• 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.

Exploring ATI Image Quality Optimizations by Guru3D

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
WelshBloke said:
This issue seems more about fanboys worrying that their company might be at a disadvantage rather than a concern about image quality.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and it appears that it is the AMD fanboys making up all types of excuses and redirects rather than seeing the issue for what it is since it is AMD who is at fault.

However, this is not an AMD vs NV issue.

If people are all about fairness and compairing apples to apples, then when a card gets sent out to be reviewed, then the driver that goes along with it shoudn't have anything set at default that the other company does not, such as ASO in this case, so that when the cards are tested they are on equal grounds. And, if it does..then whatever company that is needs to be upfront about it. That did not happen this time, and that is what the gripe is about. The optimization was not there before at default. And before the hot fix, there was no way to disable it except to set the filtering quality to high qaulity, which they did not seem to bother to tell anyone until asked directly about it.
 
Last edited:
Teizo said:
Yeah, and it appears that it is the AMD fanboys making up all types of excuses and redirects rather than seeing the issue for what it is since it is AMD who is at fault.

However, this is not an AMD vs NV issue.

If people are all about fairness and compairing apples to apples, then when a card gets sent out to be reviewed, then the driver that goes along with it shoudn't have anything set at default that the other company does not, such as ASO in this case, so that when the cards are tested they are on equal grounds. And, if it does..then whatever company that is needs to be upfront about it. That did not happen this time, and that is what the gripe is about.
Click to expand...


As I said this is not about image quality, its about a perceived unfairness.

You seem to be in agreement with me.

As I dont give a s**t who makes my video card all that matters to me is how fast it can render an image, if that image is of a comparable quality.

The only way you can be upset about this is if you have a 'team' and you think the ref is biased.
 
WelshBloke said:
The only way you can be upset about this is if you have a 'team' and you think the ref is biased.
Click to expand...
For some that is probably definitely the case. It is fanboy catnip. However, when it comes to the possible implications if not corrected, and how the industry is prone to conducting itself, it is also possible to be a bit peeved in that when you look at a review in order to make an informed buying decision...you are left wondering if the information is really all that accurate.

It's like any relationship. When trust erodes, the relationship is no longer a productive one.
 
Teizo said:
For some that is probably definitely the case. It is fanboy catnip. However, when it comes to the possible implications if not corrected, and how the industry is prone to conducting itself, it is also possible to be a bit peeved in that when you look at a review in order to make an informed buying decision...you are left wondering if the information is really all that accurate.

It's like any relationship. When trust erodes, the relationship is no longer a productive one.
Click to expand...

Thats why all that matters is image quality and speed. We have no way of knowing what optimisations either company use (and they both use them).

What the settings are called or where a slider is positioned means jack s**t.
 
Can you imagine the storm that would be created if nV was lowering IQ just to benchmark higher?

Between this and the "AMD" version of tesselation, I don't know how even the most loyal Zoners can defend them.
 
OCGuy said:
Can you imagine the storm that would be created if nV was lowering IQ just to benchmark higher?

Between this and the "AMD" version of tesselation, I don't know how even the most loyal Zoners can defend them.
Click to expand...

Do you think thats whats happening with AMD?
 
heflys said:
Trust erodes? How so? I'm more than certain that Nvidia has their own optimizations at standard quality. Only problem being that AMD gets better FPS.
Click to expand...
You can make this out to be a AMD vs NV issue and redirect all you want. You are missing the pont as to why the issue was brought up.

Fact is, at default, when in the NV control panel is at it's default, ASO is not enabled. Only Trillinear Filtering is. AMD this time around enabled ASO along side Trillinear at default, which before it was not. So there was an extra optimization enabled that Nvidia did not have. This is not a fair apples to apples comparison needed for true, objective, comparisons necessary for legitimate reviewing purposes.

The only people who are not upset by this move seem to be the ones who are happy that little red bar got a boost in fps in relation to that little green bar...even though it was not an accurate representation of the actual performance in a real apples to apples comparison.

It is not good for the gaming community in general to have such things done in such fashion since it was not disclosed and only fixed by a hot fix after the fact, and only after several review sites exposed the optimization.
 
Teizo said:
You can make this out to be a AMD vs NV issue and redirect all you want. You are missing the pont as to why the issue was brought up.

