Alright first off...
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
So this will be a pretty quick blog.
I just want to say that I had extensive time playing the Wii over the holidays as my 8 year old and 4 year old nephews (visiting from out of state) didn't want to do much of anything else.
Since day one I have denounced the Wii - not in a way that it is insignificant but in a way that I have believed it truly is only a childrens console.
Those of you who know me or who have followed my postings very long know that I have always been, am and will always be one of the biggest graphics whores around - however that doesn't mean it should sacrifice good gameplay. Graphics though is the primary reason the gaming industry progresses forward and generations of new hardware are developed.
So that being said I haven't seen too much value in the Wii for myself. Again - I have been happy that Nintendo has the console as it keeps allot of people gaming that wouldn't ohterwise. I just wasn't interested in owning one...
Until now!
I will happily say that I am now a Wii convert - for anyone who hasn't played one extensively - I encourage you to do so. The graphics are barely PS2 level, this is true - but the motion controls are nothing like Sony's Six Axis (which are half ass and only annoying IMHO) - instead the Wii Mote is very accurate and actually fun to use. It creates a new level of immersion that I have yet to experience with other consoles.
Especially in games like Golf and Bowling - those types of games make you feel as if you are actually playing the sport and not a video game.
Anyway while I still only own the 360, PS3 and PC at the moment (oh and still a PS2 as well) - a Wii is definitely on the horizon for me.
So no more bashing the Wii from me - or implying that it is a console only for kids. While many of the games are definitely child oriented and not the ultra violent adult oriented gems that are required to satisfy an older gamer such as myself - the more and more I looked around the store shelves at games for the Wii, I quickly realized there is a fair share of adult oriented games as well.
So Viva la Wii.
If you like me have left the Wii alone for fear of going blind (couldn't resist at least one obscure reference - LOL), I wholly encourage you to spend some time playing with one. Not just at a store for a half an hour - find a firend with one and give it 8 to 10 hours at least before making your final assesment because you may find a longing for that Wii Mote once it's gone.
So while I am not trying to really debate whether the past Intercoolers were good or bad I will say this...
I have used Intercoolers since the first models - yes the ones that allegedly killed so many 360's.
This will be a review of the new models as well as drawing a couple brief comparisons to previous models. Since I own a PS3 and 360 - I will write a little bit about my experiences with both models of Intercoolers.
I want to start by answering the question of "Why is an Intercooler needed?"
Quite simply with any and all electronic components - no matter how well made, the cooler you can run the device, the better it will perform. This is not debatable as anyone who is PC Tech oriented knows. It is just a fact of electronics - all electronics. I have used all types of cooling systems in my PC's over the years - including Air as well as Water Cooling (as well as some not so successful attempts at PC refrigeration).
Anyway the same goes for consoles - no matter how cool or stable the console is - the cooler you can run it the better. Period.
Some may argue that extra cooling is not necessary for the consoles - especially the PS3. This is a faulty logic as the fact is the cooler the better.
So I will start with the 360 versions:
As I said I had the original (plastic internal connector) Intercooler for my 360 and it worked without any issues for the 6 months or so that I used it. However when all of the meltdown issues that other users reported, began to occur it did make me very nervous. Also the fact that it drew directly from the main power source of the 360 made me nervous as well. However I never experienced any issues that other users have reported.
When the updated version the Intercooler EX was released - I was ecstatic and rushed out to get one. While the EX still uses pass through power it corrected the issue that was causing the meltdowns with the early model. The way that Nyko did this was to replace the inner sleeve where the power cord connect - changing from plastic to metal. Once they did this it eliminated the meltdown issue. However there was still the issue of pass through power which had me nervous - though again I never personally experienced an issue with it.
When I upgraded my console to the Falcon chip model (175w) it made me even more nervous using the Intercooler EX as now there was so much less power being fed the console that I was concerned there may not be enough "headroom" in the power stream to support the EX without causing other issues for the 360 itself. I even shopped around for a while for a 203w PSU from the first 360's. From what I had read the Falcon could use either PSU - so my thinking was that if I used a 203w PSU with a console only requiring 175w, then I should have more than enough headroom to run the power pass through with no worry whatsoever. Unfortunately the price for the 203w PSU's is around $100 and while I could afford it I didn't find enough value in experimenting with doing that to justify the cost. So I continued to use the Intercooler EX with the 175w PSU.
I used the EX for roughly 6 to 9 months without a single issue.
