AA or AF?
- Thread starter Shad66
- Start date
EasyRaider
Regular
I think blurry textures in the distance is less distracting than crawlies and pixel popping, so I generally prefer AA.
Besides, with the performance hit GF4 takes with AF, I tend to trade it for higher resolution instead.
Besides, with the performance hit GF4 takes with AF, I tend to trade it for higher resolution instead.
AF is useful until your polygons get too small(approaching 1 pixel), then you need AA.
As somebody mentioned above, in space sims (like Homeworld) AA is much more useful than AF.
In FPSs, AF is most likely more useful, since the action is generally right in front of you.
As somebody mentioned above, in space sims (like Homeworld) AA is much more useful than AF.
In FPSs, AF is most likely more useful, since the action is generally right in front of you.
When Poly's are smaller than a pixel I don't think jaggies will be the issue, but rather the colour inaccuracies caused by undersampling.
Which is why you need AA of some sort to resolve them.DaveBaumann said:
Both are extremely important features to me by now and I would rather not have to choose. Right now I am on a GF4Ti4200 at home and mostly use 2xMSAA + 2xAF, sometimes 4xMSAA for less performance hungry games.
The effect of both AA and AF can vary from application to application, but generally when probing for a sweet spot between IQ and performance, I pretty much always enable AA first, and AF second. So I guess one could say I consider AA slightly more important.
To me personally jagged polygon edges are just more ovious most of the time and AA enhances just about any game or application out there by a more or less equal amount, while the IQ enhancing effect of AF can vary from huge to minimal, often depending on the texture artwork. In some games its hard to even notice AF when activated and you really have to stop and look for it to see the difference, which isn't the case for AA, you pretty much always notice wether its there or not in a second, without stopping or lookig for it. Just my opinion of course...
The effect of both AA and AF can vary from application to application, but generally when probing for a sweet spot between IQ and performance, I pretty much always enable AA first, and AF second. So I guess one could say I consider AA slightly more important.
To me personally jagged polygon edges are just more ovious most of the time and AA enhances just about any game or application out there by a more or less equal amount, while the IQ enhancing effect of AF can vary from huge to minimal, often depending on the texture artwork. In some games its hard to even notice AF when activated and you really have to stop and look for it to see the difference, which isn't the case for AA, you pretty much always notice wether its there or not in a second, without stopping or lookig for it. Just my opinion of course...
To answer the question: I would be quite confident with a 4xRG Supersampling algorithm, that would deliver equal or almost equal to 4xLevel anisotropic filtering, if it wouldn't put such an ungodly stress on fillrates/bandwidth.
Today's known supersampling algorithms filter textures, but only up to (or close to) 2xLevel anisotropic.
Since for the above accelerators will run into obvious bottlenecks, I'd then like to see a far more advanced hybrid MS/SS sampling sollution to be combined with a truly adaptive sampling anisotropic algorithm, where the number of samples (between 1x and 16x) can vary depending on the surface.
Today's known supersampling algorithms filter textures, but only up to (or close to) 2xLevel anisotropic.
Since for the above accelerators will run into obvious bottlenecks, I'd then like to see a far more advanced hybrid MS/SS sampling sollution to be combined with a truly adaptive sampling anisotropic algorithm, where the number of samples (between 1x and 16x) can vary depending on the surface.
Similar threads
