No AA in StarCraft II with ATI Cards

[Will Robinson]

ATI is a status quo company that rarely goes an extra mile, let alone a few inches.

So...this is your considered opinion as a moderator in the video graphics forum?

No mod callouts.
-ViRGE

 

[Obsoleet]

For my money, I still wouldn't trade my 5870 for any current Nvidia card. All things considered the card is still unmatched overall.

Good for you, but it's not really what the thread is about.

Sure it is. This is a "fact finding" thread about why ATI doesn't have 3rd party support of SC2 AA. Basically pages and pages of blathering on, in attempt to stop people to buy ATI cards in favor of Nvidia.

I am stating that even with this issue, I would not pay for an loud and hot Nvidia Fermi card over my existing 5870. That cuts to the root of the discussion which is being painted as "shame on ATI, buy Nvidia".

ATI still has the best engineered GPUs out today. Cool, fast and stable. Trying to sell a brand based on a few minor driver differences is just weak.

 

[Obsoleet]

I don't think so. I think that AMD/ATI did not expect anywhere near the outcry for AA once people say Nvidia had done it. So, what would you do if you were them? (AMD/ATI). You would pull overnighters with your driver team and get out a driver hotfix as fast as humanly possible and make it look like it was in the works all along. I'll tell you right now, it wasn't as per AMD's public statement on this matter.

ATI is a status quo company that rarely goes an extra mile, let alone a few inches. They sure can talk up a storm though. Havoc, GITG, AA for SC2. Well, I hope something changes this time around.

Right. The status quo company that Nvidia chooses to follow, copying Eyefinity's success and following ATI 6+ months late to the DX11 game. What a leading edge, innovative company. But they have tHrEe DeE and Physx (as amazingly appealing as those features are) and yet have trouble getting a basic quiet, efficient, cool GPU out the door.

Yes, out of NV and ATI, ATI are the blowhards that "talk up a storm". That doesn't even warrant a response.

 

[golem]

Right. The status quo company that Nvidia chooses to follow, copying Eyefinity's success and following ATI 6+ months late to the DX11 game. What a leading edge, innovative company. But they have tHrEe DeE and Physx (as amazingly appealing as those features are) and yet have trouble getting a basic quiet, efficient, cool GPU out the door.

Yes, out of NV and ATI, ATI are the blowhards that "talk up a storm". That doesn't even warrant a response.

You might have a point with Eyefinity but not with with DX11. That's mostly Microsoft's baby.

 

[Obsoleet]

To be late in supporting a far more basic thing like MS's latest rendering API is a pretty big deal from a company that gets lavished with so much praise by these guys. It makes you throw up in your mouth a little reading some of these comments.

You'd think this company was firing on all 8 cylinders, destroying all competition if you just read this forum.. but in reality this company (nvidia) executes poorly on the product front, and well on the marketing front. Then a few driver hacks are used as reasoning that their product is a superior choice over ATI's far better (and better executed), Evergreen GPU.

 

[SirPauly]

Trying to sell a brand based on a few minor driver differences is just weak.

http://twitter.com/CatalystMaker/status/19739897631

Trying to improve the gaming experience for their customers is not weak.

 

[Grooveriding]

This thread needs to be locked.

Full of trolling, fanboyisms and tons of baiting.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I don't think so. I think that AMD/ATI did not expect anywhere near the outcry for AA once people say Nvidia had done it. So, what would you do if you were them? (AMD/ATI). You would pull overnighters with your driver team and get out a driver hotfix as fast as humanly possible and make it look like it was in the works all along. I'll tell you right now, it wasn't as per AMD's public statement on this matter.

ATI is a status quo company that rarely goes an extra mile, let alone a few inches. They sure can talk up a storm though. Havoc, GITG, AA for SC2. Well, I hope something changes this time around.

Well at least they seem to go a few inches. Nvidia has been known to take inches.

Nvidia: Hi, want to buy one of our super 8800, I mean 9800, I mean GTS250 cards? They can run Physx while being used as a stand alone card OR as a secondary card just for Physx!

