Originally Posted by Sean_W
Ironically, you do actually need a very powerful GPU like the GTX590 for all of those features on but you can bet the performance will drop like a stone in deep water.
AO doesn't ways look right either, since it applies it to most things on the screen that don't have AO. It's like the over use of SSAO in Crysis 2 and Burnout Paradise, which doesn't look good.
Features that enhance image quality also lower framerates? Ummm...yes, that's pretty much a rule.
Sometimes AO doesn't look right? OK, sounds good. I'd reply, "You still have the option to use it where it does look right and you can't on ATi cards on games that don't natively support AO.". Having it where it works >>>>>>>>not having it at all.
What's interesting about all of this is if ATi had these features and NVIDIA did not, a lot of people would be saying they are the ONLY things that matter. I remember an ATi fan telling me DX11 was the only thing that mattered when there was only one DX11 game out. And there were threads here and elsewhere that proclaimed morphological AA was the "deciding factor" because it adds AA to the 3 games that don't support AA and blurs them while destroying the HUD.
Yet when I post there are some features that work well in some games on NVIDIA products, and that they should be considered when buying a card, some act as if I've posted "The Earth is flat! They knew it in Columbus's day, it's still true now!".
Every feature I listed is unique to NVIDIA cards* and works well in some games on some NVIDIA hardware. Like the GTX590 the thread is about.
This may be what I like BEST about my GTX590. I can play on one monitor in 3d, I can play on three monitors in 3d. I can turn on PhysX, Cuda water, or AO, or not. The 590 gives me the option
to add immersion enhancing features while competitor's products limit me.
*with the exception of 3d, but the limitations of ATi's 3d are so great I don't consider it ready for market