What res do you need before AA is not needed?

[BFG10K]

I'll run a minimum of 4xAA regardless of the resolution.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
I still notice jaggies on my 21" IBM P275 at 2048x1536, although it is less noticable, I would say we need even higher resolutions before anti aliasing is not needed at all.

I was going to say something like QUXGA or WQUXGA (3200×2400 or 3840×2400) but I could see still needing it even then. Maybe twice that and we'd be set.

 

[imhungry]

I'm really not greedy I guess.

I have a great 19'' monitor, but I'm happy at 1024x768, higher is better, though.
I can't tell the difference after 12x10.

7600GT, by the way.

 

[Powermoloch]

2 AA is my minimum

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: gersson
Nvidia AA is no doubt better but ATI's AF is better. Which one is more important is up to you :thumbsup:

Stop trying to turn this into a flame fest and fanboy thread PLEASE!

If you cant keep conversation on topic then do not post, start your own threads.

Dude, what's up? I didn't say anything controversial

 

[m21s]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: m21s

Originally posted by: gersson
Nvidia AA is no doubt better but ATI's AF is better. :thumbsup:

Dude, what's up? I didn't say anything controversial

You dont think thats controversial?

This is how all the other threads end up, when people start comparing Nvidia and ATI, all HELL breaks loose!

I just didnt want to see it in this thread.

 

[TanisHalfElven]

1280x1028...atleast ony 15" crt.
how bad is Alisaing on a 19" lcd with native res 1280x1028., thinking of getting one of those but i can't handle 1280x1028 AND 2-4xAA

 

[josh6079]

Playing at 2048x1536, I didn't really see the need for AA when I was on my Trinitron CRT. On my 20" LCD's at 1680x1050 it's a completely different story.

 

[velis]

It's all a matter of DPI. If you have a 300 DPI display (non existant currently), you're very likely to not need any AA since the dots are small enough. Some people might still notice the jaggies upon close inpection, but that's about the resolution you need. Current displays however with their 100 DPI resolution have rather large pixels and so you notice the jaggies. So buying a 17" LCD will provide you with "smoother" picture than a 19" one because they both have the same res (1280x1024), but the 19" one has a lower DPI. The other thing you can do to help is move further away from the monitor. Your vision is not perfect and the further away you'll be, the smoother the image without AA will seem.
High DPI monitors on the other hand tend to have certain readability problems since no operating system currently available (AFAIK) has pure vector GUI. Your windows system font is only about 16 pixels high and it would be just as high (in pixels) on a high DPI monitor making it really hard to read dialogs. Switching to large fonts tends to do "wonders" to dialog layout I know IBM is (was?) selling a 200DPI monitor (2560x1600 res, but on 19") for a few years now, but nobody really hyped that since it has the issues mentioned. Hope the next generation of operating systems fix this non-vector GUI issue so that monitors can start gaining on DPI.

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: velis
It's all a matter of DPI. If you have a 300 DPI display (non existant currently), you're very likely to not need any AA since the dots are small enough. Some people might still notice the jaggies upon close inpection, but that's about the resolution you need. Current displays however with their 100 DPI resolution have rather large pixels and so you notice the jaggies. So buying a 17" LCD will provide you with "smoother" picture than a 19" one because they both have the same res (1280x1024), but the 19" one has a lower DPI. The other thing you can do to help is move further away from the monitor. Your vision is not perfect and the further away you'll be, the smoother the image without AA will seem.
High DPI monitors on the other hand tend to have certain readability problems since no operating system currently available (AFAIK) has pure vector GUI. Your windows system font is only about 16 pixels high and it would be just as high (in pixels) on a high DPI monitor making it really hard to read dialogs. Switching to large fonts tends to do "wonders" to dialog layout I know IBM is (was?) selling a 200DPI monitor (2560x1600 res, but on 19") for a few years now, but nobody really hyped that since it has the issues mentioned. Hope the next generation of operating systems fix this non-vector GUI issue so that monitors can start gaining on DPI.

I remember reading that Vista would have this, but as of beta 2 all it does is upscale everything as bitmaps, and this is roughly as ugly as running a 17" LCD at 800x600. The only exception seems to be the fonts in new Vista-aware applications like IE7. Maybe the upscaling looks better on high DPI displays? One can hope...

In any case, a 300dpi display has a bit more than 200% more pixels than an equivalently-sized 96dpi display, so your graphics card would be working that much harder to meet its native resolution (so as to eliminate the jaggies without AA). So it wouldn't really be that much of an improvement. Still, I'd love to have a 300dpi LCD monitor!