Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-26-04, 08:28 PM   #31
Jarred
OUTCAST
 
Jarred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: south cali
Posts: 1,033
Default Re: AquaMark3 image quality comparison

those are a bit small, I can't tell the diff. :P
__________________
3d Artist
http://www.industryoutcast.com

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein
Jarred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-04, 08:53 PM   #32
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,191
Default Re: AquaMark3 image quality comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutty
Does seem a bit sharper on ATI.. its possible thats due from the optimized trilinear that seems to reduce blur a bit.

Mike could do you a bilinear 0AF comparison to see if there is a difference in blurriness then. This might show a difference in texture lod.
No problem. But you'll have to answer my questions first

Is sharper always better? Have we become accustomed to a specific texture filtering technique based on the graphics cards we've used in the past? Is the ultimate goal of texture filtering to simulate reality?

I added links to the 520x520 bilinear shots from frame 300 and 4300 and also added them to the two thumbnail comparisons. The frame 4300 thumbnail comparison contains one spot in particular where the Radeon X800 Pro doesn't appear to be applying any texture filtering.
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 05-27-04, 08:40 AM   #33
ntxawg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 77
Default Re: AquaMark3 image quality comparison

hmm i know its not noticable when your playing game, but flipping back and forth between nvidia's bi and tri, is there a reason why nvidia's bi looks slightly clearer then its tri? not that it matters much was just curious.

side note
MikeC, you wouldn't happen to have any refrast image would you? of just the bi and tri that is.

Last edited by ntxawg; 05-27-04 at 09:04 AM.
ntxawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-04, 07:15 PM   #34
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,191
Default Re: AquaMark3 image quality comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntxawg
MikeC, you wouldn't happen to have any refrast image would you? of just the bi and tri that is.
Sorry. Massive only provided reference images that use 4X AF.

MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-04, 07:18 PM   #35
jimmyjames123
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 665
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

Mike, you have any larger pics? I like looking at the larger pics and flipping back and forth repeatedly.
jimmyjames123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-04, 07:20 PM   #36
Jarred
OUTCAST
 
Jarred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: south cali
Posts: 1,033
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

yeah I can barely tell the diff,

(not to look a gift horse in the mouth) :P
__________________
3d Artist
http://www.industryoutcast.com

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein
Jarred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-04, 07:24 PM   #37
Kamel
Hardware Mass Murderer
 
Kamel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,035
Send a message via ICQ to Kamel Send a message via AIM to Kamel Send a message via MSN to Kamel Send a message via Yahoo to Kamel Send a message via Skype™ to Kamel
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

nice MikeC

maybe you could do something similar with enemy territory (of course, using a demo or something like that to make it standardized)... some maps in enemy territory show anistrophic filtering in bright and shining colors. most prominently is probably fuel dump.
__________________
hardware murdered so far: geforce 5900u, deceised: sat on it. geforce 6600gt deceised: improperly mounted heatsink. 3 asus a7n8x-e deluxe motherboards, deceised: unsure. mobile amd xp2600 processor, deceised: chipped core due to compusa heatsink. dfi lanparty ultra b, deceised: unsure, third memory bank went out. samsung cd burner 48x40x48, deceised: unsure, will only read pressed cd's very slowly. samsung TH552C dvd burner (dual layer), deceised: same as other samsung . 10gb seagate 5200rpm drive, deceised: tried fixing a pin that was pushed into the drive by inserting an ide cable upside down. 40gb maxtor drive, deceised: maxtor manufacturer. 80gb western digital, deceised: unnatural causes. swan xt10, deceised: brutal pre-meditated murder, even video taped (it wasn't y2k compliant). logitech mx510, deceised: death by electricution. ati remote wonder, deceised: death by electricution.
Kamel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-04, 07:38 AM   #38
Shamrock
Royalty gone awry
 
Shamrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,612
Default Re: AquaMark3 image quality comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeC
Sorry. Massive only provided reference images that use 4X AF.


I can tell the difference in this shot. Look at the little pile of yellow grass on the left. The Radeon's looks TOO crisp, while the 6800's looks a little blurred, like it should, at a distance.

would be better if I had a bigger picture, instead of squinting
__________________
They're after me Lucky Charms!

