rec.autos.simulators

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

Joachim Trens

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by Joachim Trens » Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:54:26

Hi Squirrel,

thanks for the reply.

I've tried to write the LODBIASADJUST parameter into the Display/0000/OpenGL
branch of my Registry and set it to the same value its twin in the DirectX
branch is set to (0xfffffffb), but haven't been able to determine whether it
has an effect. I've changed back and forth 4 times, twice I thought it had
an effect, and twice I thought it hadn't <g>

I hadn't really expected it to have an effect as there's not too many
identically named parameters in the two branches. But I thought I'd give it
a try.

Achim


> Yes, LOD bias is vailable under Open GL, in fact, some would say it has
more
> relevance with OpenGL, then Direct3D, that's not entirely relevant,
there's
> a million discussions on it.

> Concerning nvmax, one of the most popular tweaking programs for nvidia
> chips, I can't seem to find an LOD setting for OpenGL.

> I am aware that there are issues with nvidia drivers and lod bias and
> opengl. It used to be that you couldn't force any changes at all, it
wasn't
> supported.  Unlike in the 3dfx drivers, where you could change it easily.

> Maybe things have changed with the detonator drivers, maybe they haven't.
> Let me do  a quick research...checking...checking...no luck, I can't find
> any obiovus hack or tweak to OpenGL and LOD for nvidia chips. Maybe
someone
> else has a lead?



> > Hi Squirrel,

> > regarding the LOD bias, is there an adjustment under OpenGL that has a
> > similar effect?

> > Thanks in advance

> > Achim



> > [snip]
> > ...Adjust LOD bias to -.05 with no FSAA, I guarantee that you will
> perceive
> > a better image, without the significant loss of FPS that FSAA entails.

SecretSquirre

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by SecretSquirre » Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:39:44

That was a good effort.

Again, I'm temporarily convinced the nvidia driver set can't adjust LOD bias
in OpenGL.

How very very strange.


> Hi Squirrel,

> thanks for the reply.

> I've tried to write the LODBIASADJUST parameter into the
Display/0000/OpenGL
> branch of my Registry and set it to the same value its twin in the DirectX
> branch is set to (0xfffffffb), but haven't been able to determine whether
it
> has an effect. I've changed back and forth 4 times, twice I thought it had
> an effect, and twice I thought it hadn't <g>

> I hadn't really expected it to have an effect as there's not too many
> identically named parameters in the two branches. But I thought I'd give
it
> a try.

> Achim



> > Yes, LOD bias is vailable under Open GL, in fact, some would say it has
> more
> > relevance with OpenGL, then Direct3D, that's not entirely relevant,
> there's
> > a million discussions on it.

> > Concerning nvmax, one of the most popular tweaking programs for nvidia
> > chips, I can't seem to find an LOD setting for OpenGL.

> > I am aware that there are issues with nvidia drivers and lod bias and
> > opengl. It used to be that you couldn't force any changes at all, it
> wasn't
> > supported.  Unlike in the 3dfx drivers, where you could change it
easily.

> > Maybe things have changed with the detonator drivers, maybe they
haven't.
> > Let me do  a quick research...checking...checking...no luck, I can't
find
> > any obiovus hack or tweak to OpenGL and LOD for nvidia chips. Maybe
> someone
> > else has a lead?



> > > Hi Squirrel,

> > > regarding the LOD bias, is there an adjustment under OpenGL that has a
> > > similar effect?

> > > Thanks in advance

> > > Achim



> > > [snip]
> > > ...Adjust LOD bias to -.05 with no FSAA, I guarantee that you will
> > perceive
> > > a better image, without the significant loss of FPS that FSAA entails.

rbb

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by rbb » Sun, 11 Nov 2001 18:41:22


> Since getting my GF2 32mbGTS I've been running most of my games at
> 1600x1200 16bit. Some heavy games I have to drop down to 1280x1024  or
> 1024x768 in order for them to be smooth enough to play decently. 25fps
> and up seems ok to me most of the time.

> I'm thinking of getting a Ti500 so I can run FSAA 4x at 16x12. Is this
> card fast enough to run most of todays heavy games smoothly enough at
> this setting?

> Mainly concerned about Nascar4 and Oper Flashpoint with a sprinkling of
> others like Max Payne, Rogue Spear, Undying, Swat3 and Trophy Rally.

you don't need fsaa at 1600x1200.
StraxusI

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by StraxusI » Mon, 12 Nov 2001 02:18:45

It depends on the game in question, I have a 1.4Ghz tbird and a GF3 Ti500
and I would say that 16x12 and 2x or quin fsaa is an option for most of
todays games I dont think 4x is (in q3 max all, 16x12 4x demo127 I get
42fps)

Yes you do, I still see jaggies at 1600x1200 but they are greatly reduced

Scott Lansbur

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by Scott Lansbur » Mon, 12 Nov 2001 04:09:17

You people are obviously clueless.

4X AA = Quincunx, the quality is identical.
Quincunx runs at the speed of 2X AA so you get twice the frames back.

There is NO reason why 1024x768x32bit Quincunx would look bad at all.

1600x1200 Quincunx is just a waste of bandwidth, you won't see jagged edges
in 1024 Quincunx at all, plus it will be fast.

And yes the Ti500 could easily do 1024 QC AA at nice FPS.


Peter Cowdero

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by Peter Cowdero » Mon, 12 Nov 2001 05:34:15


> 4X AA = Quincunx, the quality is identical.

Could you provide a mathematical proof of this?

--

I'm supposed to put a quote here?

Mike Nore

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by Mike Nore » Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:22:26


So, what you're saying is that there's no gain in graphics quality
with resolutions higher than 1024 with FSAA?

I hope you dont mind if I disagree.

Destro

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by Destro » Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:34:56

Have you seen 2048x1536x32 in todays games? I have on my friends new Samsung
monitor and GF3. Its WAY better than 1600x1200. So I guess, yeah, 16x12 is a
waste.

StraxusI

GF3 Ti500 <--- is FSAA an option now on high end?

by StraxusI » Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:48:21

not true in all cases im afraid in q3 I get 42 fps at 16x12x2x and 35fps
using 16x12xquin

agreed with the rest


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.