• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

How many of you use AA and AF?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
When you pick the higher seetings, the video card uses higher resolution samples to creat the frame, then it scales it "down" to the resolution that you are running. I notice the biggest difference between 2X and 4X, I have tried 6X and didn't notice that much of a difference. Careful though, once you play your games with these on you will have trouble going back to those blurred jaggies ;).

Fiz
 
i tried 16x af and 6x aa on my new rig yesterady and i cant really see a difference. it should get rid of jaggies right? i was playing q3 on 1280x1024 with 120 fps and full detail settngs... from my logical thinking (sometimes it logical... :)) because the higher the res the less the jaggies right....? at least the smaller and less noticeable the jaggies are. mabye i should play some war3 (dont have it) and see if i notice jaggies with and without it since the jaggise are more obvious in that game.
 
On my 9700 Pro I run 16x performance AF and 2x-4x AA depending on the game, and a res of 1280 or 1024. Depends on how high a framerate I need. I refuse to turn either off anymore.

-Rav
 
I use 6xAA and 16x AF on my 9700 pro. Goes most of the time without stuttering.

I also use the hidden AA settings in the nvidia drivers for my Ti 4200 and crank up 8xAA, 8x aniso. Dreadfully slow, but it looks really nice. :)
 
I use 4X AA on my 9700 Pro, but no AF. AF seems to bring back all of the jaggies I'm getting rid of with my 4X AA, plus I don't se any difference in quality with AF on, except for the jaggies. :D
 
^^^ I notice the most improvement on things like detailed floors and walls. If you shut AF off and look down a corridor that has patterns on the floor and walls, you will notice that they blurr as they get further away. The AF usually keeps the pattern sharp. It made MOHAA look amazing.

Fiz
 
I generally use Quincunx AA and 8X AF. In some games I notice a differnce, in some I don't. It really depends on the game. I'm sure the differences are there, but in a lot of fast paced games, I don't have time to notice the extra detail in some painting or whatever. ;)

U2 was a completely different story. I'm running it with no AA and 8X AF. I tried different variations, and while 2x and Qx AA would generally be playable, I can't stand the slightest stuttering, so I turned off AA and kept AF.

I've also always wondered why some people have insane rigs and then play with AA and AF turned off. I mean, on average, the human eye can pick up 24FPS (constant frames, not average). So even if you have hawk eyes, as long as your FPS doesn't drop below 32 or so, you shouldn't be able to notice it, so why bother running a game without the goodies just to get 120FPS?
 
I've also always wondered why some people have insane rigs and then play with AA and AF turned off. I mean, on average, the human eye can pick up 24FPS (constant frames, not average). So even if you have hawk eyes, as long as your FPS doesn't drop below 32 or so, you shouldn't be able to notice it, so why bother running a game without the goodies just to get 120FPS?

That's so wrong i dont know where to start. Oh well, here comes that link again......http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
 
That was a very fascinating article. I really enjoyed it (love learning about the human body). However, when running at anything higher than 80 or 90 fps, I don't see much of an improvement. I usually sync @ 85 hz and it is as smooth as can be. I like running Vsync because of the removal of screen tearing.

I tried running Q3 at the highest fps I could get at 1280X1024 (150+) and I didn't think it was any better than @ 85 fps. I guess it depends on the person looking at it. It is as smooth as can be and when you add the filters, I just can't see trading Image quality for fps.

Fiz
 
I don't use any AA, most everything is set for speed. Framerate is a concept at 30+. Some scenes I work on reduce my fps to 1. More commonly I'll get 5-10fps.

Quality features are luxuries only until they slow you down below a comfortable rate.

Sometimes I'll turn on AA in games but I turn everything else on first.
 
At 1280x1024 I'm only to run 2AA and 4Af at the most with my ti4400 but with some of the new games I can only pick 2AA or just 4AF which blows. Every month that goes by makes me wish I waited 3 more months for a radeon 9700 or 9500 because the performance hit you get with nvidia is so bad.
 
I use 6x FSAA, performance, 4x AF. I would run with higher but I'm currenting beta-ing a game that crushes my system. In it, with those setting I sometimes lag at 1024x768 :D
 
I don't use AA in any of of my games because the Radeon 8500's supersampling AA algorithm makes games too slow for my taste. :(

I definately want to be able to run games with AA on from now on though, especially after buying Unreal 2. That game does annoy me with its jaggies somehow even at 1024x768. I tried running it with AA on and it looks great then but at the same time, I can't hit the broad side of a barn because of the frame rate. :(
 
4X AA for when i CS and 2x AF(highest GF2 can go for me).

UT2k3 i run 2xAA and 2xAF, no lag at all :) Gotta love overclocking video card for nice performance boost so you can have nice AA/and AF features :)


my junky 20 dollar GF2@ 240core and 198mem

(9700pro coming soon :) )
 
Back