AMD Phenom II 955BE
16GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3 1333Mhz
Sapphire Radeon HD 7850
Logitech Z-5300 5.1 THX surround sound
HANNS-G 28" LCD
ZBoard Merc Gaming Keyboard
CoolerMaster HAF-932 Full Tower Case
Windows 7 Pro x64
Shamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-04, 03:40 PM   #39
gordon151
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 264
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

Uh, I don't think there is any grass in that picture.
gordon151 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-04, 07:54 AM   #40
Vapor Trail
the way out,is the way in
 
Vapor Trail's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 489
Default Re: Comparison from frame 300

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeC

Nice work Mike!! Very cool stuff.

Overall I'd say the shots above are very close in quality with the x800 shots being just a bit sharper or clearer.

When I looked at the larger pictures though it is very clear that the 6800 is much better on near vertical surfaces. There are many spots on rocks in the pics where the x800 blurs the details considerably.

Am I understanding it correctly that the x800 has trilinear optimizations on while the 6800 has them off in shese shots??

Last edited by Vapor Trail; 05-30-04 at 08:05 AM.
Vapor Trail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-04, 01:18 PM   #41
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

here are also more AQuamark3 screenshots..


http://www.pcpop.com/article/2004/909/37.shtml

but here it doesnt look like "TRylinear" is effective .

Last edited by Nv40; 05-30-04 at 01:29 PM.
Nv40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-04, 03:48 PM   #42
gordon151
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 264
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nv40
here are also more AQuamark3 screenshots..


http://www.pcpop.com/article/2004/909/37.shtml

but here it doesnt look like "TRylinear" is effective .
Though I'm sure you see it's ineffectiveness, but could you tell me where?
gordon151 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-04, 11:30 AM   #43
Blacklash
8^9^3
 
Blacklash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Vizima
Posts: 3,679
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by gordon151
Though I'm sure you see it's ineffectiveness, but could you tell me where?
There will be times when the Nvidia IQ appears sharper, I am not talking about Mip transitions here but rather AF sharpness. They use the SGI standard for OGL. Why does this mean anything? Well an old quote from a 3d center article explains it better than I could.

"In OpenGL, SGI - who spearheaded the inception of this API - use eight bits. That's also the standard that's followed by, eg, Nvidia that implements the 8 bit linear interpolation weight for both OpenGL and Direct3D. These three additional bits result in an eightfold increase in definition."

Now is Ati AF good? Yes, I think so. I have always been much more awed by thier AA personally. I do not think there is something wrong with a person if they do not see differences. The quality of both products is good. I think Ati has a clear edge in AA compared to nVidia, even now. nVidia 8XAA is very impressive and the performance hit is hideous. I prefer 6xAA in these cases.

So the cards have trade offs in strengths and weaknesses, always have. What is important is that the user like the IQ they are getting.
__________________
Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.96GHz (1.36v)|Mushkin 998681 XP3-12800 (3x2GB)
ASUS TUF Sabertooth (X58)|ASUS GTX 580 DirectCU II (980|4604)|ASUS PA246Q
WD VelociRaptor 150GB HD (x2)|Pioneer DVR-2920Q|LG GH22LS30|Klipsch PM20 2.0
SilverStone OP1000-E|SilverStone TJ10-B|Thermalright U-120 Extreme|Win 7 HP x64
Blacklash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-04, 04:33 PM   #44
gordon151
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 264
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

Malficar, my comment really wasn't that general. Just NV40 is like "but here it doesnt look like "TRylinear" is effective" and I go to the page and except for the R360 picture looking darker than the rest, they all look the same. So I'm guessing he sees something I dont .
gordon151 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 10-30-04, 10:02 PM   #45
iansmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8
Default Re: AquaMark 3 image quality comparison

After seeing some confusion on what AF is, I took some screenshots from Far Cry at various settings on a nVidia 6800.

http://www.ian.org/Remote/FarCry%206800%20AF.html

It's a good page to look at if you want to see some pretty clear diffrences in the level of AF filtering.

I'll add more later if I feel like it.
iansmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My UT2003 Tweak Guide DXnfiniteFX Gaming Central 48 10-30-02 11:59 PM
Someone please show me the difference in image quality on a ATI 9700 pro vs a GF4 ti? imtim83 Other Desktop Graphics Cards 70 10-22-02 01:25 AM
GeForce4 image quality - need some HONEST opinions ErrorS NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series 24 08-22-02 06:39 AM
Drive Image 2002 or Ghost? saturnotaku General Software 6 08-21-02 09:55 AM
Can't see improved image quality with AA/AF imtim83 NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series 17 08-05-02 02:30 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.