Author Topic: Antialisong (Read 2096 times)

Getback · « **on:** January 30, 2008, 02:18:53 PM »

If your video card has an option of let the game decide on Antialisong or any other recommended item that Hitech suggests that we turn off should we still turn that off manually?

Wingnutt · « **Reply #1 on:** January 30, 2008, 06:45:24 PM »

I run 2x AA.. no probs?

why turn it off, if your machine can hack it, more power to ya.

Getback · « **Reply #2 on:** January 30, 2008, 08:13:29 PM »

LOL Wingnut.

What does it do anyway? I do have a pretty awesome machine though. Duo core amd 3gighz, ati 3870 vid card.

Wingnutt · « **Reply #3 on:** January 30, 2008, 08:55:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Getback
LOL Wingnut.

What does it do anyway? I do have a pretty awesome machine though. Duo core amd 3gighz, ati 3870 vid card.

well at very high res, not much, much more than 2x is hardly noticable..

but long story short it smooths the edges of the pixels, so you dont see jagged edgest

Skuzzy · « **Reply #4 on:** January 31, 2008, 06:38:49 AM »

It also increases resources used oin the video card by a factor of what the value is for the sampling.

RedGiant · « **Reply #5 on:** February 18, 2008, 02:03:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
It also increases resources used oin the video card by a factor of what the value is for the sampling.

Isn't that what they make GOOD video cards for, though?

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #6 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:19:40 AM »

Keep it set to "Application Preference". That way, if the game supports it you can usually adjust the FSAA multiplyer in the in-game options. And if games like AH that don't support it, it won't be active.

ack-ack

Skuzzy · « **Reply #7 on:** February 18, 2008, 06:24:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RedGiant
Isn't that what they make GOOD video cards for, though?

The quality of the video card has nothing to do with the resources needed to run anti-aliasing. Anti-aliasing uses a significant amount of video ram.

If a texture only takes 1MB of video RAM, and then you set the AA level to 8, that same texture will use 8MB of video RAM. That is just one 1024x1024 texture.

SunKing · « **Reply #8 on:** February 18, 2008, 02:00:34 PM »

I always max my AA an AS settings in every game. Once you get rid of the jagged lines you can't go back.

Krusty · « **Reply #9 on:** February 18, 2008, 02:11:05 PM »

Sunking, 2x you can notice a difference. 4x looks much better. 6x? No better than 4x. 8? No better than 4x.

Maxing settings doesn't always give the best performance-to-looks ratio. Setting 4x FSAA will give almost the same results at 1280x1024 resolution as will 16x FSAA. The problem is there just aren't enough pixels to anti-alias after a certain point.

It's like using SLI instead of 1 card. You double the price but only get 5-10% gains.

RedGiant · « **Reply #10 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:11:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
The quality of the video card has nothing to do with the resources needed to run anti-aliasing. Anti-aliasing uses a significant amount of video ram.

If a texture only takes 1MB of video RAM, and then you set the AA level to 8, that same texture will use 8MB of video RAM. That is just one 1024x1024 texture.

Oh, that's ludicrous. Take a Geforce 7600GT and put it next to a Geforce 8800GTX and tell me there isn't going to be a difference in performance in regards to anti-aliasing (or overall for that matter). I understand the multiples of video ram used in running FSAA as well as transparency AA. I agree with you there. As I'm confident you're aware of, a better video card HAS the resources(more memory, higher memory bandwidth, higher GPU clock, etc.) with which to perform better whilst utilizing AA, Anisotropic Filtering, higher resolutions, physics, and so on. So, of course a better quality video has EVERYTHING to do with resources needed to run AA.
I don't want to make this a pissing contest. You're the boss here. But what you're saying is a bit, shall we say, elusive?

And why do you seem so anti anti-aliasing? You, being one of the architects of this game, I believed would be one who would champion the ability for better graphics and performance to enhance the gaming experience. Am I in error in observing this?

By the way, for anyone wanting to see the differences in settings for anti-aliasing, here's a pretty good little thing I found that allows you to see an image with different AA settings. Anti-Aliasing presentation

Good Day.

RedGiant · « **Reply #11 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:15:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Sunking, 2x you can notice a difference. 4x looks much better. 6x? No better than 4x. 8? No better than 4x.

Maxing settings doesn't always give the best performance-to-looks ratio. Setting 4x FSAA will give almost the same results at 1280x1024 resolution as will 16x FSAA. The problem is there just aren't enough pixels to anti-alias after a certain point.

It's like using SLI instead of 1 card. You double the price but only get 5-10% gains.

Respectfully, I can see a HUGE difference between 4x and 16x at 1280X1024. As well as 16x Anisotropic Filtering. The textures inside the model look much better than if set to 4x.

Wingnutt · « **Reply #12 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:28:35 PM »

I might add that if your running the game at your monitors maximum resolution..

FSAA wont do very much..

if I took a screen of 2x and one of 16x you couldent tell the difference.

Krusty · « **Reply #13 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:38:02 PM »

Wingnut: I can tell the difference between 2x and 4x. 4x is much more refined. However I can't tell the dif between 4x and 6x, or 4x and 8x (that's my vid card's max, or I'd have tested 16x as well!)

EDIT: Ge 7600 GTS 256MB running DVI to Dell FP 1900 (?) running at native resolution of 1280x1024.

Wingnutt · « **Reply #14 on:** February 18, 2008, 05:48:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Wingnut: I can tell the difference between 2x and 4x. 4x is much more refined. However I can't tell the dif between 4x and 6x, or 4x and 8x (that's my vid card's max, or I'd have tested 16x as well!)

EDIT: Ge 7600 GTS 256MB running DVI to Dell FP 1900 (?) running at native resolution of 1280x1024.

right what Im getting at is that for example..

my monitor supports a max of 1920x1200

i run AH at 1920x1200.. on a 8800GT-OC so the extra AA does not do much. if I set it to 2x it looks indistinguishable from 16x..