect because they have such an awesome PC that should be many times stronger than the console they're emulating.
I don't know, I was just using the same words as here.
Is Anti-Aliasing possible using GSdx plugin?

Besides, you can't really compare super sampling and AA.
For optimization reasons, AA does not work on textures. It only works on polygon edges. Supersampling smooths everything.

Also, if you are using a bilinear resize filter, it should be noted that using a super sampling of anything above 2x is actually bad.
 

·
From Love and Limerence
Joined
·
6,574 Posts
I don't know, I was just using the same words as here.
Is Anti-Aliasing possible using GSdx plugin?

Besides, you can't really compare super sampling and AA.
For optimization reasons, AA does not work on textures. It only works on polygon edges. Supersampling smooths everything.

Also, if you are using a bilinear resize filter, it should be noted that using a super sampling of anything above 2x is actually bad.
Supersampling is the method used to achieve AA by the plug-in (by default, not counting the .ini editting to get "standard" multi-sampling AA), so all of that is very applicable here.

Anyway, I could be wrong about something. Maybe what I'm thinking is 2xAA supersampling equals 16xAA multisampling? That doesn't seem right, because when I use 800x600 with an internal resolution of 1600x1200 (twice the resolution with four times the pixels), there's no way it looks like 16xAA. It looks like about 2xAA or maybe 4xAA, but then again, it is hard for me to notice the higher the levels as it goes above 4x.

Can someone clarify this, because I'd like to know? What level of AA is it when double the resolution is done (i.e., 800x600 with 1600x1200 internal, or 1920x1200 with 3840x2400 internal, etc.)? Is it just simply 2xAA or 4xAA, or is it more complicated, like considered 2xAA supersampling and 16xAA multisampling, like that linked to post is leading me to believe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
The software renderer is more accurate and the i7 can handle software rendering very well.
I could be wrong, but last time I tried, software render is locked at about 640*480 (internal). Hardware can render at any resolution (internal).

Also, I doubt that "software renderer" is more accurate than the hardware one. Maybe it runs the game with more fidelity (it probably doesn't do a lot of the Direct3D stuff, which wasn't present in the PS2), but that isn't the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Out of curiosity, if anyone does NOT have this hair clipping issue, I'd be curious to know their settings/setup
yep use software plugin and run it at the same resolution as the real ps2, the game graphics were designed to be done at that resolution not something else therefore clipping issues will occur...

if there are still glitches then its not a clipping issue like an outlines occuring, its a shadow issue where its not rendered correctly, i had the same where some parts are dark when they are not supposed to be... something like that can be easily fixed without breaking something else, remember where emulating a complex system
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Now my FFXII FMV is stuttering a bit. I even found a PPF patch and applied it to the ISO and nothing. I must be too inexperienced.


EDIT: Nevermind, it actually works great now O.O;;; false alarm!

FFX still has those graphical glitches, however, and software mode does not seem to assist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,467 Posts
Out of curiosity, if anyone does NOT have this hair clipping issue, I'd be curious to know their settings/setup
3rd time now. You can NOT FIX IT. There is NO ONE that has a setup that fixes it. Really. :p

I could be wrong, but last time I tried, software render is locked at about 640*480 (internal). Hardware can render at any resolution (internal).

Also, I doubt that "software renderer" is more accurate than the hardware one. Maybe it runs the game with more fidelity (it probably doesn't do a lot of the Direct3D stuff, which wasn't present in the PS2), but that isn't the same thing.
Software rendering is more correct than hardware. HW can be seen as a huge hack actually ;)
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top