PDA

View Full Version : CMR05 : Which screen looks better ?


Pages : [1] 2

SH64
01-01-05, 11:42 PM
Ok i'm investgating Colin McRae Rally 2005's AF . so i want you guys to check these pics & tell which looks better (in term of Filtering) & which takes 2nd place & which 3rd place :D
after sometime i'll tell which screen has which AF/Quality settings & what video card used (NV/ATI) .


Pic (1) (http://img91.exs.cx/img91/8476/cmr05110si.jpg)
Pic (2) (http://img75.exs.cx/img75/4602/cmr0526rz.jpg)
Pic (3) (http://img11.exs.cx/img11/3379/cmr0536fj.jpg)


also i'd like to note that the in-game AF isnt working on both NV & ATi drivers ??! :confused: .. i had to force it through CP to work . anyone else getting this ?? nv 67.02 , ATi 4.12

jAkUp
01-02-05, 12:07 AM
Best: Pic 3
2nd Best: Pic 1
Last: Pic 2

rewt
01-02-05, 12:25 AM
I agree with jAkUp 100%

Best screenshot is #3.

But it might have be best quality while in motion. It looks to have a very high LOD (which can cause texture shimmering).

-=DVS=-
01-02-05, 12:42 AM
3rd got best AF and texture quality then 2nd and 1st.

Darkoz
01-02-05, 01:03 AM
Best= 3
Second= 1
Last= 2

SH64
01-02-05, 01:12 AM
Interesting ;) .. & i hope people dont base there opinions on the others .

jAkUp
01-02-05, 01:13 AM
Tell us which is which! I really wanna know :)

Pictures 1 & 3 look very close in quality to me... Picture 2 doesnt look so great however...

SH64
01-02-05, 01:21 AM
Tell us which is which! I really wanna know :)

Pictures 1 & 3 look very close in quality to me... Picture 2 doesnt look so great however...

I want to see more answers & more poll votes first because if it went the way i think its going .. the subject might get interesting ;)

jAkUp
01-02-05, 01:57 AM
Keep us posted ;)

rewt
01-02-05, 02:20 AM
Were the settings in those screenshots kept equal?

Screen 2 looks almost as if there is no AF.

RanCorX2
01-02-05, 02:52 AM
anyone noticed bottom left in picture 3 the board is kinda dodgy looking its got 2 different textures on it, don't look right, guess its just a game bug or a dev screwing up while texturing, *no wait its in all of them ok i guess its supposed to be like that. :P

Absolution
01-02-05, 03:25 AM
picture 3's road seems to be clear'r at a long distance

Mojoe
01-02-05, 05:04 AM
Pic 3 look best and then comes Pic 1.

rewt
01-02-05, 05:09 AM
#3 looks sharper to me.

NoWayDude
01-02-05, 05:19 AM
Pic 3 looks the best, but it also looks loke u twinkle with the lod bias (very crisp but very granulated image).But that is just me
I reckon pic 2 ATI,Pic 1 Nvidia, and 3 Nvidia with lod bias tweak w/ rivatuner
(and of course if i get this right i'm buying a lotery ticket ASAP :))

Johnny Chimpo
01-02-05, 06:35 AM
I checked out the pictures before reading the whole thread.

pic 3 - best
pic 1
pic 2 - worst

|MaguS|
01-02-05, 07:24 AM
Think the first looks the best, I see some graininess in both the 2nd and 3rd.

Open all the pictures and align them so they are equal, flip back and forth and look at the hood of the card and the top right side of the car. It looks smoother on the 1st picture. Atleast for me it does.

Uken
01-02-05, 08:48 AM
pic 3 - best
pic 1 - better
pic 2 - just good

SH64
01-02-05, 09:08 AM
Ok .. i see most people picked the 3rd pic to look the best ... well heres the shocker :
Pic (1) is X800 (4.12) 8xAF, HQ
Pic (2) is 6800 (67.02) 8xAF , HQ ( all opt OFF , LOD : Allow)
Pic (3) is 6800 (67.02) 8xAF , Q ( all opt ON , LOD : Allow)

now before anyone thinks i got the screenshots mixed up , let me tell you that i checked them several times . further more .. the fps in the HQ pic(2) is 30fps while the Q pic(3) is 33fps .. thats about 10% difference .
also i'm surprised how no one mentioned how the curve's black/yellow stripes looked better (smoother) in the second pic which shows better filtering for that part of the screen .

so do you think its a driver bug ?? if its then why i'm getting higher performance with higher LOD detail ? & better filering in other parts of the screen on the other HQ shot ??
as for the ATi pic in the compasrion .. it seems to look less detailed (as most of you voted) although it was set to HQ but looked to be just in the middle position between the other NV pics .

as for the shimmering .. it can easily get ridden off by setting the AF to 16x in both NV/ATi drivers as i tested . well at least 80% of it .

strange isnt it ??

particleman
01-02-05, 09:59 AM
Well although the cards have already been revealed I thought number 2 looked the best because it showed the least amount of graininess on the slanted hill on the left hand side. Not sure if that was due to the jpeg compression though.

SH64
01-02-05, 10:09 AM
Well although the cards have already been revealed I thought number 2 looked the best because it showed the least amount of graininess on the slanted hill on the left hand side. Not sure if that was due to the jpeg compression though.

Indeed the compression changed the hill detail a little bit , but again if you compare it (pic 2) with pic (3) the slanted hill graininess looked less too .

Vagrant Zero
01-02-05, 10:14 AM
Best: 3
Mid : 1
Worst: 2

I'm betting 3 is from the ATI card.

SH64
01-02-05, 10:23 AM
Best: 3
Mid : 1
Worst: 2

I'm betting 3 is from the ATI card.

Check my other post above ^
(xmasgrin)

Vagrant Zero
01-02-05, 10:44 AM
Check my other post above ^
(xmasgrin)

Ah...I guess this is one of those few instances where NOT reading the thread before posting was a good thing.

Wow though...that really doesn't make a lick of sense but hey, considering I play everything at Q I'll take it.

rewt
01-02-05, 01:04 PM
That is odd. HQ looking worse than Q ?? Hmmmm. I'd be curious to see a shot of the 71.24's at HQ 8x AF.