Ways to solve complaining about ATI's filtering?

[nutball]

Are you all losing it? Why would ATi give the option to disable a feature they have worked very hard to design, and are awaiting patent approval on?

Umm... who's graphics card is it? Mine, or ATis? Just checking.

That is a step backwards.

I have the inalienable human right to make stupid mistakes.

If you don't like how ATi does AF then don't buy the card. Simple.

People may well just do that, but ATi shareholders wouldn't be too impressed if ATI took that stance now would they?

 

[Vortigern_red]

At the end of the day it appears that ATI just kept shut about this to look faster, cause really the nv40 and x800 are pretty much on par until you bring AF into the picture, but to get a true picture on how good the AF is we need to bench the card with full trilinear enabled to do an honest apples to apples comparison.

Mozmo, (or anybody else) you have said this several times, and I assume its correct but I don't understand sorry.

Does the amount of Tri filtering increase when you do AF? i.e. are there more mipmap boundries in a frame then when you just use Tri filtering and no AF? or does more Tri filtering work have to be done with AF on?

The way I was seeing it they should get the same % increase in performance with and without AF due to "trylinear" filtering.

Sorry for appearing stupid and thanks for any replies.

 

[Quitch]

If you get the same image quality from this optimization and full trilinear then why would you want ATI to waste precious cpu cycles on full trilinear? Why should these games be benchmarked again just to show slower results? Do you think people are going to want to disable this feature when they play games for no other reason then to slow down the card?

I have to agree with this. Considering that trilinear isn't always the best filtering choice anyway, why should ATI waste time with a dumb solution when they can use something that adapts to the situation. Of course, what will happen is a couple of minor differences will be spotted and rather than people requesting ATI refine the algorithm, there will be a cry that the cheating is obvious.

It's quite worrying how obsessively people hold trilinear up as an example of supreme quality, even though it's no such thing. I think the brilinear event has affected some peoples ability to think in a rational manner.

 

[noko]

Who says it is the same image quality?

If it passes the Mafia test with flying colors then I would somewhat agree with you.

 

[Kombatant]

ATI is using an adaptive algorithm, that produces identical results to Pure trilinear, except from some cases, where the differences are minimal to none. If my above statement is correct, I have a question. Instead of asking for Pure Trilinear, why wouldn't you want a refinement of the said algorithm, that would eliminate even those slight differences? After all, isn't the best result what we are after?

 

[Hanners]

How will we know where to ask for refinements without full trilinear to compare against? Even then, there's still the question of 'different' vs 'better'.

 

[mikechai]

ATI is using an adaptive algorithm, that produces identical results to Pure trilinear, except from some cases, where the differences are minimal to none. If my above statement is correct, I have a question. Instead of asking for Pure Trilinear, why wouldn't you want a refinement of the said algorithm, that would eliminate even those slight differences? After all, isn't the best result what we are after?

Fine.

But all we ask is to provide the option to have full trilinear. That's all.
Is that hard?
________
STARCRAFT II REPLAY

 

[Quitch]

I'd be surprised if we see a control panel option. If no one can find any negative IQ differences, then why switch it off? But what will happen is that reviewers in the "interest" of their readers will select the full tri option for an "apples-to-apples" comparison, which of course would end up being a meaningless comparison.

If you don't need full-tri, then why should the card do full-tri? What is the point of a review forcing a card to do work it doesn't need to do? Reviewers will do it though, and all in the "interest" of their readers.

Unless I see major problems with the algorithm, I see no gain in ATI introducing an option that people would take as a sign of admitting their method wasn't up to scratch, when they'd be best off refining the algorithm, should any problems be found with it.

I really think an option is a bad idea because people will use it out of ignorance.

 

[Kombatant]

ATI is using an adaptive algorithm, that produces identical results to Pure trilinear, except from some cases, where the differences are minimal to none. If my above statement is correct, I have a question. Instead of asking for Pure Trilinear, why wouldn't you want a refinement of the said algorithm, that would eliminate even those slight differences? After all, isn't the best result what we are after?

Fine.

But all we ask is to provide the option to have full trilinear. That's all.
Is that hard?

As hard as it would be for you to explain why would you need full trilinear so desperately if the adaptive algorithm's output is the same I guess.

 

[mikechai]

If you don't need full-tri, then why should the card do full-tri?

As hard as it would be for you to explain why would you need full trilinear so desperately if the adaptive algorithm's output is the same I guess.

