AA and AF... What do they look like?

[merc]

This may seem like an extremely newbish question, but I play with all my settings on high except for no AA and trilinear filtering... I have tried full AA and AF and the only difference I saw really was my framerate was slightly slower and everything seemed a little more fuzzy... Can someone post some screen shot examples of what AA and AF actually are in CS Source?

-merc

 

[Hallucinogen]

Without AA/AF you'll have somewhat blocky graphics, with AA/AF it looks alot smoother and better.
Sorry no pic tho.

 

[|LGW|Mith]

damn, i remember there used to be a thread somewhere, on some forums. Here or fallout with a full description with images of what all settings in CS:S do.

 

[westie]

Someone told me that it smoothed the edges can remember which one it was but i have not seen screenshots showing differences.

 

[KagePrototype]

Anti-aliasing is the term used for the process that helps get rid of "jaggies" (or, in technical terms, aliasing), which appear around the edges of objects and characters in a video game, though it is more obvious on objects far away. AA helps to smooth these edges out, and thus create a better image, though it can lower your framerates in the process. For example:

Lots of jaggies here (especially in the distance)

Very little amount of jaggies here

Anisotropic Filtering helps to stop distant objects from becoming fuzzy and looking out of proportion, resulting in a more detailed image. This problem is more obvious in text in the distance (remember the Star Wars opening, and how the text got blurry and fuzzy as it went into the background? AF fixes this, so it is more defined and easier to read). For example:

Here's a comparions shot

I never really pay attention to these sort of problems. Personally, I think upping the resolution does a fine job of getting rid of these little niggles anyway, and it never really seems to impact on my framerates, so I have no real use for AA or AF. They really kill my graphics card in CS:Source anyway, so it's not as if I have a choice in the matter.

 

[SubKamran]

I can't believe you people can live with extremely blurry textures. Jesus.

AF is god, AA can be done without (though if you can, do it, like me).

 

[Ecthe|ioN]

AA and AF kills my framerate in CSS, so I usually dont turn it on. Even with my new computer the fps suck when I run 6 x AA and 8 x AF. (See sig for specs)

Hopefully the final version of CSS will have an optimized source engine.

 

[PvtRyan]

AF isn't too heavy on the videocard, and has a HUGE impact on overall image quality. FSAA is nice, but not worth the performance drop.

 

[ktimekiller]

i say that css needs better performance

 

[SubKamran]

AF isn't too heavy on the videocard, and has a HUGE impact on overall image quality. FSAA is nice, but not worth the performance drop.

Exactly.

And Ecthelion, you should be running 16xAF and 6xAA and getting 100fps. I run 4xAA/16xAF on a 9800 Pro and get 60-70fps. Not to mention it's widescreen 1280x768.

I heard there was a thing with X800's that made the game slow... :|

 

[SSJ4Vegita2002]

If you up the resolution to 1280x1024 or above, you really don't need AA on at all. And i know from personal experience, i get the same performance with my 9600XT when i use trillinear filtering, as I get with 8xAF. So i always use AF, tho you can live without it in CS:S.

 

[r5a]

AA: http://www.widearea.co.uk/designer/anti.html
AF: http://searchsmallbizit.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid44_gci870037,00.html

 

[r5a]

AF isn't too heavy on the videocard, and has a HUGE impact on overall image quality. FSAA is nice, but not worth the performance drop.

Hmmm

Since anisotropic filtering requires intense processing as image frames are presented to the display, it may affect performance. A user may want to weigh the perceived improvement in visual quality against the effect on performance.

chatarcterlimitwtf?

 

[Triggerhappy41]

putting AF on affects my frame rates to the point where its not smooth all the time during fights. Trilinear for me untill i get a 6800 GT

 

[KagePrototype]

Anti-Aliasing can put quite a dent on my fps, but AF turned up full only gives a los of about average 6 fps. With AA on full I can stand to lose up to 20 fps or more sometimes.

 

[He@t!]

What takes more of a hit in fps AA or AF?

 

[KagePrototype]

What takes more of a hit in fps AA or AF?

AA.

Please pay attention next time.

 

[He@t!]

My bad .. long night =D... thnx though gonna up my Af now :sniper:

 

[Dynasty]

ive seen no diff with AF up, but maybe thats just my 9800pro. the x800 series probably shows a difference, but they're far too big to mix with us less fortunate people lol.

anyway, ever noticed 'step-like' graphics on guns and walls etc (anything that has a straight line really). most noticable on 800x600, where the barrel of a gun looks like it has steps instead of a straight line??? hard to describe and understand. AA basically stops this from happening, so you get crisper graphics. 1024 with x4AA looks just like 1280, but without the performance decrease.

hope this helps, if you understand it that is lol.

