Anisotropic filtering a waste of GPU cycles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wblane
  • Start date Start date
W

Wblane

I was just reading an Extremetech article that suggested anisotropic filtering
was a waste of time and unnoticeable even at the highest settings. Anyone have
any thoughts? I'm thinking of disabling AF on my 9800 Pro and just going w/FSAA
now.
-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
 
I was just reading an Extremetech article that suggested anisotropic filtering
was a waste of time and unnoticeable even at the highest settings. Anyone have
any thoughts? I'm thinking of disabling AF on my 9800 Pro and just going w/FSAA
now.
-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
Click to expand...


It may depend on the game, but I find anisotopic filtering looks
significantly better on flight sim games like IL2:Forgotten Battles.
Try it on/off and see if you miss it.
 
I was just reading an Extremetech article that suggested anisotropic filtering
was a waste of time and unnoticeable even at the highest settings. Anyone have
any thoughts? I'm thinking of disabling AF on my 9800 Pro and just going w/FSAA
now.
-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
Click to expand...

As the other person said, it depends on the game. In some games it
really helps stop texture shimmering, like European Air War. Best
thing is to get Radlinker and then set each game to your individual
preference because for most games AF is a waste of GPU horsepower.
 
Personally I dont both with either. FSAA blurs not only the edges of
polygons but textures and text too which for me looks ugly. I have used AF
and liked it but its no big gain. Im happy playing at 1024x768 with
trilinear and if the framerates 30+ thats all I need.
 
Sleepy said:
Personally I dont both with either. FSAA blurs not only the edges of
polygons but textures and text too which for me looks ugly. I have
used AF and liked it but its no big gain. Im happy playing at
1024x768 with trilinear and if the framerates 30+ thats all I need.
Click to expand...

You got me there!!
Dang,then I am NOT THE ONLY that says that FSAA blurs everything and looks
crappy!
Especially text.. everything looks like "fat" and "blurred" due to the edge
lines growing THICK.. I do not like at all the FSAA.

I ordered a 9700pro that will arrive in a couple of days, and I will change
my Ti4600

I just switched cause I love AnisoF that is awesome (in some games of
course).

I am sure I will play with AF8x (I think 16x is useless) and WITHOUT FSAA,
at 1024 all the times ^_^
--

~Yra Ghore
[Arcane Vaultkeeper]

Yra Gore - Origin Ultima Online OSI Europa Shard
Yra Ghore - Undead Scourge - Warcraft III Northrend
 
||Personally I dont both with either. FSAA blurs not only the edges of
||polygons but textures and text too which for me looks ugly. I have used AF
||and liked it but its no big gain. Im happy playing at 1024x768 with
||trilinear and if the framerates 30+ thats all I need.
||

Keep in mind that while TRILINEAR is forced on, it negates anisotropic
filtering.

Pluvious


||||> I was just reading an Extremetech article that suggested anisotropic
||filtering
||> was a waste of time and unnoticeable even at the highest settings. Anyone
||have
||> any thoughts? I'm thinking of disabling AF on my 9800 Pro and just going
||w/FSAA
||> now.
||> -Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
||
 
Keep in mind that while TRILINEAR is forced on, it negates anisotropic
filtering.

Pluvious
Click to expand...
What does that mean? I know with ATI cards it requires some extra work
but its not like trilinear anisotropic filtering doesn't exist.
 
You got me there!!
Dang,then I am NOT THE ONLY that says that FSAA blurs everything and looks
crappy!
Especially text.. everything looks like "fat" and "blurred" due to the edge
lines growing THICK.. I do not like at all the FSAA.
Click to expand...

The only game that I have ever had a problem with text blurring with
FSAA is BF1942, and even then it is something I live with as FSAA is
very important to me.
 
I think he's going back to the 8500, AF didn't work with that if trilinear
filtering was on. I think the 9500-up series are fixed though. I
personally can't stand playing without AA and use 4xAA 8xAF as a rule,
everything is very sharp and nice in CoD and KOTOR. And the jaggies are
gone as well as far less adge shimmering. I ussually use 1152 or 1280 res.
9800np at pro speeds/xp2500@3200speed+
Mike

Inglo said:
Keep in mind that while TRILINEAR is forced on, it negates anisotropic
filtering.

Pluvious
Click to expand...
What does that mean? I know with ATI cards it requires some extra work
but its not like trilinear anisotropic filtering doesn't exist.

--
Benford's Modified Clarke Law:
Any technology that does not appear magical is insufficiently advanced.

Steve [Inglo]
Click to expand...
 
The extremetech article I read compared images w/Trilinear + anisotropic and
Bilinear + anistropic so they can't be mutually exclusive.
Keep in mind that while TRILINEAR is forced on, it negates anisotropic
filtering.

Pluvious
Click to expand...