1. Why don't we need full trilinear? R360 is doing trilinear and the IQ is great.
2. If you don't do full-tri, then don't tell people that you do.
3. If we can't enable full-tri, we can't do a comparison between trylinear and trilinear on the same card.
4. There are IQ differences between their trylinear and trilinear on other cards(including R3xx).
5. The option is needed to shut peoples mouth.


________
Homemade Vaporizers

 

[Kombatant]

If you don't need full-tri, then why should the card do full-tri?

1. Why don't we need full trilinear? R360 is doing trilinear and the IQ is great.
2. If you don't do full-tri, then don't tell people that you do.
3. If we can't enable full-tri, we can't do a comparison between trylinear and trilinear on the same card.
4. There are IQ differences between their trylinear and trilinear on other cards(including R3xx).
5. The option is needed to shut peoples mouth.

1. If you can have the same IQ with more speed, you don't need it though.
2. I am not sure i get your point in this
3. Sure you can. That's what we have certain tools for, even if you get the true trilinear filtering via software.
4. We are talking on the basis of eliminating those "differences" as you put them.
5. No, I get the feeling (more and more) that some people use it as an excuse to whine (of course i am not referring to you, that was a general comment).

 

[mikechai]

Kombatant,

Fine if you don't need the option.

But there are some who do.
Don't take away other people's freedom.
________
Penny Stocks

 

[Tim]

1. Why don't we need full trilinear? R360 is doing trilinear and the IQ is great.

The image quality is still great on the R420, maybe even better.

2. If you don't do full-tri, then don't tell people that you do.

It is adaptive algorithm it is doing trilinear when it is needed.

3. If we can't enable full-tri, we can't do a comparison between trylinear and trilinear on the same card.

That might be great for reviewer, but for the end user it is quite irrelevant.

4. There are IQ differences between their trylinear and trilinear on other cards(including R3xx).

What are you talking about the R3xx can't do trylinear at all and noone has noticed trylinear with the RV3xx for a whole year. And different |= worse.

5. The option is needed to shut peoples mouth.

But on the other hand Ati risk reviewers start using full-tri in reviews and thus loosing performance.

 

[Kombatant]

Kombatant,

Fine if you don't need the option.

But there are some who do.
Don't take away other people's freedom.

Freedom? In order to *need* something, you must have reasons to, I guess; all I am asking is for those reasons.

 

[nutball]

Kombatant,

Fine if you don't need the option.

But there are some who do.
Don't take away other people's freedom.

Freedom? In order to *need* something, you must have reasons to, I guess; all I am asking is for those reasons.

I've never understood the mentality "I don't want this, but you do want. Please justify to me why you should have it". Why do people have to justify their dersires to other people FFS. :?

It's just plain arrogance IMO.

 

[Kombatant]

Kombatant,

Fine if you don't need the option.

But there are some who do.
Don't take away other people's freedom.

Freedom? In order to *need* something, you must have reasons to, I guess; all I am asking is for those reasons.

I've never understood the mentality "I don't want this, but you do want. Please justify to me why you should have it". Why do people have to justify their dersires to other people FFS. :?

It's just plain arrogance IMO.

Excuse me, but I never said I don't want it. All I asked is the reason behind people that want it. I'd like my Radeon to have native support for old Glide games as well, but I don't ask ATI to do that. Unless you're telling me that you want Full trilinear "Just because..."

 

[mikechai]

4. There are IQ differences between their trylinear and trilinear on other cards(including R3xx).

What are you talking about the R3xx can't do trylinear at all and noone has noticed trylinear with the RV3xx for a whole year. And different |= worse.

Sorry Tim, should have made it clearer.
I meant between trylinear on R420/RV3xx and trilinear on other cards (including R3xx).
Since there is no way to compare trylinear and trilinear on R420/RV3xx in games at the moment.


________
VAPOR GENIE VAPORIZER

 

[Bjorn]

That might be great for reviewer, but for the end user it is quite irrelevant.

What's better for the reviewer should be better for the end consumer also since he'll be able to get a better picture of the cards performance in all circumstances.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I've never understood the mentality "I don't want this, but you do want. Please justify to me why you should have it". Why do people have to justify their dersires to other people FFS. :?

It's just plain arrogance IMO.

Because you're asking someone else to do the work. If you have enough people with enough good reasons, then ATI may well provide the control panel option you are after. If you just "want it", and expect other people to put in the time, effort and money for that alone, without any better reason than that, then maybe you are the arrogant one?

 

[Quitch]

Don't bet on it. Reviewers have a habit of making an arse of the options.