SMAA is free AA and it looks better than MSAA

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
I'm just doing this as a PSA, mods feel free to sticky it.

I have discovered that if you inject SMAA into your games using Radeon Pro, it gives you AA that is free from a performance standpoint so long as you leave it set to "medium". You can set it higher to get even more quality and the performance hit is very minimal.

I'm posting this because I was reading about people worried that they couldn't do AA at 1440p resolution on a high end card so I figured this was more useful than I thought.

I had been unable to use AA at all on my 6850 in modern games because I need all the FPS I can get.

Basically all you need to do is download Radeon Pro and create a profile in each of your games. In the AA section, find SMAA and set it to "medium" and you're done. Launch your games directly from Radeon Pro.

HardOCP article:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/03/12/crysis_3_video_card_performance_iq_review/8#.UgEX920izfY
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
SMAA is not better than MSAA. All post-processing AA-methods are very very weak in motion. The advantage though is that they process almost anything. MSAA can be quite crappy, just look at Dirt Showdown or Max Payne 3 or Hitman Absolution. So both solutions can be quite poor.
Downsampling + SMAA/FXAA/MLAA or SGSSAA (depending on the game) is the way to go.
 

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,640
820
136
SMAA is not better than MSAA.

This.

MSAA is better because it has more information. SMAA and FXAA and whatever alternatives are a poor man's alternative because of the (obvious) lower cost since it only applies a filter instead of gathering more actual information. So although MSAA does not support alpha textures and it uses more processing power, there is not good replacement that matches its quality.

I'm fine with people promoting these cheap techniques as long as we're honest about their severe limitations and their very real problems. Even MSAA and SSAA have some problems in motion, they're not perfect, but these cheap ones are far worse. Learn what they do and then decided how much you want to compromise.
 

Black Octagon

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2012
1,410
2
81
SGSSAA is the only real AA in my books, but the performance hit is so large that I only ever use 2x or nothing at all at 1440p
 

JAG87

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
3,921
3
76


This.

MSAA is better because it has more information. SMAA and FXAA and whatever alternatives are a poor man's alternative because of the (obvious) lower cost since it only applies a filter instead of gathering more actual information. So although MSAA does not support alpha textures and it uses more processing power, there is not good replacement that matches its quality.

I'm fine with people promoting these cheap techniques as long as we're honest about their severe limitations and their very real problems. Even MSAA and SSAA have some problems in motion, they're not perfect, but these cheap ones are far worse. Learn what they do and then decided how much you want to compromise.

Shows how little you actually know.

SMAA 2TX is morphological post + 2x temporal SSAA
SMAA 4X is morphological post + 2x temporal SSAA + 2x MSAA

So please explain how is MSAA alone better than a solution that covers 3 types of aliasing causes, INCLUDING geometry aliasing?
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
^ obviously he meant the normal SMAA (inject SMAA). That was 100 percent clear. The OP said the same thing (inject SMAA).
 

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
All I know is that SMAA set to "medium" in Radeon Pro looked as good to me if not better than 4xMSAA at 1080p in games. I did not see any jaggies and nothing looked overly blurred. It looked beautiful.

You can also enable SweetFX in games through Radeon Pro. I highly recommend that as well. It really amps up how the lighting and the colors look in games. I found the difference in Crysis to be night-and-day with all of this enabled and there was absolutely zero performance impact on a meager 6850.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
Well, to you. I guess the majority here would heartily disagree. Pure post-process AA is rubbish imo.
 

bystander36

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,154
132
106
Frankly, all forms of AA have weaknesses. SGSSAA can cause images to be a bit blurry, but so does SMAA, FXAA and MLAA, which are worse. MSAA can be great, but it doesn't fix aliasing within textures and transparencies, so you can see a lot of aliasing in some games.

In some games, MSAA seems all that is needed, in others some form of SSAA is needed, and at other times SSAA can make things look blurry. I only use SMAA or FXAA for games which don't have any other form of AA and need it badly, as they seem to be the weakest.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
Pure post-process AA is rubbish imo.

Personally been a vocal advocate for quality super-sampled choice since the Voodoo 5 and their VSA-100 but don't agree that post-process AA is rubbish based on it offers some quality(weakness with motion quality,) very compatible, performs very well, memory footprint and bandwith advantages and may work in conjunction with other methods.

I'm glad to see more choices and innovation here for gamers to decide what best fits their subjective needs, tastes, tolerances and thresholds!
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
You can also use FXAA tool or SweetFX, or, with a Geforce, the driver control panel, to do the same with FXAA (you need a Geforce to do it with DX10+ games, though).

IMO, MSAA or SGSSAA combined with FXAA or SMAA, do best. I prefer FXAA, but not all games work with it, while I can usually force SMAA. All PP AAs fuzz a bit, but that works well for objects in motion, and still benefits from other "true" AA methods. All the while, performance can be maintained without buying Titans, just for 4xSSAA.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
Frankly, all forms of AA have weaknesses.

And why flexibility is a gamer's best friend! The abilities of choice and flexibility; to find that right balance for one's subjective needs, tastes, tolerances and thresholds!
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
SGSSAA is the only real AA in my books, but the performance hit is so large that I only ever use 2x or nothing at all at 1440p

I've used 4x on some games. Dishonored, Torchlight 2, Borderlands, Super Street Fighter IV, and Fallout New Vegas benefited from it in my experience and were very playable.
 

DarkKnightDude

Senior member
Mar 10, 2011
981
44
91
SMAA > FXAA. Pretty nice that Crysis 3 looks fantastic without taking a massive framerate hit by adding other AA levels.
 

monster88

Member
Oct 30, 2012
63
0
0
as many others have mentioned already, SSAA/SGSSAA is the only true solution. SSAA + SMAA = win.
 

Zodiark1593

Platinum Member
Oct 21, 2012
2,230
4
81
Ehh, seems to have a slightly lesser penalty when used in Deferred Shading engines compared to MSAA, but in most games, the nod goes to MSAA. I've a Mobility Radeon 5470 though, so shader power is a bit on the short side, possibly explaining the greater penalty of SMAA for me.
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
You can also use FXAA tool or SweetFX, or, with a Geforce, the driver control panel, to do the same with FXAA (you need a Geforce to do it with DX10+ games, though).

IMO, MSAA or SGSSAA combined with FXAA or SMAA, do best. I prefer FXAA, but not all games work with it, while I can usually force SMAA. All PP AAs fuzz a bit, but that works well for objects in motion, and still benefits from other "true" AA methods. All the while, performance can be maintained without buying Titans, just for 4xSSAA.

I use both, as per my rig. Radeon Pro's SMAA is very very good, near 4x MSAA quality but without performance hit. Minimal blurring, and this is the key difference.

NV's control panel FXAA blurs the hell out of the games i've tested.

Crysis 3 also implemented SMAA excellently, i used to hate post AA methods but this particular implementation is just awesome.