PDA

View Full Version : The ultimate G80 FSAA comparison


sillyeagle
11-18-06, 10:09 PM
Side by side 2x is on the left followed by 4x, 8x, 8xQ, 16x, and finally 16xQ on the right.

Its most noticeable on the vertical post.

You can definitey see there is not as much color information with the CSAA modes, but the extra samples seems to make up for it in most cases.

http://sio.midco.net/111lll/FSAA.jpg

The respective performance numbers are:

2x - 137
4x - 107
8x - 74
8xQ - 52
16x - 73
16xQ - 37

As I often see 16x is running at the same speed as 8x but with superior results.

fivefeet8
11-19-06, 12:33 AM
Nice comparison, but I wouldn't necessarily call this the "ultimate g80 FSAA comparison". ChrisRay did a much more detailed comparison here:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33872731

It's at Rage3d, but how else was I going to get some of you to check out the other side. ;)

sillyeagle
11-19-06, 01:53 AM
Nice comparison, but I wouldn't necessarily call this the "ultimate g80 FSAA comparison". ChrisRay did a much more detailed comparison here:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33872731



I like the magnified side by side view, I think its the ultimate way to compare.

Dazz
11-19-06, 04:04 AM
Theres a diffrence from 2x and 4x but can't tell from there. i always found 4x to be enough.

Zeta
11-19-06, 07:04 AM
Wow, I agree. This just proves that I don't need to run more than 4x.

(I can see the difference past 4x but its minute compared to the difference from 2x to 4x)

Dazz
11-19-06, 07:12 AM
I would rather have 1680x1050 w/ 4x FSAA high high frame rates then 1680x1050 w/ 16x FSAA with ok frame rates.