PDA

View Full Version : GeForce4 image quality - need some HONEST opinions


ErrorS
08-20-02, 12:00 PM
Odd expecting any from a nVidia fansite.. but I need to know

I am either buying a Radeon8500, a Radeon9500(later down the road) or a GF4 Ti4200 .. As of now I'm 98% sure I'm not getting a GF4 because of image quality..

Only problem is I'm basing Radeon8500's image quality off of my Radeon1s.. which is nearly perfect (anis. filtering in OGL) .. and basing GF4s IQ off of what I see in reviews ..

This page here - http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1645&p=12

be HONEST.. is that what GF4s Anis. filtering looks like?(in comparison to GF4 pic) I know for a FACT that is what Radeon's Anis. filtering looks like(in comparison to my Radeon)..

I wouldn't mind some full screen screenshots of GF4 in quake3 if anyone has any.. with Anis. filtering.. just so I can see for myself how good GF4 looks..

and a couple of questions to people here.. reviewers never seem to cover this crap so asking a GF4 owner is the only way to find out..

Does GF4 support Anis. filtering in D3D? Officially?
Does GF4 have SuperSampling in both D3D and OGL? Heard a while back it did in OGL but not D3D..

I got a couple of problems here.. NO1 i am SPOILED by my Radeon1's good IQ.. the SSFSAA is perfect(slow but best looking with texture filterong on Radeon's Anis. filtering) .. I WILL play a game at 20fps to get the best possible IQ..

I can't get to a firm conclusion from all of these reviews.. SOme recent German reviews of the Radeon9700 show it looking like complete crap.. and the GF4 looking better then my Radeon1.. Most English reviews show Radeon9700 looking as good as my Radeon1(better because of the Trilinear filtering) with FSAA with the GF4 having crap Anis. filtering..

I know this is long.. but the main point is.. I wanna know EXACTLEY how nVidia's Anis. filtering LOOKS(not performs) .. without any bias PoV .. but in comparison to screenshots on other sites.. does your card look like that?

Thanks

Geek_
08-20-02, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by ErrorS
Does GF4 support Anis. filtering in D3D? Officially?
Does GF4 have SuperSampling in both D3D and OGL? Heard a while back it did in OGL but not D3D..


Umm.... No... and No respectively. Nvidia does not have support for AF in D3D in their drivers and Nvidia does not do Supersampling at all.... your welcome. ;)

FastM
08-20-02, 01:22 PM
Image quality this and image quality that....bah

These days it really just comes down to your monitor.

Renzo
08-20-02, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by Geek_


Umm.... No... and No respectively. Nvidia does not have support for AF in D3D in their drivers and Nvidia does not do Supersampling at all.... your welcome. ;)
If the drivers don't support anisotropic filtering in D3d, how come I am able to turn it on through registry OR from game options (and it works, though slower than OpenGL one)

No supersampling at all? Then how come OpenGL 4xS AA is using combination of supersampling and multisampling... at least according to nVidia and hardware reviewers.

thcdru2k
08-20-02, 07:46 PM
hmm thats weird i have a geforce4 ti4200..and AF seems to be working for me in d3d. you just need to use a program such as rivatuner or anything else. theres 8bit, 16, 32, and 64 bit anistropic in both performance optimized and quality optimized speeds. the image quality is good, and the speed is much faster than the radeon 8500. but if your gonna wait and get a radeon 9500 than get that its obviously going to be the best card when it comes out.

ErrorS
08-20-02, 08:08 PM
its not gonna be faster for sure.. the card i think is 4x1 (4 pipes 1 texture per pass or some technical worded **** i dont care about) .. pretty much effectively 128bit memory bus.. so 11GB/s at most.. in comparison to GF4 it's not much higher .. it might actually be slower then GF4 Ti4600 and for all I know it could be priced at $250 .. would make sense.. Radeon9000Pro @ 150 .. 9500 @ 250 .. 9700 @ 350 :-\

anyone by any chance have some quake3 settings with anis. maxed in 1024x768+ that they would be willing to upload somewhere so I could see?

RaggaMuffin
08-20-02, 09:41 PM
I tried anisotropic filtering in opengl on my ti4200 but had difficulty telling the difference in wolfenstein and quake. there was a noticeable improvement in medal of honor but it was a bit slow. the reasons why I got the gf4 over the 8500 is because the antialiasing is a lot faster, the drivers are better and it overclocks pretty well. Its a good bit cheaper in the UK too.

