Anti Aliasing @ Higher Resolutions

[YoungThomas]

Hi just a quick question.

Have read in a few places that with higher monitor resolutions like 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 AA is not as important as on a lower res monitor.

Can anyone shed some light on the subject for me.

Thanks.

 

[LtMatt]

Hi just a quick question.

Have read in a few places that with higher monitor resolutions like 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 AA is not as important as on a lower res monitor.

Can anyone shed some light on the subject for me.

Thanks.

You don't really need AA at 1440p. Its hard to notice a difference, even more so if the title uses FXAA.

 

[Xelene]

It's about pixel density not resolution. It smooths off jaggy lines which are more apparent on a low pixel density screen.

 

[YoungThomas]

Thanks for explaining that.

 

[Havana_UK]

Problem is that you'll still notice jaggies on high contrast objects, e.g. sharp dark edges against a bright background, or lit edges against edges in shadow.

 

[Diagro]

I still see them on my 1600p monitor... So I use 2xaa or at most 4xaa. Unless there is a lot of power left to use then I do the Max I can

 

[andybird123]

some people put up with it, but I still need *some* AA with a 1440p screen depending on game and implementation

in BF3 for example, I could very clearly tell the difference between FXAA, MSAA2x and MSAA4x (thin objects like people and lamp posts would tend to dissapear with FXAA only at longer ranges)... in Crysis 3 now however, it's more difficult to tell between many of the AA options (it has so many)... the SMAA options seem to be the best image quality for the least performance hit

but beauty being in the eye of the beholder, it will come down to personal preference... for me personally it was worth getting an extra 670 to allow me to run the AA settings I wanted to

 

[V3teran]

Use downsampling combined with small portion of AA for good results without the massive performance hit.

I game at 2880*1800 on 24 inch IPS dell at 1920*1200.

 

[V3teran]

You don't really need AA at 1440p. Its hard to notice a difference, even more so if the title uses FXAA.

I can notice it, depends on the person.

 

[LtMatt]

I can notice it, depends on the person.

I can notice it if i spend enough time looking for it but as long as it doesn't stick out then its nay bother. I've yet to play one recent game where it sticks out.

However i will still use AA sometimes. I play bf3 with 2aa simply because performance is so good that it doesn't hurt fps, even at 1440p. Sleeping dogs i use high SSAA as that doesn't hurt performance. Farcry 3 i keep it off though as i can't notice any difference with it on or off at 1440p Ultra preset but fps does go down enough that its smoother to keep it off.

 

[Spudgun]

at 1440p I don't bother in fast paced games as I don't notice it

 

[Gregster]

Hi just a quick question.

Have read in a few places that with higher monitor resolutions like 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 AA is not as important as on a lower res monitor.

Can anyone shed some light on the subject for me.

Thanks.

People who say that, don't have the GPU power to enable AA. It is very apparent if you have it enabled and then you turn it off.

 

[Rusty0611]

People who say that, don't have the GPU power to enable AA. It is very apparent if you have it enabled and then you turn it off.

It's not as apparent at 2560*1440 on a 27" as the pixel density is far greater than a 27" 1920*1080 monitor.

1080 is horrid without AA in my eyes but 2560*1440 the image quality hit is comparatively small.

 

[YoungThomas]

People who say that, don't have the GPU power to enable AA. It is very apparent if you have it enabled and then you turn it off.

I have a HIS 7970 I have really noticed the negative impact in Crysis 3. On Ultra the game is unplayable with 2 x MSAA. With High settings it seems ok.

 

[Gregster]

It's not as apparent at 2560*1440 on a 27" as the pixel density is far greater than a 27" 1920*1080 monitor.

1080 is horrid without AA in my eyes but 2560*1440 the image quality hit is comparatively small.

Yer fair point. I notice it from 5760*1080 off, and on in a big way.

 

[LtMatt]

It's not as apparent at 2560*1440 on a 27" as the pixel density is far greater than a 27" 1920*1080 monitor.

1080 is horrid without AA in my eyes but 2560*1440 the image quality hit is comparatively small.

+1

Having come from 27" 1080p to 27" 1440p the difference was night and day. I used to be a graphics whore at 1080p. I remember having debates with rusty over sleeping dogs AA with me insisting that extreme was essential at the time. But moving up from 1080p 27" i saw a huge difference and soon realised that silly amounts of aa just wasn't needed any more to provide a smooth and high quality image.

 

[Rusty0611]

Yer fair point. I notice it from 5760*1080 off, and on in a big way.

Yeah you will on 27" screens at 5760*1080 with 3 1080 screens effectively appended together .

I do even at 24".

 

[KelDG]

Yer fair point. I notice it from 5760*1080 off, and on in a big way.

Is that eye-finity though? I would expect to see a difference with AA on that, as it is essentially 3 : 1920x1080 screens. Compared to a screen with a higher pixel density.

EDIT : Ignore me, thats what happens when you reply to a post and go make some food before you type anything in, Rusty got there first