Intercooler TS (360):
So the NEW Intercooler TS models were released recently and I couldn't be happier. First off they use an independent power supply so there is no concern of drawing power away from the 360 or causing the meltdown issue. The TS model is aesthetically more pleasing in my opinion as well. It is physically smaller than it's predecessors. I do have a 360 Elite (black) and the TS is a clear plastic over white color - so it doesn't match color wise, but that's fine by me. The best feature of all is the Temperature Sensor that is built in to the unit. The new TS will rev up or down with the fans depending on how much cooling the 360 needs. This is a nice feature. Also overall the new TS model is substantially quieter than either the original Intercooler or the EX iteration.
Overall I would give the Intercooler TS a 10/10 for an add on cooling solution. There really is nothing I see as a potential issue in regards to this model. So if you need extra cooling - or if like me you just want extra cooling because you know it's better for the hardware (especially during those 12+ hour gaming sessions) - then I whole heartedly recommend the Nyko Intercooler TS for the 360. It is far superior to any other add on cooling solution currently available for the 360 - and Nyko has addressed every issue of the previous models as well as added the amazing new Temperature Sensing feature.
So...
Nyko Intercooler TS (360): 10 / 10
Now...
The PS3 Intercooler by Nyko.
First the previous version of the Nyko Intercooler PS3 did a sufficient job of cooling the console down. Unlike the 360 model the PS3 model had a control knob to allow the user to manually adjust the fan speed so that depending on what you were doing at any given time you could balance the cooling to noise ratio by speeding up or slowing down the fans. The unit came in two pieces - a piece for the side and a piece for the back. This unit performed well and served me well for over a year on my 60gb launch PS3.
A few months ago I was able to sell my 60gb PS3 for a substantial profit to someone. I purchased one of the new 80gb model PS3's and found they had redesigned the rear of the case on the new units. I had two freeze up's on the new 80gb model within the first week. This was very disheartening to say the least. I noticed that on the new models there are no fans whatsoever in the rear of the console - again this was a little nerve racking for a "Cooler Geek" like me. In addition to that I soon discovered the ports had moved to the far left on the back. I attempted to re-attach the original PS3 Intercooler to no avail. Yes it would physically attach but it would completely cover up the HDMI and RJ45 ports - which I wanted to use. This was a little frustrating as anytime there is a physical change or revision to a console the accessories never seem to be compatible.
This is actually what got me researching not only Intercoolers but other cooling solutions as well again. This is what led me to the NEW Intercooler TS models.
Intercooler TS (PS3):
The PS3 version of the TS has many things different from it's 360 counterpart and from it's earlier cousin that it replaces.
First off the TS is now only one piece of hardware instead of the two pieces of the previous model. This was a good thing and the design of the new hardware seemed excellent. It will also work with either the old versions of the PS3 or the new ones without blocking the ports - which was of course a necessity.
One thing about the NEW TS is that because of the way it attaches it will lift the back of the console up slightly when the PS3 is in the horizontal position. The TS is also VERY difficult to attach properly - it took me about 10 minutes of struggling with the piece to get it to properly fit.
The TS still has a manually adjustable knob for the fans though it is now plastic and flush to the units casing instead of a big metal knob sticking up. This is the biggest downfall for this unit unfortunately. When you have the fans on full speed the unit will produce an unacceptable amount of vibration and noise - even if like me you play with headphones on, it will still be audible. It is honestly the worst thing I have ever heard from any cooling solution. It's not the noise level mind you as I don't mind loud fans - it's that it makes a pulsating growling noise every couple of seconds. I returned the first unit I got thinking it must be a defect - though it's not. I believe it's because of how fast the fans are going causes a metal internal bar in the unit (used for attaching the device to the console) to vibrate. There is no way to adjust or rectify this noise without physically breaking the exterior casing of the unit.
Luckily - once you turn the fans down to about half of their speed or less, the noise goes away and the unit sounds much like you would expect. With the fans turned down to half it produces approximately the same amount of noise as the 360 version does. I would have preferred having the fans on full blast to reap the rewards of the extra airflow, however in the end I realize that since the new PS3's have no exhaust fans at the back whatsoever that even at half speed I would be gaining a vast improvement.
And sure enough - my PS3 has quit locking up and just like the 360 - even after 12 hours straight during multiple sessions of gaming it isn't dropping frames or having any issues whatsoever - so the unit is doing what it's supposed to. Just not at the full potential which really is nothing more than an irritation in my mind as even at half speed it is doing an excellent job of sucking hot air out of the console.
