Recommended Posts

The 360 does not support native 1080p correct? Only 720p?

I recently went from a 32 inch 720p HDTV to a 40 inch 1080p HDTV. The games look far worse then ever. It seems like the game upscale, and there isnt anything to do to correct it.

Anyone else have this problem? On the back of games, it says 1080p. It supports it, or is it native 1080p?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1121210-360-and-1080p-hdtv/
Share on other sites

Did you set the Xbox to output to 1080p (or Auto) mode? If you didn't then your TV is streching the image to fit the screen which will make it look worse.

The Xbox supports renders games at up to 720p then scales them to 1080p. I play games on my 50 in 1080p and they looks just as good as anything else.

Did you set the Xbox to output to 1080p (or Auto) mode? If you didn't then your TV is streching the image to fit the screen which will make it look worse.

The Xbox supports renders games at up to 720p then scales them to 1080p. I play games on my 50 in 1080p and they looks just as good as anything else.

I'll have to try it on auto. I know battelfield looks worse then what it did on 720p

Boo. Well hopefully next gen has native 1080p

I'd trade 1080p and stick with 720p for some anti-aliasing and filtering + maybe a default FOV that actually fits a widescreen TV so it doesn't take a half hour to do a full turn around in a game.. these are a few of the reasons why I can't enjoy games on the 360.

I'd trade 1080p and stick with 720p for some anti-aliasing and filtering + maybe a default FOV that actually fits a widescreen TV so it doesn't take a half hour to do a full turn around in a game.. these are a few of the reasons why I can't enjoy games on the 360.

Many games already use AA in some form and that doesn't entirely help with how bad the games look when upscaled.

I'd trade 1080p and stick with 720p for some anti-aliasing and filtering + maybe a default FOV that actually fits a widescreen TV so it doesn't take a half hour to do a full turn around in a game.. these are a few of the reasons why I can't enjoy games on the 360.

Whatever the FOV is, a full 360 turn around still take the same amount of time ;p

One thing I notice with my Xbox 360 is that even in the Dashboard set to 1080p and the TV being definitely @ 1080p the screen doesn't look 'sharp' at all. Looks like it's upscaled while my PS3 looks fantastic.

I took notice to this too. I don't like it at all.

Just saw this thread and now im questioning the past two years of my gaming lol I play my 360 on a 40" Sony @1080p via HDMI. I've never seen a problem but im definitely not a 'trained eye' as it were. Would my games likely look more crisp if I set it to 720p for the consoles sake even though the TV is 1080p?

The smaller a high def the TV is, the better it looks the closer you get to it. The closer you are to a bigger screen, the worse it looks. The resolution is 1920 pixes by 1080 pixels. They ALL fit in a 32" or a 70". just the 70" is obviously 2x the size pixels so you are literally halfing your aliasing (I think)

This is why I went from a 42" 720p to a 32" 1080p TV. Wow, you really notice the difference. Same as an iPad 2 to an iPad 3 screen. apart you can't tell, but side by side its a world of difference. We won't include the fact that most 360 games run at 720P at best, only the menus/dvd playback/netflix/arcade or something are doing the true 1080.

I've heard quite a few people mention that the 360 isn't 1080p, and that games aren't either.

I know my 360 is set on 1080p and my TV is, and the majority of my games are 1080p.

All I know is I got a pronominal picture quality and awesome game detail when I play my games. Nuff said.

I've heard quite a few people mention that the 360 isn't 1080p, and that games aren't either.

I know my 360 is set on 1080p and my TV is, and the majority of my games are 1080p.

Unless you're nearly exclusively playing 2D arcade games there's no way that the majority of your games are 1080p, as the X360 simply isn't powerful enough to render games at that resolution. Heck, there are lots of games that don't even run at 720p and have to be upscaled from 640p. The X360 may be outputting at 1080p but it is not rendering at that resolution.

Both PS3 and 360 have a very limited number of native 1080p games. I haven't actually read any details as to why, but I can guarantee it's to use higher quality graphics while keeping the frame rate up. The 360 and PS3 don't have the power to run these games the way they want them at 1080p. Next gen will jump to native 1080p (and possibly support output to 4k, while they probably won't have power to run games at 4k). You have to remember when these systems came out, 1080p screens weren't in every room of every house like they are now.

True, but they knew they would be. It was a cost saving measure.

