First Check Comparison Of The Two Screens

ste_167

Very Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,202
Location
England
Website
Visit site
Having tried the Mk2, it has a more 'dot-matrix' look to it; as Craig has said, it's like the GP32 screen in that respect. However, the contrast appears to be greater, the blacks look black. It's certainly as bright as the Mk1.

Firmware 2's gamma setting appears to be set for this new screen, making the Mk1 looked washed out in comparison. Not what I was expecting..

In terms, of the non-interlacing, it results in slight jagged edges which are, as an example, noticeable in the NeoGeo start-up, and indeed the actual GP2X interface graphics. The viewing angle wasn't really that much of an issue*, although I'll have a better look at things tonight and also do some daylight testing to see which is clearer outside.

(And also compare the rotated thumbstick!)


I've put a 0.6 gamma autorun on the Mk1, and it still looks comparatively washed out.
*However, depending on the viewing angle of Mk2 it can vary from being washed out to too dark. It's perfect if you get the correct angle.
 

ste_167

Very Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,202
Location
England
Website
Visit site
Here's the difference between the two. Mk1 on the left.. bear in mind it's a mock-up, and is open to debate.

 

thespawned

Still Fresh
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
41
okay, i see what you mean about the dot-matrix effect...however its hardly noticable. i have a hard time really telling the difference. at first glance i would say the MK2 colours are much fuller, less washed out.
 

pantera6

Ruler of good and evil, then i make them fight tog
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
609
Website
Visit site
Yes i see what you mean aswell
might not be to noticable during game play
so fay even though it looks a bit paler and ever so slightly more blurred
mk1 is btter
 

DavidBeoulve

GP2X by EvilDragon OC's to 280-300MHz
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
427
Age
43
Location
USA
Website
www.GamersGoneBad.com
Well, perhaps it's because I'm an amatuer artist, but I can spot the differences in those mock-ups immediately. You probably applied a sharpening filter (x2?) to the Mk2 mock-up, and played with the contrast.

Given the level of detail my eyes can see (I can actually see the line 60hz CRTs generate when looking directly at the monitor, and can see up to 80hz if I use my peripheral vision, which means 85hz is as low as I can go) I will undoubtably see everything that is good and bad about the Mk2 screen.

All of that said, the joystick fix was paramount, which is why I asked EvilDragon to delay my order until he gets some Mk2's and handle my custom order from there.
 

Paradox

oh em gee
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
1,748
Age
31
Location
England
Website
Visit site
so what's the conclusion ste, which is better? i cant really tell from the images, the second looks a bit weird and pixelated though.

i had to send my 2X back to craig because my joystick just broke on me the other day so i hope i either get the joystick replaced or another MK1 unit cause i dont like the look of the mk2 screen (from those images)
 

Parkydr

Developing for the GP2X since 2006
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Messages
1,360
Website
www.parkydr.ezeedsl.co.uk
I compared my MK1 with a MK2 today. The MK2 has a lot more contrast. What I'd like to compare is what they look like in sunlight. I can hardly see anything on my MK1 under these conditions. I'll just have to wait until we get some sun, it's been raining all day.
 

ste_167

Very Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,202
Location
England
Website
Visit site
I'd not be able to choose between the two really. The Mk2 has to be held at an angle to get the best out if it.. the good news is that it's the angle you would normally hold it at when using it. If you laid it flat and looked directly down at it, you'd find the picture a little dark.

If you look at the grey sky above ARMS and BOMB on the pic (no. 2), you'll get an idea for the 'dot-matrix' effect. It's all very subtle though and they're on the Mk1 to some extent. Not a problem at all! They're on this TFT that I'm using too! They're evvvverywhere!!

Well, perhaps it's because I'm an amatuer artist, but I can spot the differences in those mock-ups immediately. You probably applied a sharpening filter (x2?) to the Mk2 mock-up, and played with the contrast.
I created a dot effect on it, increased the edge sharpness on any text (to remove the smoothness), removed the dot effect from darker areas, decreased the darkness towards the lower half of the screen (viewing angle), and altered the black border so it wasn't quite black. I actually had to blur it slightly, because the source was a pixel perfect screen grab ;)
 

DavidBeoulve

GP2X by EvilDragon OC's to 280-300MHz
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
427
Age
43
Location
USA
Website
www.GamersGoneBad.com
ste_167 posted on May 24 2006 at 02:03 PM said:
I created a dot effect on it, increased the edge sharpness on any text (to remove the smoothness), removed the dot effect from darker areas, decreased the darkness towards the lower half of the screen (viewing angle), and altered the black border so it wasn't quite black. I actually had to blur it slightly, because the source was a pixel perfect screen grab ;)
Good, precise work, Ste. The end result shows the Mk1 as the clear winner in your mock-ups. Is that as you intended?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gaterooze

Coltrane Sundia
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,723
Website
Visit site
When I make those images the size of a real GP2X screen, the difference is VERY small, but the MK2 looks a little better to me. Not much though...

And moving, there will be even less difference.
 

lintsniffer

Duke Nukem 3D = Crazy Delicious!
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
495
Age
29
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Website
Visit site
I think you should take an original picture and change some stuff to make it MKI and change stuff to make it MKII so it's equal. Anything you change will generally look worse.
 

ste_167

Very Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,202
Location
England
Website
Visit site
David Beoulve posted on May 24 2006 at 09:58 PM said:
ste_167 posted on May 24 2006 at 02:03 PM said:
I created a dot effect on it, increased the edge sharpness on any text (to remove the smoothness), removed the dot effect from darker areas, decreased the darkness towards the lower half of the screen (viewing angle), and altered the black border so it wasn't quite black. I actually had to blur it slightly, because the source was a pixel perfect screen grab ;)
Good, precise work, Ste. The end result shows the Mk1 as the clear winner in your mock-ups. Is that as you intended?
I didn't intend to make either better, I just wanted to replicate the actual screens. I think it's a fine line between the two. The Mk2 really does hit you with its colour and contrast alongside the Mk1 (I'd go as far to say that it's the better of the two), but the Mk1 seems to iron out imperfections in graphics due to its interlacing and as a result can make them look better.

