AA @ 1920x1200 gaming

[drak3]

Do I really need it and will notice it's presence/absence?

Thanks.

 

[Reality|Bites]

Nope you don't really need it. I just 4X AA for good measure though .

 

[BassPunk]

depends how close you sit to the screen and what game

In FPS I don't use it but in Racing games I do

 

[TheMagic1an]

I don't really use a lot of AA at that resolution and i don't sit close to my screen, so a lot of AA isn't needed.

 

[willhub]

That X1900 will struggle at that res with AA anyway.

 

[psychas]

depends what gf card you have you can put 2 aa but im not sure if you notice allot

 

[willhub]

His will struggle.

 

[Margaret]

If you're sitting close to it you will want AA, higher res doesn't make any difference.

 

[gt_junkie]

You don't need it but you may like having it.

I never ran it (even when i had an 8800GTX) as i liked the added performance.

It's quite a res so i'd only consider cards upwards of an 8800GT if you do plan to use some AA.

gt

 

[FreeStream]

That X1900 will struggle at that res with AA anyway.

Ummn.

Depends on what game but in FS-X, LFS, FS-9 it does pretty dam well with max AA and AF... 709/845 XTX btw.

 

[drak3]

Obviously I am asking to base my next purchase guys X1900 served me well.

If AA is not much of an issue, I may as well go with X2 if it's good and within budget.

I don't want to spend much for now, as I plan to upgrade the GFX card only until next-get CPU/GPU's are out later in the year.

There is a BFG GTS 512 on ocUK for 200quid at the moment btw, what you think?

 

[AgedIdiot]

Looks a good move

 

[AgedIdiot]

Then again gtx is only £30 more.

Or wait next gen - not long allegedly

Personally I would go with the GTS

 

[oweneades]

If you already have the monitor and can test at that resolution why not find out for yourself? (I don't mean this to sound harsh btw)

Also at that resolution with AA I would go for a GTX tbh.

 

[balls]

At anything about 1680 x 1050 the difference between 0 > 4 AA is noticable, but above that You really can't see any difference but fewer frame rates

 

[Margaret]

At anything about 1680 x 1050 the difference between 0 > 4 AA is noticable, but above that You really can't see any difference but fewer frame rates

That's not true at all in my experience, 1920x1080 here and without AA you can see the jaggies just as easily as I could at 1680x1050.

 

[J1nxy]

At anything about 1680 x 1050 the difference between 0 > 4 AA is noticable, but above that You really can't see any difference but fewer frame rates

That is a totally untrue statement. With AA enabled at 1920 x 1200 there is a visible difference.

 

[balls]

That is a totally untrue statement. With AA enabled at 1920 x 1200 there is a visible difference.

Might want to re-read, I said that there was a noticeable difference between aa being off and 2x/4x, but above 4x AA the difference between say 4x and 8 x is very hard to see, maybe I'm just very blind