AF worth it?

[imported_tss4]

So it looks like most people say that you're better off running at 1600x1200 no AA than 1200x1024 with 4xAA. Since the higher res is better at reducing jaggies than AA is. So my new question is, is the AF really worth the drop in frame rate and if it is, is it necessary to use 8x or is 2x or 4x just as good visually? And also is there a good article showing the difference between AF and no AF images.

 

[Cerb]

Try it and see. Nobody can judge it except for you.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: Cerb
Try it and see. Nobody can judge it except for you.

Agreed.

 

[newb54]

I depends on the game for me. For UT2k4 I prefer 1600X1200 and no AF.

 

[ShawnD1]

Is AF worth it? Hell yes.

Have a look at this picture of a floor texture with no AF
no AF

See that very noticable blurry line? That's what happens when you disabled AF.

 

[Acanthus]

It depends on the game / graphics engine.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Is AF worth it? Hell yes.

Have a look at this picture of a floor texture with no AF
no AF

See that very noticable blurry line? That's what happens when you disabled AF.

That is a still image.

Would you really about care the blurry line when you are busy hunting down opponents in UT2004?

 

[Mem]

I would rather run with some AF and no AA if I had too in a game,bottom line for me AF is a must,AA I`m not bothered if it`s there or not(infact most times I don`t use AA).

I do agree with the guys that only you can really decide ,since it`s really a personal preference thing, so no right or wrong .

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: newb54
I depends on the game for me. For UT2k4 I prefer 1600X1200 and no AF.

True, faster moving games look better at high res; slower games (ie Halo) look great with AF on.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Is AF worth it? Hell yes.

Have a look at this picture of a floor texture with no AF
no AF

See that very noticable blurry line? That's what happens when you disabled AF.

That is a still image.

Would you really about care the blurry line when you are busy hunting down opponents in UT2004?

Looks like a movie to me, Captain Obvious.

Anyway... I'd definately care about all the blurry lines (there's more than one) because they become even more noticeable when you're moving. Nobody wants to see bands rolling across the floor as they move.

 

[ShawnD1]

Well since that blurriness completely screws up your ability to judge distance, yes I would say it matters a lot.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Is AF worth it? Hell yes.

Have a look at this picture of a floor texture with no AF
no AF

See that very noticable blurry line? That's what happens when you disabled AF.

No, that's what happens when you have trilinear filtering disabled or have it in anything but quality mode (assuming you can change those settings, depending on your card and driver).

 

[imported_tss4]

where did you see that changing from quality mode to performance mode causes banding? All the info I've seen on the web said there was no noticeable difference between performance mode and quality mode.

But yes, trilinear filtering is what prevents banding. AF only improves the appearance of textures at distance.

 

[RussianSensation]

Even with a slow videocard, the visual difference with 2AF vs 2AA and 4AF vs 4AA is always more rewarding for me. Of course my card cant even run 4AA at 1600x1200 in any game so i try to play old games at highest resolution first, and then see how much AF i can enable. I think generally though before enabling AA/AF, one should first max out the res because that usually results in the greatest improvement. But that's my opinion.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Is AF worth it? Hell yes.

Have a look at this picture of a floor texture with no AF
no AF

See that very noticable blurry line? That's what happens when you disabled AF.

That is a still image.

Would you really about care the blurry line when you are busy hunting down opponents in UT2004?

Depends on the person, that line stays a CONSTANT distance in front of you. It basically segments your view. As you run there can be a very noticeable 'line' running in front of you like he carrot you can never reach. That can be annoying, but not a total killer.

Visual quality is about what is best for YOU. If you are fine with that line in front of you everywhere you go, that is GREAT, because you don't need to buy as hefty a graphics card for you to be pleased.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

i use neither, infact i have never used them in games......and now i wont.....so i wont know what im missing therefore i am really content wit ut 2004 at high settings and at 1024x768....looks great to me, speed is my main concern, im too busy focusing on killin ppl rather than notice how blurry textures get 5ft away.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: tss4
where did you see that changing from quality mode to performance mode causes banding? All the info I've seen on the web said there was no noticeable difference between performance mode and quality mode.

But yes, trilinear filtering is what prevents banding. AF only improves the appearance of textures at distance.

Not only distance, but angle. The closer it is to parallel to your viewing angle, the more flat it will look, and the more it needs AF.

 

[JBT]

I LOVE AF so yes it is worth it to me.

 

[BFG10K]

AF is definitely needed - so much so that you should leave it on at 16x performance at all times. The performance hit is miniscule compared to the benefits you get from it.