Well a console that would have cost 800-100 dollars, with DUAL SLI setups and 1000W power consumption and the cooling system from hell wouldn't have been very popular ;)

Yeah, I think it would have made the system far to expensive and bulky like HawkMan said, at least at launch, to support it. Think about how much power you'd need to play games at 4k right now. You'd need probably quad SLI to smoothly play games at high quality in 4k, but in 6 or 7 years time, your regular old video cards would probably do it. I mean, you COULD make a 1080p game for the 360 or PS3 right now, but you'd have to minimize graphic texture detail a whole lot, and they figure it looks better at 720p upscaled. Honestly, I've never had any issues with my 360 looking "bad" on my 1080p screen, but it'd be kind of like going from an 800x480 screen on a phone to a 720p screen. You didn't know how bad it was before until you upgraded to it and looked back.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • After I installed KB5095093, the volume on my ARM laptop won't go above 20%. It's stuck on the hearing protection level, which is pretty much useless if you want to listen to anything. I rolled back.
    • Amazon Prime Day slashes Samsung's newest Galaxy Watch Ultra by 45 percent by Karthik Mudaliar Samsung’s flagship Android smartwatch has received one of its steepest Prime Day cuts. Amazon has dropped the 2025 Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra in Titanium Blue to $357.24, saving buyers around $292 from its $649.99 list price. That's a 45 percent discount (purchase link below). The 47mm Galaxy Watch Ultra uses a titanium casing and a 1.5-inch Super AMOLED display with a resolution of 480 x 480 and peak brightness of 3,000 nits. It includes LTE connectivity, Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi, NFC, and dual-frequency L1+L5 GPS for more accurate outdoor route tracking. The 2025 model has 64GB of storage, a 590mAh battery, sapphire crystal glass, 10ATM water resistance, IP68 protection, and MIL-STD-810H durability testing. Its health and fitness tools include heart rate monitoring, sleep coaching, Energy Score, Running Coach, body composition analysis, temperature sensing, and ECG support, where available. This model is best suited to Android users who regularly run, hike, cycle, or train outdoors and want cellular access without carrying a phone. The larger battery, rugged construction, bright display, and dedicated Quick Button also make it a stronger option than Samsung’s regular Galaxy Watch models for extended workouts and demanding environments. Grab the Titanium Blue Galaxy Watch Ultra before the Prime Day price resets: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025) [Sold and Shipped by Amazon] Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Google begins rolling out its post-Epic Play Store billing model next week by Karthik Mudaliar Google has confirmed that its redesigned Play Store billing and fee structure will take effect on June 30, 2026, in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Economic Area. The changes will let eligible developers offer their own payment systems or send users to an external website for purchases, while separating Google’s platform service fee from the cost of using Google Play Billing. The rollout puts concrete dates and detailed rate cards behind the broader Android policy overhaul Google announced in March. That announcement followed a proposed settlement with Epic Games intended to resolve their long-running disputes over app distribution and payments, although the U.S. portion of the agreement still requires court approval. Under the new billing choice program, developers selling digital content or services can display an alternative payment option alongside Google Play Billing. They may also direct users to their own websites to complete a purchase. Developers can use Google’s standard payment-choice screen or design one that complies with the company’s user-interface rules. Choosing another payment processor does not eliminate Google’s cut altogether. The company will continue charging a service fee for transactions associated with apps distributed through Google Play, regardless of whether payment is handled by Google, an alternative provider, or a developer’s website. Google argues that this fee covers the value and infrastructure provided by Android and the Play Store. For developers earning up to $1 million annually, the service fee will generally be 10 percent. That rate also applies to auto-renewing subscriptions. When Google Play Billing is used in the U.S., U.K., or EEA, Google will add a separate 5 percent billing fee, and developers processing payments elsewhere will not pay that additional charge. This means Google’s familiar flat 30 percent commission is disappearing, but developers will not necessarily see a dramatic reduction on every transaction. An in-app purchase from an existing user processed through Google Play Billing can still reach a combined 30 percent. The biggest savings are likely to come from subscriptions, smaller developers covered by the $1 million tier, and companies able to move customers to their own payment infrastructure. Google is also offering lower rates through its Apps Experience and revamped Games Level Up programs. Apps and games that satisfy the company’s requirements can qualify for 15 percent service fees on new-install transactions and 20 percent on existing-install transactions. The criteria include performance and reliability standards, support for additional Android device categories, and selected platform features. Those program rates are scheduled to become available in the initial markets and Australia on September 30. For consumers, the immediate effect will depend on whether developers adopt alternative payments and pass any savings on through lower prices. For developers, however, June 30 begins a more flexible but considerably more complicated Play Store economy in which distribution, billing, install dates, revenue thresholds, and program participation can each affect Google’s final cut. Google is also separately developing a Registered App Stores program designed to simplify the installation of qualifying third-party stores. That initiative is expected to arrive with a major Android release later in 2026 and will launch outside the U.S. first. Google says the rest of the world will receive the changes by September 30, 2027, although billing rates for markets outside the US, UK, and EEA have not yet been announced.
    • 38% off a super insane price is still an INSANE price.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!