I had both a gf2 gts and radeon 1 at one point and found that the gf2 had terrible 2d quality in both desktop and dvd quality in comparison to the radeon. The gf2 was faster but this margin reduced with newer drivers. the xfx ti 4200 has easily as good 2d image quality as the original radeon

I would say get a ti 4200 because the image quality improvement/speed tradeoff by quincunx antialiasing outweighs other benefits that the 8500 might have in anisotropic filtering.

saturnotaku
08-20-02, 10:13 PM
As I've lost my webspace, the best I can do is some shots that highlight the differences between no anisotropic filtering and the max settings. These were taken from q3dm1, playing at 1600x1200 resolution, first with no anisotropic:

saturnotaku
08-20-02, 10:15 PM
And 8x aniso on the same map - BTW, the game was set to also run with trilinear filtering.

G6-200
08-20-02, 11:45 PM
People with low bandwidth connections, just hit stop on your browser. :)
These were taken on my GF4 with trilinear filtering enabled, with 4xAA also enabled.
They are also in PNG format to get nice image quality while still getting some compression.
However, each shot is over 1 MB in size.
Not much of a difference between 4x and 8x, I am using the 30.82 driver set.

anisotropic filtering disabled:
http://webpages.charter.net/madman11/NoAniso.png

2X anisotropic:
http://webpages.charter.net/madman11/2xAniso.png

4X anisotropic:
http://webpages.charter.net/madman11/4xAniso.png

8X (max) anisotropic:
http://webpages.charter.net/madman11/8xAniso.png

Cotita
08-21-02, 12:45 AM
I've just received my visiontek geforce4 ti4600 today upgrading from a geforce3 ti200.

I can't say there is any difference in IQ between the 4600 and the ti200 at least to my eyes.

They both have the same IQ even with AF and AA.

Of course the 4600 is soooooo much faster. Everything runs so smooth.

I've seen the Radeon 8500 in action and I gotta say I like the geforce 3/4 IQ better specially with AF.

Anyway I think you will be satisfied with either the radeon8500 or the geforce4 ti4200, both cards perform well and have great image quality.

ErrorS
08-21-02, 06:45 AM
well i noticed most people can't notice the difference between even having anis. on and off.. for some reason I can and I do.. heh.. i am the type of person to go into a game just to stand and stare at walls :x i bought Quake3 for benchmarking and screenshots alone..

G6-200 .. Surprised by your pics.. the LOD is sharp as can be and the anis. filtering looks great.. looks like you got vertex lighting on or your gamma sorta high and your FoV is ugly :p but overall GF4 looks surprisingly well..

and saturnotaku .. your pics look almost perfect (sharpness) ..

hmm.. taking what I've seen here into consideration .. I think i'm going to hold off and see how GF4 prices drop.. Not only will they most likely drop since Radeon9700 was released.. but isnt nvidia releasing a higher clocked AGP8X GF4 soon?

Thanks again everyone

imtim83
08-21-02, 08:00 AM
G6-200 or anyone please tell me why i can not see a difference in those 4 pictures of quake 3 arena when anisotropic filtering is disabled, then on 2x, then 4x, then 8x? They all look the same quality to me. Even with the one with no anisotropic filtering. I keep looking trying to see something different with them but i can't. I even went into quake 3 arena on my computer on the same board but i could not notice a difference. I keep looking at those pictures but i still see no difference. What am i looking for btw? I am looking like in the far away areas to see if it has more detail which i believe what anisotropic filtering does is give areas that further away from you more detail then when its off. i could be wrong.

Thanks.

StealthHawk
08-21-02, 08:07 AM
personally i don't think those shots were too great at illustrating AF. as for where to look, look at the space where the pad is, and the ground in front of it. the sharpness of the textures increases as higher degrees of AF are applied. although i see little to no difference in 4x/8x.

imtim83
08-21-02, 08:12 AM
StealthHawk i see tha sorta. I can barely notice a difference. But is that the only difference? Nothing else looks better like the ground, walls, etc. Plus it does not look much difference the pad. Heck it seems like to be AF disabled first pic and 8x AF last pic looks the same. Does AF only improve the sharpness of textures that are hardly noticeable inless you are trying to look for it?
It seems like turning on AF and FSAA makes such a small difference when i thought it would of made a huge difference in everything but i guess thats not the cause. I know FSAA fixes jaggies but i never see jaggies except maybe at 640x480 resolution which i never play at.