 

[KagePrototype]

anyway, ever noticed 'step-like' graphics on guns and walls etc (anything that has a straight line really). most noticable on 800x600, where the barrel of a gun looks like it has steps instead of a straight line??? hard to describe and understand. AA basically stops this from happening, so you get crisper graphics. 1024 with x4AA looks just like 1280, but without the performance decrease.

hope this helps, if you understand it that is lol.

They're jaggies (or aliasing), they're a fairly well known occurance. Anti-aliasing helps get rid of it, although upping the resolution usually does the job well without really impacting on your fps.

Again, pay attention, because I already mentioned it.

 

[Dynasty]

soz i didnt read the first page.

 

[RogueShadow]

Exactly.

And Ecthelion, you should be running 16xAF and 6xAA and getting 100fps. I run 4xAA/16xAF on a 9800 Pro and get 60-70fps. Not to mention it's widescreen 1280x768.

I heard there was a thing with X800's that made the game slow... :|

Feel free to include the rest of your specs.
Video card is nothing. I have a 9800 pro and I get 10 fps in action after the latest update. that's with 640x480 with lowest detail settings.

 

[Nex321]

Yes, its running bad on X800 xt pe's for some reasons, even the 6800 GT can beat it in fps. Anyone knows why?

 

[Dynasty]

Feel free to include the rest of your specs.
Video card is nothing. I have a 9800 pro and I get 10 fps in action after the latest update. that's with 640x480 with lowest detail settings.

..........................................................................

anyway, this is just a beta dont forget. somethings happen to people that dont happen to others. if it was a finished product then i would be worried.

but yeah, give your other specs aswell. is it on other games aswell?? could be anything from incorrect RAM types to the mobo the card is in (bottlenecking etc etc etc.

 

[Pibborando San]

They're jaggies (or aliasing), they're a fairly well known occurance. Anti-aliasing helps get rid of it, although upping the resolution usually does the job well without really impacting on your fps.

Again, pay attention, because I already mentioned it.

Umm, actually, upping your rezolution is the biggest performance hit you can make. At 1024x768 you are rendering 786,432 pixels. But at 1280x1024 you render 1,310,720 pixels. Almost twice as many!

I know that turning AA 4x didn't really affect my frames, maybe it's just the Radeon cards that can handle it easily. But at 1024x768 I get 40 -50 fps. When I go up to 1280x1024 I usually get 20 - 30, in the same circumstances.

Also, AA doesn't make the image crisper. It's actually the opposite, because it is bluring the image to make it look more smooth and realistic, but it is actually blurier. 1024x768 with AA looks about as good as 1280x1024 without, but you'll get much better fps.

 

[KagePrototype]

Umm, actually, upping your rezolution is the biggest performance hit you can make. At 1024x768 you are rendering 786,432 pixels. But at 1280x1024 you render 1,310,720 pixels. Almost twice as much!

I know that turning AA 4x didn't really affect my frames, maybe it's just the Radeon cards that can handle it easily. But at 1024x768 I get 40 -50 fps. When I go up to 1280x1024 I usually get 20 - 30, in the same circumstances.

AA tends to kill my Radeon 9600 Pro, upping the resolution not only looks better for me, but it just plain runs better than using AA.

 

[Pibborando San]

AA tends to kill my Radeon 9600 Pro, upping the resolution not only looks better for me, but it just plain runs better than using AA.

Umm... what? I'm running a 9600 Pro as well, and AA 4x give me almost no performance drop. Weird.

 

[KagePrototype]

Well, it certainly seems that way to me. Especially in CS:Source.

Maybe it's just me. :|

 

[Pibborando San]

O.K. I think I found an optimal setup for my system.

I used to run at 1024x768 on High, with AA4x and AF8x. I got around 35 fps with no players on the screen.

I was messing around with settings and found that the difference between AF2x and 16x is VERY slight, but the increase in fps from 16x to 2x is about 15 fps! I bumped up the resolution to 1280x960 (I had it on 1280x1024 but when I went to 960 my fps improved by almost 20!). And I forgot about AA completely since at that rez it isn't very important but you gain a lot of fps.

So now I run at 1280x960 on High, with AF2x, and it looks better than it did before. Only now I get around 45 - 50 fps with no one on screen.

Maybe that will help other people optimize their performance.

 

[Triggerhappy41]

Well, it certainly seems that way to me. Especially in CS:Source.

Maybe it's just me.

i think its different for everybody. I like to keep a good 60 fps all the time. others might tolerate a lower fps with AA on or something.

 

[Carnage_333]

go the Ti4200 in 800x600 with no AA and trilinear filtering!!

even still my fps drops to 25 sometimes and never exceeds 50