The stick's more responsive on the Mk2 too. I can't speak for every Mk1, but mine seems pretty loose and I sometimes have to try twice at navigating simple left and rights on menus (new cap used). Yeah, I should push harder.. The Mk2 allows for lighter pushes. I've been playing a fair number of NeoGeo football games, and it does seem to make a difference with the rotated thumbstick. It almost seems like a proper one! :p I'd say I prefer it to the PSP thumbstick.. although the PSP's little knob is hardly a benchmark in controls..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sam fisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
9,446
Location
Bristol, UK
Website
blog.peter-r.co.uk
gaterooze posted on May 24 2006 at 10:33 PM said:
When I make those images the size of a real GP2X screen, the difference is VERY small, but the MK2 looks a little better to me. Not much though...

And moving, there will be even less difference.
Thats because THEY ARE THE SAME FUCKING RES. No offense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ste_167

Very Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,202
Location
England
Website
Visit site
Yeah, they're 320x240, same as the actual GP2x screen. Please don't take them as the definitive Mk1 vs Mk2. They were intended to highlight the points in my thread. Although in all honesty, they're probably more useful than photos of real screens, as the finer details wouldn't be properly captured.

Parkydr could offer a second opinion on them, as he has both versions. I think they're very accurate. (And I'm quite a perfectionist!)
 

gaterooze

Coltrane Sundia
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,723
Website
Visit site
sam fisher posted on May 24 2006 at 10:15 PM said:
Thats because THEY ARE THE SAME FUCKING RES. No offense.
My viewer defaults to 'fit-to-width', and my Opera is zoomed to 120%, so I had to resize.

No need to be so rude.

Oh, and Sam, when I said " the difference is VERY small" I was obviously referring to the difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 screens. Comprehension not your strongest asset, is it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sam fisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
9,446
Location
Bristol, UK
Website
blog.peter-r.co.uk
gaterooze posted on May 24 2006 at 11:23 PM said:
sam fisher posted on May 24 2006 at 10:15 PM said:
Thats because THEY ARE THE SAME FUCKING RES. No offense.
My viewer defaults to 'fit-to-width', and my Opera is zoomed to 120%, so I had to resize.

No need to be so rude.

Oh, and Sam, when I said " the difference is VERY small" I was obviously referring to the difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 screens. Comprehension not your strongest asset, is it?
I know the difference is very small! Comprehension is my strong point. Grammar isn't. Also what I meant was that the difference is very small and At the normal rez during gamepaly not overly noticable. I thought you were being a prat and scaling the widescreen image of 641 pixels in width to 320 and then the scaling would make them look identical except contrast.

Also, yes I am rude.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Epicenter

Very Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,068
Age
34
Location
USA
Website
www.epicgaming.us or http
Paradox posted on May 24 2006 at 12:04 PM said:
so what's the conclusion ste, which is better? i cant really tell from the images, the second looks a bit weird and pixelated though.

i had to send my 2X back to craig because my joystick just broke on me the other day so i hope i either get the joystick replaced or another MK1 unit cause i dont like the look of the mk2 screen (from those images)
There is no 'better', these are 2 different displays with different properties. Some will prefer the less-pixellaceous MK1 screen with the light blurring attributes that will blend together dithered patterns like those used to simulate more colors in 2D sprite-based games (8-bit/16-bit consoles, NeoGeo Arcade titles, etc.) while others may find the more 'digital' and less 'analog' appearance refreshing. It's all a preference thing.

Personally, I don't care that much but the MK2 screen seems it might be an improvement, as graphics drawn for the native resolution of the display will always look good on a pixel-perfect screen. While games for say, the MegaDrive/Genesis that used lots of custom dithering styles that took advantage of NTSC/PAL Color compression to simulate more colors won't look quite as good, I don't see it being a catastrophe. Many developers did this intentionally, e.g. one of the desigers of Ecco 2 (Tides of Time) for MegaDrive/Genesis I interviewed stated the artist would use special dithering patterns to achieve the look of thousands of colors on a 64 simultaneous color display, and it certainly works in practice.

But really, when things are moving, the difference will be very hard to tell. Mockups won't do anyone very much good; even photos may not. Only personally using the displays will really give you a true idea of what you'll be looking at, esp. with scanline/interlacing's appearance to your eyes as that is something that can only be experienced with a rapidly refreshing image, not a still photo!

In all honesty, I believe this issue has attracted far more concern than what is necessary. I'm positive the VAST majority of users will be happy with the new displays, if they would even notice the difference were they not told the screen was changed!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gaterooze

Coltrane Sundia
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,723
Website
Visit site
sam fisher posted on May 24 2006 at 10:31 PM said:
Also, yes I am rude.
:lol: No worries mate. All I meant was, when I first opened the picture it was zoomed-in and the difference between Mk1 & Mk2 was very noticable, but when I put it back to the original res, there wasn't much between them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DaveC

Internal Development
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
9,208
ste_167 posted on May 24 2006 at 03:39 PM said:
Here's the difference between the two. Mk1 on the left.. bear in mind it's a mock-up, and is open to debate.


Why not just take a picture of the REAL screen so we can see the EXACT difference?

Also the real question is that if the viewing angle is not as good how does the new screen fare if playing the unit at 90 degrees as in vertical MAME games? That could be a problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top