PDA

View Full Version : Am I the only person who thinks anything under 6xAA is crap?


Pages : [1] 2

Kruno
06-01-03, 01:19 AM
I think 4x AA is for cavemen.

I have grown out of 4xAA the moment I seen 6xS and 6x on my R300.

I don't care about IQ arguments about other cards here.

I want to argue the fact that 6xAA looks FAR better than 4x AA on my R300 at 1152x864 and 1024x768.
Either my eyes are playing up or it surely looks far better.
Performance is also amazingly (far) better than playing with the lowest settings possible (320x240 etc...) in any game (Unreal 2 etc...) on my NV20.

So what's the bloody point of not using 6x AA?

Sazar
06-01-03, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I think 4x AA is for cavemen.

I have grown out of 4xAA the moment I seen 6xS and 6x on my R300.

I don't care about IQ arguments about other cards here.

I want to argue the fact that 6xAA looks FAR better than 4x AA on my R300 at 1152x864 and 1024x768.
Either my eyes are playing up or it surely looks far better.
Performance is also amazingly (far) better than playing with the lowest settings possible (320x240 etc...) in any game (Unreal 2 etc...) on my NV20.

So what's the bloody point of not using 6x AA?

I generally just play @ 1600x1200 with little or no AA/AF or 1280x1024 with a little turned on of both...

Behemoth
06-01-03, 01:36 AM
i just use 2xAA, if it looks like crap at 2xAA, it still looks like crap at 8xAA

Typedef Enum
06-01-03, 01:37 AM
I had similar thoughts just a few days ago...

Something along the lines of, "by next generation, 256MB framebuffers will be the standard, and we can expect 8-sample Antialiasing (useable, unlike the FX)"

I swear...anybody who really thinks that Antialiasing stinks has either a suck-ass monitor, blind, or stubborn.

Nv40
06-01-03, 02:18 AM
I want to argue the fact that 6xAA looks FAR better than 4x AA on my R300 at 1152x864 and 1024x768. Either my eyes are playing up or it surely looks far better.

i think you can get much better IQ ,raising the settings up to 1600x1200
and playing with 2xAA or 4xAA..
here is my geforce4 QUake3 + 4x +Aniso8X+texture sharpening
everything looks PErfect! :)


Raven shield at 1600x1200 at same settings above, but using 4xS looks
amazing too.. but the performance is too slow.. so i disable the shadows
and lower the AA to 2x ,and tada!! everything is playable and looks very nice . :)

Chalnoth
06-01-03, 02:20 AM
Raising the resolution isn't feasible in all games: the text shrinks too much.

FSAA is also good for those who have poor monitors, as high resolutions are where the lower-quality monitors suffer.

Kruno
06-01-03, 02:25 AM
Originally posted by Chalnoth
Raising the resolution isn't feasible in all games: the text shrinks too much.

FSAA is also good for those who have poor monitors, as high resolutions are were the lower-quality monitors suffer.

I thought it looks better at high res?

I have a good CRT. :p
No make fun of it. :)

Nv40
06-01-03, 02:31 AM
yes ,you need a good monitor..
people doesnt know the diferences a good monitor can do.. :)

i have a true flat trinitron monitor ,and it looks like ANisoF is enable up to 20x , my movies looks far better ,than a cheap monitor i have.
the sharpness and the Colors is outstanding in Trinitron tube monitors..
where black is black (not darkgrey) ,and red is red, and so on..
i never thought a monitors can do any diference in IQ , until i saw
in lan parties the monitors of others with same settings and same video
cards the diferences was HUGe from night to day. this is not like the diferences with AA or AF when sometimes you need to zoom shots
to find diferences,the diferences i say ,can be seen instanly from 10 feet from your monitor. good monitor really makes a huge diference. my next purchase will be one with support for 2000x2000 resolutions ,low dotpitch and excelent refresh rates :)

Sazar
06-01-03, 02:46 AM
Originally posted by Typedef Enum
I had similar thoughts just a few days ago...

Something along the lines of, "by next generation, 256MB framebuffers will be the standard, and we can expect 8-sample Antialiasing (useable, unlike the FX)"

I swear...anybody who really thinks that Antialiasing stinks has either a suck-ass monitor, blind, or stubborn.

I don't think AA stinks :)

I just like playing games @ high res coz I am a FPS player and therefore I need my aim to be as good as possible... hence... I play @ high res :)

its quite simple...

and yes chalnoth... the text size is a little ridiculous... even so I prefer having to squint sometimes to losing the ability to aim better...

yoladude
06-01-03, 02:51 AM
i have a flat trinitron monitor too....mine's a 17 incher. only problem is its max res, which is 1280x1024. nothing higher is needed with my ti4200 though.
yes, i have to agree that trinitron monitors are amazing (if u dont mind the damper wire shadows).

Hanners
06-01-03, 05:54 AM
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I think 4x AA is for cavemen.