Consumer: Sure! I'd like to check out Physx on my new rig, I'll use it as a stand alone card! Here's your money.

Nvidia: Well, we have your money and have decided that your stand alone Physx part is really only actually a paper wieght since you have an AMD graphics card. Oh, and by the way, hope you didn't want AA in Batman...

 

[ArchAngel777]

What is a good game? Does a MMO game that dominated the history of best selling game qualities as one? Does a RTS game that still have traction to gamers 10 years after its release qualities as one?

Opinion asside, they are by definition a crappy developer if they cannot implement graphical features that have been standard for many years.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well at least they seem to go a few inches. Nvidia has been known to take inches.

Nvidia: Hi, want to buy one of our super 8800, I mean 9800, I mean GTS250 cards? They can run Physx while being used as a stand alone card OR as a secondary card just for Physx!

Consumer: Sure! I'd like to check out Physx on my new rig, I'll use it as a stand alone card! Here's your money.

Nvidia: Well, we have your money and have decided that your stand alone Physx part is really only actually a paper wieght since you have an AMD graphics card. Oh, and by the way, hope you didn't want AA in Batman...

Well, they sure want AA in SC2. So much so, that "they" seem to be selling, trading up, or shelving their ATI hardware to play it. Depending on how long it takes ATI to release this hotfix, be it a day or a month, will determine how dedicated they are to it.
There isn't any way to tell if they just started working on it since the uprising, or have been at it for a while and just was not ready in time. Judging from their public address of the situation, I'm going to lean toward the former. A knee-jerk. A re-action.
Blizzard is the one to blame for not using an API that supports in game AA or whatever the reason it doesn't have it. Nvidia is the one to thank for implementing it. ATI is the one who does nothing until it has to. You can take these comments personally if you want to, but that is just really a silly thing to do. This should be a totally unemotional conversation.
It is only plastic, metal and silicon when you get right down to it.

IMO.

 

[Jovec]

GPU makers should make GPUs, game developers should make games, and never the twain shall meet.

Seriously, this path leads to even more brand exclusive features than AA. It's leads to buying off developers to keep your brand image up when it's the products that should to talking.

 

[ArchAngel777]

I don't think so. I think that AMD/ATI did not expect anywhere near the outcry for AA once people say Nvidia had done it. So, what would you do if you were them? (AMD/ATI). You would pull overnighters with your driver team and get out a driver hotfix as fast as humanly possible and make it look like it was in the works all along. I'll tell you right now, it wasn't as per AMD's public statement on this matter.

ATI is a status quo company that rarely goes an extra mile, let alone a few inches. They sure can talk up a storm though. Havoc, GITG, AA for SC2. Well, I hope something changes this time around.

Yeah, there does seem to be a lot of talk with ATI. They never really commit to anything. Oh well, at least this issue doesn't concern me as the game involved sucks. Still, really lame of Blizzard to not implement features that have been standard for years.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Blizzard is the one to blame for not using an API that supports in game AA or whatever the reason it doesn't have it. Nvidia is the one to thank for implementing it. ATI is the one who does nothing until it has to.

100% agreed. Well said.

 

[ArchAngel777]

GPU makers should make GPUs, game developers should make games, and never the twain shall meet.

Seriously, this path leads to even more brand exclusive features than AA. It's leads to buying off developers to keep your brand image up when it's the products that should to talking.

You know, there is some serious truth to this. In many ways, this could tear apart PC gaming. If either company has a feature implemented that the other does not, and devs split 50/50, we end up suffering as a result. Pretty soon we will have to have two rigs, one with ATI and one with nVidia to enjoy said game to the fullest... At this point, though, ATI doesn't really have anything that nVidia doesn't - The same cannot be said for nVidia right now... Still, this tears apart PC gaming overall. Not good for the consumer...

 

[Seero]

What is the name of the API that allows AA to be done with Deferred Shading in Dx9? If it is so "standard", then one of you guys will know the name of it.

If you do a simple google search, then you will know that Dx9 doesn't support AA + deferred shading. To make it more complicated, Using SSAA may cause shadow/texture to flicker. A game as big as SC2 won't allow things that are half working, so either work, or not used. Unlike other games, SC2 actually on beta for one year and most doesn't see major problems since the beginning of beta, meaning that it is quality ensured.