ErrorS
08-21-02, 08:49 AM
look at where the mipmapping starts.. looks like it's pushed back with the 8xAnis. filtering ..

and wtf.. maybe it does depend on monitors.. my A70 must kick ass

imtim83
08-21-02, 08:53 AM
I have a high quality, 19 inch monitor. Its a NEC Multisync FE950+ black monitor. A really good monitor. So i know its not that. I know my AF is working because i do get less fps.

G6-200
08-21-02, 12:00 PM
imtim83, save the no anisotropic and the 8x anisotropic on your PC and open them in seperate instances of MSPaint, then switch back and forth between them.
I guarantee you will see a pretty noticeable difference, look at the floor off towards the yellow armor.

jbirney
08-21-02, 12:56 PM
Ok these are old but here are two images of max ansio on R8500. They were taken on a fresh install of drivers back in early Dec of LAST year.

http://www.pc-gamers.net/jb/reviews/ati8500/q31.jpg

http://www.pc-gamers.net/jb/reviews/ati8500/q32.jpg

Sorry I dont have any thing newer on-line.


I own both the 8500 and GF4 Ti4200. Both are pretty good cards and both perfrom well. I have had no issues with either. Some things the GF4 is faster at, other things (like JK2 and RtCW) the 8500 eeks a touch a head. However the 8500 can not to tri-linear which depending on the game can lead to noticable mip-map lines. The 8500 also has an issue when things are rotated a 45 degrees on the Z axis. Due to a hardware bug it does not apply aniso. I have a SS shot of that:
http://www.pc-gamers.net/jb/reviews/SSSE/ScreenShots/ansi_rot_SSSE.jpg

For FPS this is the only room that I have ever saw this issue! For flight sims this would be a huge problem.

In all I can not recomend either to be much better than the other. If I would have to pick only one....then I would probably go for the GF4 Ti4200 just due that is has bit more speed in UT2003.

StealthHawk
08-21-02, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by imtim83
StealthHawk i see tha sorta. I can barely notice a difference. But is that the only difference? Nothing else looks better like the ground, walls, etc. Plus it does not look much difference the pad. Heck it seems like to be AF disabled first pic and 8x AF last pic looks the same. Does AF only improve the sharpness of textures that are hardly noticeable inless you are trying to look for it?
It seems like turning on AF and FSAA makes such a small difference when i thought it would of made a huge difference in everything but i guess thats not the cause. I know FSAA fixes jaggies but i never see jaggies except maybe at 640x480 resolution which i never play at.

yeah, the ground around the pad(towards the user) gets clearer with 2x and 4x. what G6-200 says is correct. the best way to see a difference is to switch between 2 shots, the human eye is very good at sensing movement, so any differences in image quality should be apparent.

imtim83
08-22-02, 06:45 AM
StealthHawk yeah but i don't notice the difference with the ground around the pad i only see very little difference with the pad itself. To me AF 2x,4x or 8x is not much different that with it off. It just does not look different at all. FSAA i can hardly notice either. Even with 4x FSAA and the other FSAA options. I tried pasting images in mspaint then look at them but i could not notice a difference still at all. I took a shot of the same area too.

ErrorS
08-22-02, 06:48 AM
i dunno why but i think that is soooo weird.. the diff settings for anis. filtering seem to stick out to me clear as hell.. maybe less so on a GF4 though ..

imtim83
08-22-02, 06:58 AM
ErrorS its almost like even with AF filtering off it still looks really good the games. I could just be someone who can't notice a difference for some reason :(
I wonder if i would notice the difference with AF and FSAA on a ATI 9700 pro. I have a feeling i would not lol.

ErrorS
08-22-02, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by imtim83
ErrorS its almost like even with AF filtering off it still looks really good the games. I could just be someone who can't notice a difference for some reason :(
I wonder if i would notice the difference with AF and FSAA on a ATI 9700 pro. I have a feeling i would not lol.

R9700 AF probably looks just like the 8500s.. with trilinear filtering though (better smoothing where the filtering starts) ..

R8500/9700's anis. filtering IS ALOT sharper then the GF4s .. however their is insane texture aliasing on 8500 some people can live with and some people cant..

i wish a 3rd competitor would come out with a card that does real anis. filtering

imtim83
08-22-02, 07:39 AM
ErrorS yeah. I wish the Kyro 3 was still coming out. And a Kyro 4 if they could of still been around. But i am just saying a Kyro 4. They never had any plans for a Kyro 4 but i am sure they would of.