I'm a caveman. :(

I still use 4xAA for everything, to be honest I haven't even tried 6xAA yet - Maybe I'll give it a go sometime. :)

euan
06-01-03, 09:04 AM
Yeah there is a line that you cross, from AA being not worth the hit why bother, to it being the best thing since sliced bread. My line was upgrading from an 8500 to the 9700. There is no way in hell I will use anything less than 4xAA. If the next gen can't hack it I will have to upgrade. AA was the dogs balls on the GF3/4 but now that it isn't competitive on the FX series it seems like AA is back being pointless and worthless, and nobody should need it. Very strange. :confused:

borntosoul
06-01-03, 09:13 AM
i cant see too much difference between 4x and 6x aa. i have a great monitor so obviously it must be my eyes :)

goofer456
06-01-03, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I think 4x AA is for cavemen.

I have grown out of 4xAA the moment I seen 6xS and 6x on my R300.

I don't care about IQ arguments about other cards here.

I want to argue the fact that 6xAA looks FAR better than 4x AA on my R300 at 1152x864 and 1024x768.
Either my eyes are playing up or it surely looks far better.
Performance is also amazingly (far) better than playing with the lowest settings possible (320x240 etc...) in any game (Unreal 2 etc...) on my NV20.

So what's the bloody point of not using 6x AA?

Most games I play are just to slow on 6xAA. Even though my rig is reasonably fast (XP2700+ on nforce with R9700pro) I am unable to play NFS HP2, Rallisport Challenge & Race Driver on 6xAA on 1024x768. Other games like Fifa 2003 and the latest bond game are playable at 6xAA however.

Humus
06-01-03, 09:37 AM
On Radeon 9700 the performance difference between each FSAA mode, 2x/4x/6x is so small anyway, so 6x all the way. There are still aliasing visible for the keen eye at 6x, so I hope for something like 16x in the future with not too heavy performance hit.

Nutty
06-01-03, 10:00 AM
As for the original question.. I hardly ever use FSAA. I just dont notice it that much when playing. Sure if I stopped to look at all the lines in the game I'd see a big difference, but it just doesn't make much difference to me.

goofer456
06-01-03, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by Nutty
As for the original question.. I hardly ever use FSAA. I just dont notice it that much when playing. Sure if I stopped to look at all the lines in the game I'd see a big difference, but it just doesn't make much difference to me.

Change to a R3xx or NV35 card and you will see and enjoy the difference. I wouldn't use AA If I had anything less:D

Hanners
06-01-03, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by goofer456
Change to a R3xx or NV35 card and you will see and enjoy the difference. I wouldn't use AA If I had anything less:D

Agreed - I'd find it very hard to go back to gaming without AA now.

Kruno
06-01-03, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by goofer456
Change to a R3xx or NV35 card and you will see and enjoy the difference. I wouldn't use AA If I had anything less:D

He has a GF4. AA IQ hasn't changed since the NV20 AFAIK (except for QCX).

goofer456
06-01-03, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
He has a GF4. AA IQ hasn't changed since the NV20 AFAIK (except for QCX).

I know. Just trying to concince Nutty it is time to upgrade:D

SmuvMoney
06-01-03, 12:07 PM
To me, the level of FSAA needed depends on the res just as much as the game. On my 9700 that I broke in March, 4x or 6xAA did look incredible at lower resolutions - 1024x768 or lower - but once you went over 1100xanything, I couldn't tell the difference between 2x and 4x without really studying my surroundings. On lower res, the hit was almost minimal so 4x or 6x was worth it. I think only 1024 actually had a significant hit going from 4x to 6x.

Even at 1152x864, the res I tend to use now, the performance difference outweighed the visual difference a lot. I could still somewhat tell the difference between 2x, 4x, and 6x visually. However, I noticed even more the (sometimes much) slower performace 4x or 6x would give me after a certain res.

My view may be skewed since I play mostly FPS where I try to balance visual beauty with game speed/consistently high framerate. Hence my sweet spots tend to be 1024x768 @ 4xAA or 1152x864 @ 2xAA. If I played more RPG/strategy games where all you may need is 30-60 frames/sec to get by, I may say that anything below 6xAA is meaningless. :) To each his/her own...

PlasmaSMP
06-02-03, 09:19 PM
I think resolutions below 1600x1200 are for cavemen. I play RTCW at 2048x1536 and Vice City @ 1920 on my Sony G410. No need for AA at that resoluton.

jAkUp
06-02-03, 09:24 PM
i play ever game i have at 1600x1200 with 2xaa... im more of a fan of increased resolution... allows more desktop space, and keeps the text small in games so you can see more onscreen... without worry of being blocked, plus more precision in aiming... i dont use any af... because it seems thats the border line of whats playable in the newest games, and plus i hardly notice any difference with the lower end af.

ragejg
06-02-03, 09:42 PM
Hi I'm ragejg and I'm a caveman.

Out of necessity....

well, maybe i'm just an ape... I think 2xAA + 4xAF @ 1024 looks *great as possible and visually satisfying TO ME* on my B grade 17"...


...but Unreal2 @ 12x10 on a NICE19"w/4xaa/4xaf does look MAD tasty tho... darn rich ppl with their 9700P's and P4 2.8's...

StealthHawk
06-02-03, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by PlasmaSMP
I think resolutions below 1600x1200 are for cavemen. I play RTCW at 2048x1536 and Vice City @ 1920 on my Sony G410. No need for AA at that resoluton.

Some people own LCDs....and it is well known that using any resolution other than the native LCD resolution makes the IQ bad.

Not to mention that most people's refresh rates at high resolutions aren't that high for CRTs either.

Two perfectly valid reasons not to bump up the screen resolution.