-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
 
I was just reading an Extremetech article that suggested anisotropic filtering
was a waste of time and unnoticeable even at the highest settings. Anyone have
any thoughts? I'm thinking of disabling AF on my 9800 Pro and just going w/FSAA
now.
-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
Click to expand...

I prefer to use only AAx2-4 just to smooth out the jaggies a little
bit, nothing more.
 
On 18 Feb 2004 07:12:30 GMT, (e-mail address removed) (Wblane) wrote:

||The extremetech article I read compared images w/Trilinear + anisotropic and
||Bilinear + anistropic so they can't be mutually exclusive.
||
||>Keep in mind that while TRILINEAR is forced on, it negates anisotropic
||>filtering.
||>
||>Pluvious
||
||
||-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)

Hmm.. guess I was misinformed. My bad.

Pluvious
 
Is there any point to using AA at extremely high resolutions (say 1600x1200 or
1280x1024)? I'd figure the fact that there's so many pixels would offset the
jaggies (aliasing?) to some degree right?
I prefer to use only AAx2-4 just to smooth out the jaggies a little
bit, nothing more.
Click to expand...


-Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
 
Is there any point to using AA at extremely high resolutions (say 1600x1200 or
1280x1024)? I'd figure the fact that there's so many pixels would offset the
jaggies (aliasing?) to some degree right?
Click to expand...

To some degree, but personally I hate the shimmering you get when you
move without FSAA, especially noticeable in driving games with
chainlink fence by the side of the track, or in FPS games on the
ground usually near the centre of the screen. Thats why I much prefer
1024x768 with FSAA over 1600x1200 without.
 
You got me there!!
Dang,then I am NOT THE ONLY that says that FSAA blurs everything and looks
crappy!
Especially text.. everything looks like "fat" and "blurred" due to the edge
lines growing THICK.. I do not like at all the FSAA.
Click to expand...

That only happenes on low resolutions like 1024x768.
I am sure I will play with AF8x (I think 16x is useless) and WITHOUT FSAA,
at 1024 all the times ^_^
Click to expand...

At 1024 8x might be to low. I remeber expermenting with different
resolitons and AA/AF settings. In JK2:JO I've set the resolution to 1280
and try switching between different aniso modes - there was no
difference, but when I changed do 800x600, 16XQuality wasn't enough.
Allso I noticed that higher resolutions with a lower AA/AF setting look
a lot better, nicer and crisper than lower resolutions and higher AA/AF
settings. Eg. 1280x1024/2XAA/4XAF looks better than 1024X768/4xAA/8xAF.
 
Marko said:
That only happenes on low resolutions like 1024x768.
Click to expand...

Too right, anything less than 1600x1200 is just girly :-P (It does look
nice at 85Hz, too)
At 1024 8x might be to low. I remeber expermenting with different
resolitons and AA/AF settings. In JK2:JO I've set the resolution to 1280
and try switching between different aniso modes - there was no
difference, but when I changed do 800x600, 16XQuality wasn't enough.
Allso I noticed that higher resolutions with a lower AA/AF setting look
a lot better, nicer and crisper than lower resolutions and higher AA/AF
settings. Eg. 1280x1024/2XAA/4XAF looks better than 1024X768/4xAA/8xAF.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If you're thinking of going higher than 2xAA and need to drop a
resolution, don't bother.

I tend not to run AA at all, since it didn't work with Splinter Cell and
1600x1200 is "enough" :-p

AF is nice when the textures have something detailed on them, especially
when the geometry of those shapes matters, such as text in the distance.

Ben
 
Well i can see a major difference. In fact, i would choose AF over AA
anyday... I don't even use AA, and just run at high resolution. But, i
always have my AF set at 16x on my 9700 Pro, and my games are much more
vivid in color, more bold, and i can see more detail deeper into the
environment. If you aren't going to do 16x, then don't bother because you
won't see much of a difference. 16x AF is beautiful to me though and i would
never go without it
 
Here's a link with comparison pictures with 4xFSAA and without, at 1280x1024
and 1600x1200.
http://www.slottweak.com/ati Ti4400.htm
Look particularly at the 'GPL suspension parts' pictures and the 'Nascar
Heat quality' shots.
There's quite a difference.
Of course, I still think the best FSAA was with the V5-5500 :-)

Gary
 
Too right, anything less than 1600x1200 is just girly :-P (It does look
nice at 85Hz, too)
Click to expand...

I have to use 1400x1050, because 1600x1200 diplays at only 75Hz on my
Syncmaster 757NF.
 
Marko said:
I have to use 1400x1050, because 1600x1200 diplays at only 75Hz on my
Syncmaster 757NF.
Click to expand...

Fortunately my Sony E400 was replaced by the G400 when I had problems with
it, so I am now able to do 85Hz at that res. 80Hz is the minimum for me,
otherwise I can see the flicker.

Ben
 
Back
Top