PDA

View Full Version : CRT users, 1600*1200 or low res w/ AA?


heedory
07-27-03, 11:39 AM
my eyesight is 0.9~1.0 w/ contact lens and

distance between my eyes and monitor is 40~50cm

I cannot see any jaggy in game screen on 1600*1200 res. w/o AA

and small objects are more clear than low res. w/ AA

so I always prefer high res w/o AA

personally, AA performance is not an important factor for purchasing video card. so I choose 5900 for it's AF quality..

your opinion?

walkndude
07-27-03, 12:26 PM
Depends on your own tastes really... great thing about the 5900 or 9800 is that you can have high resolutions AND AA.

There are many games that you'll be able to play at 1600*1200 with 2x fsaa enabled, or even 4x for that matter so dont sell yourself short by thinking you'll need to choose between fsaa at lower resolutions or high resolutions without it... its a totally different ball game nowadays.

Funny thing is I jumped on the 9800pro the very first day I found a vendor with them in stock and for the first 3 weeks didn't bother messing with 6x aa for the fact I figured it would be too damn slow at 1280*1024(my prefered gaming resolution). Heh, what a mistake that was...

Textures look like ass at 1024*768 on 19 inch monitors so it really doesnt matter how clean the lines are with fsaa enabled -so just crank the resolution and the aa and have a party :)

too much coffee fur danno...

GlowStick
07-27-03, 05:15 PM
higher res looks better, alot better in games. just for fun, run a game at 800x600, after you are done pukeing you will go back to high res : )

john19055
07-27-03, 07:31 PM
I have a 21'' monitor and I run my games at 1600x1200 and with FSAA and aniso on,it just looks better.

Sazar
07-28-03, 12:44 AM
sorta depends... but I prefer 1600x1200... :)

Smokey
07-28-03, 07:41 AM
I prefer 1280*1024 w/2xAA+AF, but as my gf3 is getting on a bit, I have to run new games at 1024*768. I still play MOH @ 1600*1200. I would need a high end video card again to say what I prefer, looks vs performance, but for me the crosshair in games is too small at 1600*1200 for MP, 1280*1024 is spot on :)

prodikal
07-28-03, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Smokey
I prefer 1280*1024 w/2xAA+AF, but as my gf3 is getting on a bit, I have to run new games at 1024*768. I still play MOH @ 1600*1200. I would need a high end video card again to say what I prefer, looks vs performance, but for me the crosshair in games is too small at 1600*1200 for MP, 1280*1024 is spot on :)


Aww that sux i need a new monitor the highest mine goes is like 1024*768 :(

saturnotaku
07-28-03, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by Smokey
1280*1024 is spot on :)

Same here...and that just so happens be the native resolution of my LCD. :D

Zod
07-28-03, 12:48 PM
It depends upon the game: Unreal 2 at 1600x1200 with 6xS FSAA and 8x aniso is not smooth enough on my FX5900 U coupled with a 3GHz P4 and 1GB of PC3500 and I see the jaggies if I switch off FSAA, so I run at 1280x960. Quake 3 on the other hand is no problem at all. The problem with older games is that the resolution often does not go high enough.

Smokey
07-28-03, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by Zod
It depends upon the game: Unreal 2 at 1600x1200 with 6xS FSAA and 8x aniso is not smooth enough on my FX5900 U coupled with a 3GHz P4 and 1GB of PC3500 and I see the jaggies if I switch off FSAA, so I run at 1280x960. Quake 3 on the other hand is no problem at all. The problem with older games is that the resolution often does not go high enough.

hehe I think Q3 and other games using the engine (not all) can go high enough ;) only problem for me @ 2048 or whatever it is, my refresh is about 72Hz :o

jAkUp
07-28-03, 08:27 PM
i play all games at 1600x1200 2xaa.. i cant stand to have aa turned off.. i notice it immediately, i see jaggies...


jaggies= bad:)

Smokey
07-28-03, 08:46 PM
I was just doing some testing with my gf3 and ravenshield, and I think this looks quite nice, shame I cant play with these settings, when I moved from this position, fps were under 20 :(

http://members.fortunecity.com/thesmokey/rvs.4xfsaa.8xaf.gif