Due to the difficult installation and the inability to use the fans at full speed without causing an unacceptable noise (again I am not talking about loud fans - but a grinding noise caused at full speed), I will not be able to rate the unit as highly as the 360 version though. However I would still definitely recommend this unit as an external cooling solution for the PS3 - especially if you have experienced lock ups due to overheating.
So...
Intercooler TS (PS3): 8 / 10
In closing...
All in all - I am very happy with the quality of both of these units. If the PS3 version had allowed full speed of the fans to be used with nothing more than loud fan noise, I would have readily given it a 10 / 10.
I would fully recommend either of these units to anyone who wants to prolong the life of their console, play for longer periods of time without lock ups or is just generally a Cooling Geek like me that knows that the colder the better ALWAYS. If you get one for the PS3 just know ahead of time that you will need to set the manual fan setting at around half speed - and from that point on you will be as happy as a clam with the unit.
In a word...
YES!
This blog was inspired by a thread I read yesterday. At first I responded in the thread - however I after writing the response last night I removed it and saved it to file instead - and decided to blog it. I mean no offense to any of you of course and some of you may disagree with me - or find yourselves in the category of users that I will cite as misinformed. Please don't take offense to this.
This is my blog and not an open forum per se - so if you disagree with something I say, find error with something I say or just have some questions...
Of course speak your mind and being that this is a little more private than the main boards - you shouldn't have a whole lot of people ganging up on you. 
So is 1080p REALLY noticeably better than 720p...
Even on smaller than 42" screens?
Even at further away than a 6 foot viewing distance?
Yes, YES and YES!!!
I am going to start this off with the quote of the original thread creator asking a question, followed by a quote from one of the responders in the thread - which inspired me to do this blog, however I am going to change/remove their names.
| EnigmaticBeauty wrote: |
| I have a 42 inch Hi Def TV that is 1080P and I have a HMDI cable plugged in the back of it... my question is, what settings should I put my 360 to? On the back of the boxes, it says it's 1080P and I've heard people say that all the games are actually 720, just up-scaled... so I really don't know what to do, would it look better if I was to put the input as 720, or keep it as 1080? |
| Un_named_Responder wrote: |
| I believe it's upscaled, but it doesn't matter either way. On a 42" screen, I guarantee you cannot tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. The human eye can't really pick up the extra detail 1080p puts out until you start talking 55 inches and up. |
I need to say to Un-named Responder...
I do not mean to direct these statements directly at you - however I am quoting you because I believe it is necessary to put right some false and inaccurate information. That doesn't mean I am trying to undermine you - just trying to help educate B.E. and make general statements to all who read this (none of it is directed at anyone in specific) - and well, your posting is going to get used as a tool. I mean no offense by any of this...
I can easily tell the difference between 1280x720 and 1920x1080 even on a 19" screen. I can notice the difference on any size screen 19" or larger even at distances of 20+ feet. So please don't give me - "it has to bigger than 42 inches and you have to be closer than 6 feet away" arguments - because in real world applications there is a noticeable difference. That difference is obvious to anyone who is looking at the details even if they are further than 6 feet away or looking at a smaller screen. I suspect even on smaller screens than 19" the differences would still be noticeable, however smaller screens rarely if ever support that high of a resolution.
I wish people would quit making statements like "I guarantee you cannot tell the difference between 720p and 1080p." That is a completely false statement. All statements like that truly do to people who know better is make anyone making those statements sound unreliable and not credible. Usually they are rehashing what someone else told them without actually researching the science for themselves - so I'm not saying be upset with them (because it's what they've been told so it's not their fault - their just repeating it) - they are just wrong and misinformed is all. Educate yourselves when it comes to technology. Heck - educate yourselves when it comes to ANYTHING, but that is another topic for another day.
As other posters have stated 1080p up-scaled provides a better image than 720p native because you still get all the advantages of 1080p just not "quite" as crisply as native 1080p.
The higher the resolution, the better - ALWAYS!!! It's just a matter of if you're willing to pay for it. It's a simple cost versus specifications comparison. Is it worth it? If it is worth it to you - there is a difference, so get it.
Beauty - Your TV supports 1080p already - so use it. That's what you paid for. Get the most out of your equipment.
