• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Ati's EATM better looking and higher performing setting?

Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2006
Posts
39,325
Location
On Ocuk
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33874363

I was going through that , and i saw something about ati's EATM which is also a setting newly added to ati tray tools apparantly its higher performing than normal AA and looks better :confused:. If you notice any dots apparantly this was sorted with the 6.12 beta's as its a new thing and still being worked on

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/9949/wowaaafp3.jpg <- normal AA
http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/5578/wowzrorzda0.jpg <-- EATM

-

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/1024/wowperformanceadaptiverg3.jpg <- normal AA
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/6439/wow2006alphacoveragetz2.jpg <- EATM
 
Last edited:
It doesn't seem to work in WoW (setting AAA in ATI tool). What other settings do you need to make it work?
 
Robert said:
It doesn't seem to work in WoW (setting AAA in ATI tool). What other settings do you need to make it work?

Ati Tray tools ( get the latest beta )

Advanced Tweaks

New AA and AF methods

Make sure there is a tick in

EATM

.

Some say that 6.10-6.11 its abit buggy with a lot of dots , but it was much improved with the 6.12 beta's almost perfect. Thats all i really know , but there certainly a difference going by people's screenshots.. Have a look at that rage3d thread , a guy posted the same as you then he got it to work
 
I couldn't get it to work with the registry hack, so im just gona wait for the officials, hopefully they'll be out next week and have it in em. :)
 
I didn't get it to work either and when I used ATi Tray Tools I realised all my registry entries were going in to a slightly different parentla folder when compared to every one on Rage3D ( ControlSet002 instead of ControlSet001 ). I've no idea why that is, but I'm wondering if it's why I don't get any AA in game when I use driver override.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
I couldn't get it to work with the registry hack, so im just gona wait for the officials, hopefully they'll be out next week and have it in em. :)

Sounds like a plan , im also waiting for 6.12's as eatm are supposed to work pretty good with those :D
 
Neil79 said:
Sounds like a plan , im also waiting for 6.12's as eatm are supposed to work pretty good with those :D

Yeah, lets just hope they are on time like the 6.11's were, as the 6.10's took that long the 6.11's turned up a few days after. :D
 


Amazing eh? :D I cant wait to use it correctly with the 6.12 drivers when they are out
 
Last edited:
Aye looks awesome. The picture quality is REALLY good, and the FPS is double that of adaptive AA :o I wonder what the perf hit is compared to normal AA though.
 
Looks great and the performance figures are fantastic, but if you look carefully you'll see why as DanF has already tried to point out. The edges of the alpha textures seems to have a sort of blurred border lines that give the impression of being anti-aliased; not exactly sure whats going on, but I'm pretty sure its not proper antialiasing of the alpha textures (like with adaptive antialiasing or any form of supersampling).

Thats said, it looks like a cool visual trick that I'm fairly certain will look good in certain games, but probably not others.
 
Last edited:
I really cant see a difference between the two.

I have never enabled AA or AF on my games as i never really noticed them do anything other than make my framerate worse.

I now have a x1950 on the way and could no doubt put them on without a mad performance hit, but is it worth it? What exactly am i looking at?

Is there something that will explain AA and AF to me on a thread? link me please.

edit:: now i look closely at the first 2 pictures all i can see is that the second one has blurred all the twigs on the tree making it look a bit rubbish. The normal AA at least looks crisp and imo a lot better.
 
Last edited:
AA + AF

No AA + AF

Not the greatest comparision in the world because you can never really get two identical shots in the same place, but the results can be seen. Look at the edges of walls etc. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom