Can everyone here notice the difference when FSAA and AF is turned on ?

[WyteWatt]

 

[GarlicBreath]

Yes, because:

1) The frame rate drops
2) AA reduces the jaggies and causes things to appear slightly blurry to me.
3) Anistropic filtering makes surfaces appear to be "in focus" from further away. Greater detail is seen at longer distances.

 

[rbV5]

No, not everyone.

 

[ToBeMe]

41

 

[Sunner]

Well, with FSAA everything slows down, and things look slightly better, though not as good as they would by simply increasing the res.
Don't know how AF looks since I've never used it.

Running a GF3 Ti200@250/250 BTW.

 

[WyteWatt]

ToBeMe huh? This is nothing about anything. You are just mad.

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: imtim83
ToBeMe huh? This is nothing about anything. You are just mad.

Mad???? I'm laughing................

 

[Wolfsraider]

yes on a 21 inch i use it frequently and notice a picture that isn't as blocky that looks smoother when running and that definatly reduces framerates but then again i got my monitor off a cad machine

 

[GoSharks]

FSAA, not as much. i can tell that it is there becuase of the blurry text that it comes along with it. *2x quality, r8500*
AF, most definitly. everything in the distance is just so clear with it. I got downstairs to watch my brother play cs on his non-AF enabled GF2, and its like OMG, that is so ugly!

 

[dexvx]

Its like the 16 vs 32bit color debate all over again.

You probably wont notice much right away, unless you were comparing side to side and look closely. But if you enable it and use it for awhile and then switch back to disabling it. You'd be like wtF?

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: ToBeMe
41

ROFLMAO,

I just got it...

I wonder what 42 will be...

Author : imtim83
Subject : C'mon... doesn't anyone else lay in bed at night and dream of little nv30's dancing around in their room?

 

[bluemax]

If 42 is the answer to all questions and (etc.... anyone remember the exact quote? Some sort of HitchHikers' Guide to the Galaxy thing...)

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: bluemax
If 42 is the answer to all questions and (etc.... anyone remember the exact quote?) maybe we'll finally settle the AMD vs. Intel vs. nVidia vs. ATI vs. intim83 lunacy?

The question is "How many topics on nVidia vs ATI has imtim83" made since July... thank ToBeMe for the answer

My guess is that the intent of this thread is to downplay the visual improvements of FSAA and AF so that the R300 doesn't seem as amazing (when compared to a GF4) as it really is. So this thread definatly counts towards the total.

I'm looking forward to 42.

 

[BFG10K]

Anybody who can't notice changes when anisotropic filtering or FSAA is enabled has probably never even seen a game.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Anybody who can't notice changes when anisotropic filtering or FSAA is enabled has probably never even seen a game.

apoppin can't . . . He stupidly insists that a GF3/8500 will run Doom III.







(yeah, right)

 

[Alex]

does a bear sh!t in the woods?

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Anybody who can't notice changes when anisotropic filtering or FSAA is enabled has probably never even seen a game.

apoppin can't . . . He stupidly insists that a GF3/8500 will run Doom III.







(yeah, right)

I'm not sure if you ever said that, but you did say

Even Doom III will NOT take advantage of the R300 or NV30 as it is optimized for the Radeon 8500 and GF3.


Which is kinda like saying that Quake3 would not take advantage of a Geforce3 because it was optimized for the TnT 24b/8bit stencil.

 

[mchammer187]

if you can tell the difference between jagged and straight yes

if you can tell the difference between clear and blurry yes

 

[BFG10K]

He stupidly insists that a GF3/8500 will run Doom III.

Stop twisting the argument. I never denied that the cards couldn't physically run Doom3, the issue was always about performance.

 

[Sunner]

Well, Carmack himself stated that a GF3 would be able to play Doom III with all the bells and whistles turned on, at 800x600x32, and get "playable framrates", which if I remember correctly meant ~30 FPS.

And really, 30 FPS is good enough for a single player game, it's nowhere near perfect, but good enough.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

He stupidly insists that a GF3/8500 will run Doom III.

Stop twisting the argument. I never denied that the cards couldn't physically run Doom3, the issue was always about performance.

I never said you didn't . . . our issue was on "how well". Come on now, can't you tell when someone is making fun of themselves? (I was replying to your statement: Like I "never even seen a game"). Did you miss the ?

Even Doom III will NOT take advantage of the R300 or NV30 as it is optimized for the Radeon 8500 and GF3.

Now that's "twisting" (or taking out of context). Of course the 9700 will run DIII BETTER than the GF3/8500 - it's just that DIII's engine was finalized before R300 was released and it won't take full advantage of the 9700's capabilities. (To be fair - Some others evidently misunderstood and questioned me about this and I explained my statement fully in the long thread.)

 

[Boogak]

Yes

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: BFG10K

He stupidly insists that a GF3/8500 will run Doom III.

Stop twisting the argument. I never denied that the cards couldn't physically run Doom3, the issue was always about performance.

I never said you didn't . . . our issue was on "how well". Come on now, can't you tell when someone is making fun of themselves? (I was replying to your statement: Like I "never even seen a game"). Did you miss the ?

Even Doom III will NOT take advantage of the R300 or NV30 as it is optimized for the Radeon 8500 and GF3.

Now that's "twisting" (or taking out of context). Of course the 9700 will run DIII BETTER than the GF3/8500 - it's just that DIII's engine was finalized before R300 was released and it won't take full advantage of the 9700's capabilities. (To be fair - Some others evidently misunderstood and questioned me about this and I explained my statement fully in the long thread.)

I twist nothing!!! That whole other thread was twisted though... although I did read the entire thread and I was amazed that it remained an "informative discussion" rather than a flame fest. After I read it, I was confused as to whether or not I wanted a 9700

 

[bluemax]

Isn't that GIGA-Watts? What the heck is a "Jigga"? Is that where you do a little dance while being zapped with a cattle-prod?



There's tons of stupidity in these threads already, might as well make it totally looney!
bloobloobloo-ba-loooooooooooo!!!!

 

[BCompDude]

I never play with FSAA. . .but I play with FAA . And I can tell the difference immediately. . .the difference is huge. I can play at 800 by 600 and it honest to God looks like 1600X1200. It also doesn't blur the textures so I don't need AF on like for FSAA. But I do play with FSAA on with my Geforce 3 and it still looks a helluva lot better than w/o IMHO.