A few people will always argue that resolution doesn't matter but it's generally people who can't afford the higher resolution equipment trying to justify their own satisfaction at a lower resolution like 720p. Everyone who is hard-core into video and who can afford 1080p - does get it. No one who cares about video quality chooses lower resolutions because they prefer it - they just can't justify in their minds that the resolution difference is worth it for the extra cost. For people who don't have cost constraints - they are either going to have 1080p or even the rare 2160p (usually high end PC monitors - as the QHDTV market won't be ready until 2015).
It's a fact that there is a difference - ask any TRUE GearHead or TechnoPhile. If it weren't the case we would all still be playing at SDTV resolutions because we wouldn't be able to tell any difference.
All you have to do is look at the aliasing (that's the "jaggies") at the edge of objects or characters in the game. Even 720p with anti-aliasing at 4x doesn't touch 1080p with 2x anti-aliasing due to other advantages that 1080p provides.
In addition to the aliasing issue - you will ALWAYS get a larger field of view, the higher the resolution you are displaying at. This means you will actually see more of the game world at any given time over someone playing at a lower resolution. If you are a competitive gamer playing games like Halo 3 or Gears 2 or if you're someone who enjoys the panoramic scenery in games like Oblivion and Fallout 3 and takes your time checking out the scenery - this makes a HUGE difference. On the competitive side you will actually have an edge over people playing at lower resolutions because targets will enter your field of view sooner than they will for people at lower resolutions. On the scenic side - because you are seeing more of the game world at any time it gives a more realistic sense as it feels closer to viewing the real world - 720p looks "zoomed in" by comparison.
And don't even get me started on the whole "Frame Rate" argument - because with the current generation of consoles - and DEFINITELY with medium to high end computers - there are no frame rate issues at 1080p anymore. The hardware is more than capable of handling a steady frame rate at that resolution. If there are frame rate issues - it's not due to a hardware issue not being able to handle 1080p - it is due to poor and rushed coding of the software. Again - Today's hardware is MORE than capable of running all the games released to console (or using DX9 on the PC - I say DX9 because that's comparable to the current gen consoles). There may be driver issues or improper coding within the software - but it's not the hardware being incapable of that resolution.
As far as image quality goes, think of it this way...
720p is considered a better image than standard TV for a reason right? HDTV is better than SDTV - we all know that. Well 1080p is actually a larger increase in mega-pixels over 720p than 720p is over 480p (or God forbid anything with an "i").
We all know that Mega-Pixels are the most important thing in the end when it comes to image quality. Even on photos and camera displays that are 3" wide - we can tell the difference between a high Mega-Pixel image and a low one.
So keeping that in mind...
SDTV is .3 mega-pixels
720p is .9 mega-pixels
1080p is 2.1 mega-pixels
So while naysayers of 1080p will state "720p is a greater increase because it's triple the image quality in relation to SDTV but 1080p isn't triple the image quality in relation to 720p" - I encourage you instead of getting lost in ratios and semantics to actually look at the technical specs. We have established that the difference between SDTV and HDTV 720p is noticeable - and there is only a .6 mega-pixel difference between those two resolutions. However the difference between 720p and 1080p is 1.2 mega-pixels. So it is actually double the difference in quality over 720p compared to what you would notice between SDTV and 720p.
It's a big difference and anyone who has even a slightly technical eye can definitely tell.
Again - there is a difference you just need to determine whether the difference in resolution is worth the extra money you would spend for it in your situation. In other words - it's better if you can afford it.
Beauty - Hands down in a situation like yours where you already have 1080p - it would be absolutely ridiculous not to use it. It would be like driving a Ferrari around town with a Volkswagen engine in it - even though you can easily afford one with a Ferrari engine. It just doesn't make sense.
You have a 1080p TV. 1080p TV's cost more than 720p/1080i TV's for a reason. Use the best technology your TV is capable of - that's 1080p.
Now don't misunderstand - 720p is FANTASTIC and is a huge leap forward over SDTV or EDTV, however I believe that 1080p is just as big a leap forward over 720p.
I play everything on both PS3 and Xbox360 at 1080p whether up-scaled or not and in every single case it looks noticeably better than 720p. Any frame rate issues I may have previously associated with higher resolutions have been resolved using extra cooling that I won't talk about in this blog.
Also I play on a 42" Panasonic 1080p Plasma - and love it, but again am not looking to debate the difference between Plasma and LCD right now.
Those are topics for future blogs maybe.