Fact is, at default, when in the NV control panel is at it's default, ASO is not enabled. Only Trillinear Filtering is. AMD this time around enabled ASO along side Trillinear at default, which before it was not. So there was an extra optimization enabled that Nvidia did not have. This is not a fair apples to apples comparison needed for true, objective, comparisons necessary for legitimate reviewing purposes.
Click to expand...

You do realise that AMD and NV both optimise differently, both apply AA differently, hell they render the image differently. There is no apples to apples.

I'll say it again, all that matters is what you can see on the screen.

Teizo said:
The only people who are not upset by this move seem to be the ones who are happy that little red bar got a boost in fps in relation to that little green bar...even though it was not an accurate representation of the actual performance in a real apples to apples comparison.

It is not good for the gaming community in general to have such things done in such fashion since it was not disclosed and only fixed by a hot fix after the fact, and only after several review sites exposed the optimization.
Click to expand...

I thought you said this wasn't about AMD vs NV?
 
OCGuy said:
What other reason would there be?

In a market where a few FPS can alter the whole perception of a line of cards that you have invested millions and millions in, anything is possible.
Click to expand...

So which games have a perceivable loss of image quality?
 
Teizo said:
You can make this out to be a AMD vs NV issue and redirect all you want. You are missing the pont as to why the issue was brought up.
Click to expand...

What? Didn't you just say something about "AMD fanboys," and that anyone who (essentially) doesn't agree that AMD is dishonest must be one?
 
WelshBloke said:
You do realise that AMD and NV both optimise differently, both apply AA differently, hell they render the image differently. There is no apples to apples.

I'll say it again, all that matters is what you can see on the screen.
Click to expand...
To a degree yes. Different hardware, different methods. However, enough people with clout are saying things are not being done in the right way for an objective comparison, and people that I respect, so I am inclined to believe them.


WelshBloke said:
I thought you said this wasn't about AMD vs NV?
Click to expand...
It isn't, but for some it sure seems like it can't be any other way.
 
OCGuy said:
I know you aren't being obtuse intentionally, correct?

I've seen enough of your posts to know that you understand what we are discussing.
Click to expand...

So you know what I'm getting at then?

Do you want to change
lowering IQ just to benchmark higher
Click to expand...
When we both know that the only games shown to have perceivable image quality loss aren't benchmarked, unless you know of some and then you could have just answered my question.
 
heflys said:
What? Didn't you just say something about "AMD fanboys," and that anyone who (essentially) doesn't agree that AMD is dishonest must be one?
Click to expand...
I don't think AMD is a dishonest company (as much as any Corporation can seen as being 'honest' when it comes to business), nor do I think they cheated. However, not telling people about the optimization in the first place until they were exposed does give them image issues they unfortunately are stuck to deal with because of.
 
Teizo said:
To a degree yes. Different hardware, different methods. However, enough people with clout are saying things are not being done in the right way for an objective comparison, and people that I respect, so I am inclined to believe them.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you are rabble that has been roused then, yes? :awe:

Personally I'm not going to get upset about something I cant notice just because someone else is.
 
Teizo said:
To a degree yes. Different hardware, different methods. However, enough people with clout are saying things are not being done in the right way for an objective comparison, and people that I respect, so I am inclined to believe them.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'm waiting for more investigation, since the only people I've seen make a big deal are a few german sites (whom I can't read), and Guru 3d, who says it isn't a cheat.
 
WelshBloke said:
Ah, so you are rabble that has been roused then, yes? :awe:

Personally I'm not going to get upset about something I cant notice just because someone else is.
Click to expand...
Well, I have yet to lose any sleep over it, if that is what you are wondering :awe:

heflys said:
Personally, I'm waiting for more investigation, since the only people I've seen make a big deal are a few german sites (whom I can't read), and Guru 3d, who says it isn't a cheat.
Click to expand...

Yeah, accusing someone of cheating is harsh. So saying AMD cheated is a bit off collar. However, Hilbert did agree it was there and made the plea to AMD to remove it, so for me that is all I needed to beleive since I don't think Hilbert would take the time to do such an article and state such given his reputation in the community.
 
Last edited:
SlowSpyder said:
Looked at the pics... Seriously this is what the uproar is about? Haha.. ok, continue the AMD hate. Get 'em Happy! 🙂 How dare AMD give an option in their drivers that makes the image look identical but speeds up performance and can be turned off! Grrrr..!
Click to expand...

Actually AMD should be given credit for giving ME (an AMD user) 5-10% extra performance for free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top