GF4 Aniso performance

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Taken from Anand's 9700 review:

Anisotropic Filtering Performance
UT2003 dm-antalus @ 1024x768

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 104.7

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (2X Aniso) 58.0

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (4X Aniso) 42.0

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (8X Aniso) 36.6

That 2X Aniso drop is rediculous, it's lower than enabling 2X FSAA (76.1). WTF is going on here?

 

[SSXeon5]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Taken from Anand's 9700 review:

Anisotropic Filtering Performance
UT2003 dm-antalus @ 1024x768

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 104.7

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (2X Aniso) 58.0

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (4X Aniso) 42.0

NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4600 (8X Aniso) 36.6

That 2X Aniso drop is rediculous, it's lower than enabling 2X FSAA (76.1). WTF is going on here?

I know, just look at how horrible it looks too, the 9700's IQ has gotten alot better and possibly close to matrox's. Just look at the firing squad preview

SSXeon

 

[SickBeast]

Nvidia better have their aniso fixed on the NV30 or they'll be in alot of trouble. Aniso is a very nice feature, I use it all the time on my R8500.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I want it fixed on the card I have now, I'll be playing UT2003 long before I get an NV30 or R300.

 

[kgraeme]

The 8500LE beats the pants off the Ti4600 for 4x aniso. The 9700 is just like cake AND icecream.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yes, we all know that ATI is the king of aniso performance, my gripe is Nvidia being so shameful at it.

 

[BFG10K]

While I agree that nVidia's performance drop is steeper than it should be for anisotropic filtering (and it sometimes annoys me a lot), lets not forget that it's still probably the best in image quality.

 

[Wolfsraider]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
While I agree that nVidia's performance drop is steeper than it should be for anisotropic filtering (and it sometimes annoys me a lot), lets not forget that it's still probably the best in image quality.

really?
hmmm

lets not forget that it's still probably the best in image quality

something tells me you ain't so sure and after looking at jedi knight screenshots with all the details turned up and no jaggies
i will have to agree with you about you not knowing sweet mother of goodness look at them pics again and notice no jaggies
and after comparing the pics on both the "other" one has noticable jaggies

just in case you may have missed the pics and true the gforce cards do have fine image quality but the 9700 seems to raise that bar by ridding the hated jaggies in my book

not trying to step on your toes here BFG10K peace

 

[WyteWatt]

Yeah but with unreal 2003 at 1024x768 with all details on high and everything else on with no FSAA or AF at 104.7 fps is not bad at all. I not going to turn on FSAA and AF because i can not notice a difference at all with it on. I tried games with FSAA and AF on maximum at 1024x768 and 1600x1200 just for the heck of it but saw no difference. I looked everywhere for jaggies espically at 1024x768 but could not find any. I looked on the end of floors, walls, doors, etc in the games. I tried nascar racing games, plane games, first person shooting games, etc and still saw no difference. I don't get whats with me but i just don't see a difference. Trust me i want to see a difference but it seems like i never do. I not sure if its me or what. Does anyone else here have a hard time noticing a difference in any game with no FSAA or AF turned on to FSAA and AF turned on maximum at 1024x768 resolution? My monitor is fine. Its a 19 inch NEC Multsync FE950+ flat screen monitor. So thats not the problem. I guess in one way its good that i don't notice a difference with FSAA and AF on because then i will beable to get more fps out of my games just in case i need them like for unreal 2003 and doom3. I am sure i will need all the fps i can get. BTW i am on a GF4 ti 4400 video card. I wonder if i would notice the difference with maximum FSAA and AF on the ATI 9700. That would be pretty funny if i did not. I would hope.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Fire up a JKII botmatch in the Bespin level. If you don't see jaggies and filtering lines there I think you need to get your eyes checked. I'll admit some games/engines really don't show that much difference with FSAA or aniso enabled, but on the ones that do it's like night & day.

 

[BFG10K]

something tells me you ain't so sure and after looking at jedi knight screenshots with all the details turned up and no jaggies

Which JK2 screenshots are you referring to?

And why are you talking about jagged edges? I was talking about straight anisotropic filtering image quality, not FSAA image quality.

Anyway, judging from the screenshots I've seen of ATi's quality anisotropic filtering I think it looks superb - just as good as nVidia's. And it looks like ATi have finally got true per-pixel trilinear working as well, just like nVidia has had for a long time. So really I think the 9700 is simply an outstanding card.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Back on topic it does seem like the GF4's Aniso performance does equal to roughly, suck, how many people actually use it on the latest/greatest games? In my opinion Anisotropic filtering is nice, and AA is worthless, but at the same time, I'd much rather have a higher framerate with neither on.

 

[BFG10K]

how many people actually use it on the latest/greatest games?

I would if I could but the problem is that my framerates sink like rock in some modern games. Other modern games run quite well though, so I use it.

But if it ran fast enough I'd use it in every single game I play and ever will play and that's why I like the 9700 so much. It's a monster card and the anisotropic filtering is blazingly fast.

In my opinion Anisotropic filtering is nice, and AA is worthless,

I don't like FSAA either.

 

[Wolfsraider]

Originally posted by: imtim83
Yeah but with unreal 2003 at 1024x768 with all details on high and everything else on with no FSAA or AF at 104.7 fps is not bad at all. I not going to turn on FSAA and AF because i can not notice a difference at all with it on. I tried games with FSAA and AF on maximum at 1024x768 and 1600x1200 just for the heck of it but saw no difference. I looked everywhere for jaggies espically at 1024x768 but could not find any. I looked on the end of floors, walls, doors, etc in the games. I tried nascar racing games, plane games, first person shooting games, etc and still saw no difference. I don't get whats with me but i just don't see a difference. Trust me i want to see a difference but it seems like i never do. I not sure if its me or what. Does anyone else here have a hard time noticing a difference in any game with no FSAA or AF turned on to FSAA and AF turned on maximum at 1024x768 resolution? My monitor is fine. Its a 19 inch NEC Multsync FE950+ flat screen monitor. So thats not the problem. I guess in one way its good that i don't notice a difference with FSAA and AF on because then i will beable to get more fps out of my games just in case i need them like for unreal 2003 and doom3. I am sure i will need all the fps i can get. BTW i am on a GF4 ti 4400 video card. I wonder if i would notice the difference with maximum FSAA and AF on the ATI 9700. That would be pretty funny if i did not. I would hope.

21 inch cad monitor with bnc here and run jedi knight as posted earlier you will see the light grasshopper as you step out of the darkness lol

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
While I agree that nVidia's performance drop is steeper than it should be for anisotropic filtering (and it sometimes annoys me a lot), lets not forget that it's still probably the best in image quality.

I agree totally my Gainward GF4 Ti4600 kicks as*!