AA is not something standard, but a documented feature in DirectX. Deferred shading allows good FPS, easy on video cards and CPU. It is ideal for the public as not everything has 3x5970 or 4x480. Visit SC2 forum and you will see lots of people are playing at single digits.

Do not forget, lots of people are playing on laptops and replacing v-card is not an option. That means Dx9 is not a bad decision. yes, going Dx10 won't have AA problem, but loses at least 30% of the potential customer. It isn't a good idea as people buy SC2 because it is SC2, not because of its AA.

Note that WoW is also written in Dx9 and have AA, so it is possible that blizzard will enable AA in the future, but just not near future.

 

[akugami]

Well, that's competition, isn't it?
If your competitor does something, you respond.

I agree that to "keep up with the Joneses" ATI should have AA in Starcraft 2 done so they can claim feature parity. I just disagree with Wreckage's assessment that Starcraft 2 not having AA is somehow ATI's fault. That's just plain ludicrous.

Should they? Probably not, but when given the opportunity to pick up the slack of the devs. It is a nice value add by the vendor. In this case Nvidia added value to their product by having this ready by launch day. AMD imo should have also had a similar fix just to save face...

Agreed.

...But the higher ups at AMD again dropped the ball and let themselves be smeared across the tech boards over this. The management at AMD infuriates me. For being such a 2nd rate player they sure dont help themselves by not being more proactive than the big players in their markets(Intel and Nvidia). And this has been AMDs motto since I have followed them in 1997.

Smeared is overly strong. This issue is being taken way out of proportion. 19x12 resolution is fairly common for a 24" LCD and I can honestly say that the jaggies are barely noticeable during gameplay.

And while AMD/ATI can't be considered the premiere graphics company of the world, it is a tier 1 player. I don't see how you can call them second rate. Look at their market share. Look at their performance. Top notch. Not the best certainly but there have been enough times in ATI's history where they traded blows with nVidia to not be considered a 2nd rate player.

 

[Obsoleet]

http://twitter.com/CatalystMaker/status/19739897631

Trying to improve the gaming experience for their customers is not weak.

I don't think ATI is saying buy their product due to AA in Starcraft like the Nvidia side is attempting to convey. Evergreen is the GPU to get before and after this tweak is implemented. That's all there is to the debate.

 

[Scali]

What is the name of the API that allows AA to be done with Deferred Shading in Dx9? If it is so "standard", then one of you guys will know the name of it.

There is no API.
For deferred shading, you need to implement your own custom AA resolve by reading back the multisample buffer in your shaders.
DX9 shaders cannot do this, period.

 

[Scali]

You might have a point with Eyefinity but not with with DX11. That's mostly Microsoft's baby.

Yea exactly.
So nVidia was late... but they had been working on it for years. They just ran into technical difficulties which caused a delay.
It's not like ATi hasn't been there before, like with the Radeon HD2900.

This is not hardware though, this is software. And I think Keys really has a point there.
ATi makes decent hardware, but for as long as I've been using them (which is since the Radeon 8500), ATi has often been behind the curve with software.
Originally their drivers were very buggy, they didn't really resolve that for D3D until they kicked off the Catalyst project.
OpenGL still isn't quite up to snuff even today.

And then there are things like GPGPU and physics. nVidia is clearly leading the pack there. ATi has the hardware to do the same, but they haven't been able to put it on the map the way nVidia did.

And ofcourse there are the little 'extras' that nVidia gives you. Like being able to enable SSAO through the control panel for a number of titles. And now it's AA.
nVidia is just a lot more involved in offering software support for new features and such.
You rarely get anything 'special' with ATi, and I think 'status quo' is a good way to typify that stance.
Now, you can downplay those nVidia 'extras' all you want, as not being useful and whatnot, but that doesn't take away from the fact that nVidia DID put in the effort to bring these 'extras' to their customers.

Oh, and have I mentioned the small print in their release notes for 10.7?

