NVIDIA Multi-Frame Sampled Anti-Aliasing (MFAA) Performance on GTX 970

Ayahuasca · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:28

Complaining about quality now but you based your original opinion on it on 2 awful screenshots lol.

Stooeh's screenshots are the best and you can see from those there's little to zero difference, colours don't look washed out.

jh30uk · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:29

shankly1985 said:
lol it is if you know what to look for. AA is AA dont matter if its motion or still image.

shankly1985 said:
Hard to tell from them images.

Bit of a contradiction :confused:

Gregster · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:32

And the second images

Sorry Shankly but if you can do better, go for it

shankly1985 · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:32

Ayahuasca said:
Complaining about quality now but you based your original opinion on it on 2 awful screenshots lol.

Stooeh's screenshots are the best and you can see from those there's little to zero difference, colours don't look washed out.

Already said on the higher quality I dont see difference. I didn't base that on Gregs shots did I..

Just pointing out his comparison has killed the quality and added in compression effects.

shankly1985 · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:33

jh30uk said:
Bit of a contradiction

Brains.. Means that both AA looks the same to me in them shots.. Meaning MFAA is just as good to MSAA in them screens.

WOW

Final8y · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:34

jh30uk said:
Its not easy from pics and we are not seeing it the same as your screen.

While the actual screen is better because of no compression it can be very easy to tell the difference from pics, it all depends on the scene and the quality of the pics.

Gregster · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:34

Ayahuasca said:
Complaining about quality now but you based your original opinion on it on 2 awful screenshots lol.

Stooeh's screenshots are the best and you can see from those there's little to zero difference, colours don't look washed out.

Spot on. I did the images and had to redo them, as I didn't put what was what (MSAA or MFAA) and I couldn't tell.

Ayahuasca · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:35

Which is the point being made you should have waited before forming an opinion on 2 tiny screenshots.

It's madness how one side tries to play down the other sides features straight away around here, particularly when they aren't using it and likely never will.

Final8y · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:37

Ayahuasca said:
Complaining about quality now but you based your original opinion on it on 2 awful screenshots lol.

Stooeh's screenshots are the best and you can see from those there's little to zero difference, colours don't look washed out.

Well there is a difference the shadows are washed out.

But over all they are not quality pictures.

Gregster · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:37

I think there is some form of misconception here...MFAA isn't better image quality but gives the same quality, but with less of a performance hit.

humbug · 19 Nov 2014 at 16:54

jh30uk said:
I have TXAA available to me and it looks good if the game supports it correctly, if not and it did look poor (every AA is about blurring edges) then I can change to another AA choice.

I have the choice at least so cannot moan.

How many reviews do you seen here about AA and most peeps say they cannot see the difference in the photos, I have a keen eye and cannot most times as its not the same as looking at the game nor is a YT video.

I judge by my own findings not what others say and you will get the same amount saying the opposite for anything.

No, actually, a Good AA will multi-sample edges, a bad AA will blur them. and as far as i can tell FXAA doesn't even blur edges, it blurs the whole image.

humbug · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:00

Gregster said:
And the second images

Sorry Shankly but if you can do better, go for it

I can see more detail in the distance with MSAA than i can with MFAA and your getting a 10% drop in performance with MFAA

arc@css · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:09

I'd say the image with MFAA enabled looks lighter. MSAA has heavier, more noticeable shadows. I do like the improvement in image shimmer though when the camera moves (MFAA) (different shots / videos).

humbug · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:12

arc@css said:
I'd say the image with MFAA enabled looks lighter.

Slightly washed out, not quite as bad as the MSAA vs MFAA review images but the MFAA Image defiantly has less depth. like its running at a lower res.

jh30uk · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:21

shankly1985 said:
Brains.. Means that both AA looks the same to me in them shots.. Meaning MFAA is just as good to MSAA in them screens.

WOW

You mean your lack them.

You said one thing in your 1st quote then the exact opposite in next posts quote.

Again a contradiction, do not pick out what parts suit you.

elrasho · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:25

Played a few round with it on and off, looks the same as plain MSAA to me. But I did see an increase in FPS of around 10 here and there.

jh30uk · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:27

Thanks for feedback because I and shanky and co cannot see it for real.

shankly1985 · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:31

Gregster said:
And the second images

Sorry Shankly but if you can do better, go for it

Better way just open each image in new tab and flick between. Simple.

Final8y · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:37

shankly1985 said:
Better way just open each image in new tab and flick between. Simple.

That's how i always do it.

shankly1985 · 19 Nov 2014 at 17:38

jh30uk said:
Thanks for feedback because I and shanky and co cannot see it for real.

You don't need to see it in motion. Just look the screenshots. Simple

In the lower res shots from op I pointed out clearly the difference and even asked for higher resolution comparisons.

Then we got them and I said it's hard to see a difference between them now.
So if I can't see a difference and either can guy above it means MFAA is just the same as msaa. With a tiny performance increase.