I played Half Life 2 at 1080p, with 8x AA, and still notice jaggies. They aren't BAD, but there are noticable. Were pc gamers over exaggerating 1080p res? I thought it was supposed to kill jaggies? 
wtf i thought jaggies were supposed to be gone in 1080p?
- Thread starter jeffmule
- Start date
videogames101
Diamond Member
- Aug 24, 2005
- 6,783
- 27
- 91
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,007
- 126
1080p is not even close to killing jaggies. Neither is 1600p for that matter.
High PPI displays are better (e.g. very small high resolution displays like on some phones), but they undersample because their physical pixel counts are low.
What we need are displays with high pixel counts and high PPI. So instead of 4 million pixels on a 30 screen, we need 16 or 64 million in the same space.
With that said, HL2 has a lot of shader aliasing which will be cleaned up with SSAA. If you have the performance, 2560x1600 with 8xSSAA should get you almost perfect image quality.
High PPI displays are better (e.g. very small high resolution displays like on some phones), but they undersample because their physical pixel counts are low.
What we need are displays with high pixel counts and high PPI. So instead of 4 million pixels on a 30 screen, we need 16 or 64 million in the same space.
With that said, HL2 has a lot of shader aliasing which will be cleaned up with SSAA. If you have the performance, 2560x1600 with 8xSSAA should get you almost perfect image quality.
That SSAA needs to be a sparse grid pattern or mixed with rotated grid multisampling pattern for almost perfect IQ.
Anyway, I think AA will always be necessary even though nothing can purge edge aliasing completely the way games are rendered. It's a lot more important to me than uber high monitor resolutions.
1920X1080 (1080P) is just a resolution. It has no bearing on how developers choose to use textures. Creating textures with less jaggies without using AA/AF means a higher polygon count, which counts against performance. Your GPU is a tool that you can use to deal with these situations.
Rambusted
Senior member
- Feb 7, 2012
- 210
- 0
- 0
This was cutting edge at the time http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/362968-doom-3do-screenshot-former-human-up-close-s.jpg and we couldn't get enough of it. I think maybe were getting a little spoiled.
Barfo
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2005
- 27,539
- 212
- 106
I played Half Life 2 at 1080p, with 8x AA, and still notice jaggies. They aren't BAD, but there are noticable. Were pc gamers over exaggerating 1080p res? I thought it was supposed to kill jaggies?
you heard some random person say 1080p got rid of jaggies and took him ay his word? lol...we'll have flying cars by 2015, trust me
try with 8X SSAA, I didn't notice any jaggies with it.
He may be seeing jaggies on fences and trees which would means he needs to run adaptive AA or transparency AA
Saying that resolution has nothing to do with aliasing (jaggies, the thing antialiasing attempts to correct) is like saying that the sun has nothing to do with sunburn. The reason you have aliasing is that computers approximate an analog image by displaying a single color for every discrete pixel in the frame buffer. The smaller the pixel is (i.e. the more of them there are per inch) the smaller the error. The tradeoff, of course, is that increasing resolution is extremely difficult and expensive, both in terms of hardware cost and system resources. So the highest practical resolution combined with the strongest supportable antialiasing scheme will always give you the best results.
What size screen to you use? Jaggies are pretty apparent on my 42 inch tv that i use as a monitor. It doesn't help that i sit too close either.
higher resolution will help eliminate jaggies, but here's the thing:
Higher monitor "resolution" is not true resolution improvement. Pixels of all monitors are about the same size. Within ~15-20% of each other from a 1024x768 screen up to and beyond a 1080p screen.
Even though there are almost 3x the pixels on a 1080p screen than on a 1280x768 screen, there is generally also almost 3x the screen area.
You need a "true resolution" improvement to have any effect on jaggies. Increasing the number of pixels per unit area will offer improvement.
Even then you will have issues with areas of high contrast, and you will want some form of AA, either multisampling or post processed, but that will offer some improvement.
You can significantly reduce jaggies with only 1024x768 or even 320x240 like we used to play DOOM at... if you have a small enough screen.
Higher monitor "resolution" is not true resolution improvement. Pixels of all monitors are about the same size. Within ~15-20% of each other from a 1024x768 screen up to and beyond a 1080p screen.
Even though there are almost 3x the pixels on a 1080p screen than on a 1280x768 screen, there is generally also almost 3x the screen area.
You need a "true resolution" improvement to have any effect on jaggies. Increasing the number of pixels per unit area will offer improvement.
Even then you will have issues with areas of high contrast, and you will want some form of AA, either multisampling or post processed, but that will offer some improvement.
You can significantly reduce jaggies with only 1024x768 or even 320x240 like we used to play DOOM at... if you have a small enough screen.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter