This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Queston: How much does Anti Aliasing effect framerate?

#21SinisterSlayPosted 10/11/2013 7:47:01 AM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
WyzeGye posted...
MasterDonGero posted...
SinisterSlay posted...
Well once upon a time, AA essentially meant every frame had to be rendered twice.
2X, twice
4X, rendered 3 times, etc.
So if your GPU was struggling, it would potentially half your frame rate.


But, anti aliasing has improved since this was true, I don't know anymore.


That describes SSAA, not all AA.


he did kinda cop out of that response at the end of it. He wasn't claiming it was definitive in any way.


It was incorrect anyway, though.
2x2SSAA renders four times. 3x3SSAA renders 9 times. 4x4SSAA renders 16 times.
There is no 4X aa of any kind that renders 3 times.


That's just a typo....
---
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence
#22JKatarnPosted 10/12/2013 11:31:14 AM
kingoffps posted...
JKatarn posted...
kingoffps posted...
In some games I've noticed it makes very little difference.

I'm guessing modern GPUs have dedicated hardware specifically for AA. Because sometimes going from no AA to 2x AA only impacts framerate by like 10% in some games I've played.

It used to always be that enabling AA would halve the framerate each time the level of AA was doubled.


Not really, it takes more GPU power and memory, it's far more likely that your GPU is powerful enough to bear the burden of the added calculations and still maintain a playable framerate. There are also a few different kinds of AA - FXAA for example is a shader effect that only applies to the edges of surfaces in an image, it's very lightweight GPU-wise but tends to blur out some details etc. whereas Super Sampling AA (or SSAA) renders the image at a multiple of your resolution (2x,4x etc, based on AA settting) and then uses data from that to smooth out the edges in the final image - obviously this is more GPU/VRAM intensive but results in a somewhat cleaner image without the blurring caused by FXAA. Developers typically restrict AA to FXAA when they use some form of deferred rendering/shading that is incompatible with standard AA (due to lighting/geometry being rendered in separate passes). It also depends on the general scene/model complexity of a game.


Thanks for the knowledge :D I did a load of OpenGL programming for a company a while back, but never touched things like AA, so my knowledge of graphics engines is still quite limited. I was under the outdated assumption that everything still used SSAA (which I was just calling AA, I didn't realise there were more efficient methods available now).

By the way your screen name makes me sad. I can't believe it's been 10 years since the last JK game.... Between 2003-2004, JK2: JO was basically all I played...


No problemo...yeah, I believe I was really into Dark Forces when I initially made this account, and am still a fan of the series, though I haven't played it in a while. I own Dark Forces and Jedi Knight II, have to buy Jedi Knight sometime.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#23kingoffpsPosted 10/14/2013 2:59:39 AM
JKatarn posted...
kingoffps posted...
JKatarn posted...
kingoffps posted...
In some games I've noticed it makes very little difference.

I'm guessing modern GPUs have dedicated hardware specifically for AA. Because sometimes going from no AA to 2x AA only impacts framerate by like 10% in some games I've played.

It used to always be that enabling AA would halve the framerate each time the level of AA was doubled.


Not really, it takes more GPU power and memory, it's far more likely that your GPU is powerful enough to bear the burden of the added calculations and still maintain a playable framerate. There are also a few different kinds of AA - FXAA for example is a shader effect that only applies to the edges of surfaces in an image, it's very lightweight GPU-wise but tends to blur out some details etc. whereas Super Sampling AA (or SSAA) renders the image at a multiple of your resolution (2x,4x etc, based on AA settting) and then uses data from that to smooth out the edges in the final image - obviously this is more GPU/VRAM intensive but results in a somewhat cleaner image without the blurring caused by FXAA. Developers typically restrict AA to FXAA when they use some form of deferred rendering/shading that is incompatible with standard AA (due to lighting/geometry being rendered in separate passes). It also depends on the general scene/model complexity of a game.


Thanks for the knowledge :D I did a load of OpenGL programming for a company a while back, but never touched things like AA, so my knowledge of graphics engines is still quite limited. I was under the outdated assumption that everything still used SSAA (which I was just calling AA, I didn't realise there were more efficient methods available now).

By the way your screen name makes me sad. I can't believe it's been 10 years since the last JK game.... Between 2003-2004, JK2: JO was basically all I played...


No problemo...yeah, I believe I was really into Dark Forces when I initially made this account, and am still a fan of the series, though I haven't played it in a while. I own Dark Forces and Jedi Knight II, have to buy Jedi Knight sometime.


Dark Force 2: Jedi Knight has very crappy lightsaber combat compared with the follow ups. BUT it has some of the best level design in the entire series. Huge open levels filled with actual paths.
---
i7 920 @ 3.6GHz, 3.8GHz (single-thread mode), MSI X58 Platinum, 6GB DDR3 PC10700, HIS IceQ 7950 (1100/1450), 240GB Agility 3 SSD, Arctic Power 950W PSU
#24HamBurglar69Posted 10/14/2013 3:03:41 AM
Spacewhizguy posted...
affect*, not effect


http://philly.barstoolsports.com/files/2013/06/slow-clap.gif
---
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/95696112/tumblr_mpjakcPyVC1rvua2oo1_500.gif
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/95696112/margaery-tyrell.gif
#25sonic_man00Posted 10/16/2013 3:59:46 PM
Here's an example. I played Burnout Paradise and i did it at max. I ran at 30-45 FPS, I turned off Anti-Aliasing effect from 8x to off, And it goes about locked 60 FPS, So that should be a good example.
---
PC > 360 > PS2 > 3DS > PSP > Wii
Windows 8/AMD Dual-Core E-3000/4 GB RAM/ATi Radeon HD 6310/320 GB HD
#26Sergei_DukanovPosted 10/16/2013 4:17:15 PM(edited)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202026

For around $200, you cant go wrong with this.
---
FX8350 oc'ed 4.6ghz asrock 990fx extreme9 8gigs ddr3 MSI R9 280x antec 750W http://imgur.com/DKxtZXP http://imgur.com/I9vdXTk