• 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.

Poll: Which is better: Lo-Res FSAA-On or Hi-Res FSAA-Off

shanehi

Junior Member
For those of you who have the ability to do FSAA, which option do you like better:

- a lower resolution mode with FSAA on
or
- a higher resolution mode with FSAA off

Let's assume that the frame rates are approximately equal.

 
RoboTECH is right in Q3 I just tryed FSAA and it made the game all jerky. But in a game thats not as intense it would work I suppose.
 
I noticed with combat flight simulator that 1024x768 32bit that i get nice smoke effects and puffs of smoke/sparks from my bullet srikes on enemy aircraft. I can play this game with my current set-up at this resolution and 2xHQ with the 618 drivers. If I had my preference I would rather play at high res/32bit because of the special effects you see that you wouldn't with 4x and the lower resolution you would have to use to keep things playable.
 
For eyecandy, I can't say. For playability, low res full FSAA(assuming that smooth framerates are achievable). Low res is especially important for first person shooters.
 
Really depends on the game for me. In slower paced games, low res w/ FSAA. In UT and Q3, with FSAA no matter what the frame rate, it seems to be not as smooth. I don't really know why that is. So in those games, high res.
 
I'm going to go against the whole purpose of this thread and say I prefer low resolutions with FSAA turned OFF. To me, low resolution doesn't look that bad, and the higher resolutions doesn't provide enough increase in visuals to sacrifice the frame rates.
 


<< and the higher resolutions doesn't provide enough increase in visuals to sacrifice the frame rates. >>



What do you consider 'acceptable' frame rates? I don't mind the 40's or 50's, cause I played UT for a year on a K6-2 350/TNT2u....so high frame rate are great, but I'm used to REALLY low, I could play at 1024x768 with 4x and still consider it playable, like no one else would. I don't do that, but I COULD is the thing.
 
a consistent 60 fps is all I need.
But consisitency is sort of hard to judge.

in falcon 4, i prefer 800 by 600 with 2 by 2 fsaaa.


STeven,

Ps i have a gts
 
Back
Top