• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anti-aliasing vs Anisotropic filtering

N

NoQuarter

Golden Member
Just out of curiosity, given the choice what does everyone prefer?

Between the two not having anisotropic filtering bugs the hell out of me, I can't stand the muddy textures without it at 16x. But my buddy can't stand the jaggies you get without high antialiasing which don't bother me at all.


So.. antialiasing or anisotropic filtering? Which can't you live without?
 
I like both equally. I've been running 16xAF as a minimum since 2002, but unfortunately not all games allow AA.
 
AA I usually don't use, simply because my old 8800GT sometimes has problems with it. But in other games such as Entropia Universe that uses CryEngine 2, i play that High Detail with 8x AA and it runs great. But i play Divinity II sometimes and its a nightmare with AA on for me, but then again its a nightmare trying to play that in general with win7. not sure why though, works fine on vista x64

But some games just look very bad without it so im forced to turn it up.

But AF has a much less performance impact than AA in my experience. So its pretty much 16x all the time unless the app doesn't support it (and i dont force any settings).
 
AF is a must and AA on a game by game basis if I feel I need it. of course many games dont allow AA as BFG10K already pointed out.
 
At 1920+ AA becomes a bit less important.

AS in my opinion is more important, the moire patterns without it drive me nuts.
 
AF is practically free these days. I don't see it as an either/or situation.
 
Not all games support AA these days, but I feel AF is far superior. Unless you stand around looking at static images all day, you won't notice AA much during a game, but you will definitely see the effects of AF (unless you are playing an indoors shooter) since its very typical to look ahead on the screen.

Also AA doesn't help much when you are in motion, the jaggedness returns.
 
Astrallite said:
you won't notice AA much during a game
Click to expand...
I'm sure that is true for higher resolutions (such as 1920x1080), but for those gaming at 1280x1024 / 1440x900 / 1344x768 / 1024x768, no AA is a punishment. I have experienced this even in games like Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Dragon Age. Without AA, it looks (to me, at least) that the jagged edges are jumping right out at you or trying to blind you with their sparkle.

Although, as mentioned already, AF doesn't seem to have much impact in performance. I have personally never experienced needing to decrease AF just to be playable, most of the time it would be lowering AA from 8x to 4x which makes any difference that I can notice.
 
AF is my preference if I have to choose but a I'll take a combination of AA/AF if the performance is acceptable.
 
I always leave AF on for all my games, but drop it to 8x for more demanding games like Crysis. It runs a bit faster than 16x, and is virtually identical in image quality as far as I'm concerned.
 
SinxarKnights said:
But i play Divinity II sometimes and its a nightmare with AA on for me, but then again its a nightmare trying to play that in general with win7. not sure why though, works fine on vista x64
Click to expand...

Divinty II's AA is broken. There's no way to even force it. I bought it, but I'm not playing it until they get it fixed. Game looks like something from 2002 without it.
 
It really depends on the pixel pitch of a monitor - on some the jaggies are just way too severe and requires AA a lot more than other monitors, of which AF would be far more important

Granted, when considering the performance cost, AF really hasn't been a performance killer for several years now and thus I'll often just force my drivers to 16x AF as the default setting for all games.
 
Don't notice AF much, & it can always be enabled without performance issues anyway.

AA is the big thing for me, especially as lots of UE3 games don't work properly with it. :\
 
My video card isn't fast enough in new titles for AA, but I'm pushing it at 1920x1080. Older titles it does help, but jaggies for me anyways at 1920x1080 don't bother me that much.
 
For most games i like to keep at least 2x AA up. I see a large difference playing on my 1920x1080 screen.

Mass Effect 2 was my most recent game where the difference between 0 aa and 2aa was huge.
 
bryanW1995 said:
how much of a performance improvement do you see in crysis when going from 16x AF down to 8x?
Click to expand...

It's been a long time so I can't remember too well, but I think it might have been about 5-10% in some cases. Not much, but I was trying to eke out as much performance as I could.
 
Anyone who says you won't notice AA must be crazy. I game @ 1920x1080 on a 23" monitor and definitely notice it. Obviously there's less need since the pixels are smaller but I still have yet to play a game that didn't need it. Maybe if you have a tiny 21" monitor @ 1080 but any regular size would need it.
 
better to have low level aa+af than just one of either. muddy textures are horrible. jagged artifacts and pixel poppery make clear textures pointless. aa just makes everything look rendered right.
 
zerocool84 said:
Anyone who says you won't notice AA must be crazy. I game @ 1920x1080 on a 23" monitor and definitely notice it. Obviously there's less need since the pixels are smaller but I still have yet to play a game that didn't need it. Maybe if you have a tiny 21" monitor @ 1080 but any regular size would need it.
Click to expand...
On a 30" @ 2560x1600, I can honestly say I don't notice it unless I look for it (as in, I never stop playing the game and say "man those jaggies there look like shit"). But then again, I actually play games.

Anyway, 16x AF in every game for me, and 4x AA where allowed (performance/application permitting).
 
MrK6 said:
On a 30" @ 2560x1600, I can honestly say I don't notice it unless I look for it (as in, I never stop playing the game and say "man those jaggies there look like shit"). But then again, I actually play games.

Anyway, 16x AF in every game for me, and 4x AA where allowed (performance/application permitting).
Click to expand...


That's because you are not picky. I can clearly see aliasing on mine and it bothers me.

However just like you 16xAF is hardset globally, and 4xAA in-game where performance permits. 4xAA is almost free these days 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top