OpenCL™ 1.0 conformance tests have not been run with this version of the ATI
Catalyst™ Driver Suite in conjunction with the ATI Stream SDK v2.2. If you require
an OpenCL™ 1.0 conformant driver, we recommend that you install the ATI
Catalyst™ 10.5 Driver Suite

Another thing where nVidia clearly goes 'the extra mile' for their customers: proper OpenCL support since November 2009. AMD still hasn't sorted it out.
Don't say Keys doesn't have a point, focus group member or not.

 

[SirPauly]

I don't think ATI is saying buy their product due to AA in Starcraft like the Nvidia side is attempting to convey. Evergreen is the GPU to get before and after this tweak is implemented. That's all there is to the debate.

You're welcome to your view but Evergreen is not the GPU for me. Appreciate ATI's strengths and their execution this round and have garnered the market share lead - according to Mercury Research and great to see. But, the key is to have compelling choice and both IHV's have tangible strengths that may be appealing to many. It seems the market likes ATI products this round -- I'm fine with that.

But the subject was StarCraft and AA. Its always much more ideal to have in-game AA but certainly glad to see nVidia be pro-active and also AMD as well. Don't have a problem with marketing or PR -- they both shine lights and cast shadows, while creating division; it's all good and part of it.

 

[GaiaHunter]

So basically what we've learned -

If it isn't vendor locked AMD can get it implemented too.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Well, they sure want AA in SC2. So much so, that "they" seem to be selling, trading up, or shelving their ATI hardware to play it. Depending on how long it takes ATI to release this hotfix, be it a day or a month, will determine how dedicated they are to it.
There isn't any way to tell if they just started working on it since the uprising, or have been at it for a while and just was not ready in time. Judging from their public address of the situation, I'm going to lean toward the former. A knee-jerk. A re-action.
Blizzard is the one to blame for not using an API that supports in game AA or whatever the reason it doesn't have it. Nvidia is the one to thank for implementing it. ATI is the one who does nothing until it has to. You can take these comments personally if you want to, but that is just really a silly thing to do. This should be a totally unemotional conversation.
It is only plastic, metal and silicon when you get right down to it.

IMO.

It's not personal to me at all. I'm picking up the game this weekend and I imagine it'll .1% more enjoyable with AA then without. And I completely agree with you, Blizzard released a AAA game in 2010 without a very popular option that has been generally available in games for years and years. Nvidia absolutely deserves a pat on the back for going above and beyond for their customers. I just don't know that AMD should shoulder much (if any) blame in this like some here are saying. And the whole point of my reply to you was just to say that Nvidia isn't some hero in the gaming or hardware world (though they do deserve any and all credit they get for this instance).

 

[Zstream]

ATI is a status quo company that rarely goes an extra mile, let alone a few inches. They sure can talk up a storm though. Havoc, GITG, AA for SC2. Well, I hope something changes this time around.

That is pure bullshit and you know it. You want us to take you seriously when you state the above?

Display Port, Eye Infinity, DX 10.1, DX 11 just in the past year and a half...

 

[Scali]

Display Port, Eye Infinity, DX 10.1, DX 11 just in the past year and a half...

I think we can scratch all those, apart from Eyefinity, as the others are industry standards, and not something developed by ATi.
Industry standards will generally always be supported by both vendors, and whoever is first depends more on their refresh cycle than anything else.

Eyefinity is one thing where ATi goes above and beyond standards, and comes up with something of their own.
But they don't have all that much of those... Last I can remember is 3Dc.

nVidia has much bigger list of extras, many of which later spun off into an industry standard and eventually ended up in ATi's hardware aswell.
There's tons of OpenGL extensions, there's Cuda, Physx, Cg, DST/PCF, to name but a few.

 

[Keysplayr]

That is pure bullshit and you know it. You want us to take you seriously when you state the above?

Display Port, Eye Infinity, DX 10.1, DX 11 just in the past year and a half...

All hardware. Eyefinity is a definite feather in ATI's cap though. Other than that, all industry standards and not much to do with software and dev support, which is really what we are talking about here. I know we'll disagree on every point ahead of time. So I respect your opinions and agree to disagree with you.