Harower Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) I tried some combined AA SS and MS but I couldn't manage to get enough compatibility to reduce the blurr, no LOD wont fix that. So that rules out 2xSS + 2-8xMS <---- Blurry. Tried post injection AA but it also blurs edges more then I would like though the performance impact is amazing and this will definitely be an amazing future tech. I ended up settling on 8x MSAA I tested this all by taking the same via screen capture and paste it into paint to avoid compression. Then zoom in 300% Eventually I believe Super sampling will be better but not until we get a better AA compatibility bit Oh and yeah the high settings for AA bioware has provided is an absolute joke. Btw make sure to disable ingame AA then override application settings. Much better quality and performance result then enhancing application settings. Edited January 19, 2012 by Harower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grimzkunk Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Count me with those that doesn't see any difference with every AA options. Been playing with ATI CCC 4x FSAA before the patch. Took 3 screenshots to show you. From top to bottom : ingame aa @off , ingame aa @high, ati ccc fsas @4x http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/toraacompare.jpg/ Intel i5-2500K XFX 6970 2gb 1920x1200 fullscreen ATI Catalyst 11.12 Edited January 19, 2012 by grimzkunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyIommi Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Yea I actually got a boost this patch in terms of performance. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benfea Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Let's try and compare notes so we can try figuring out who is affected by what. I did a direct comparison between AA set to "high" and "off", but did not compare "low". AA is definitely implemented. I did not notice significant performance degradation, but then when I looked at things, I was in a non-combat area so my finding here may be different once I try actual combat. I am using a nVidia 570 card. I've noticed that many of the complaints appear to be from people using ATI/AMD GPUs. I am using a Core i7 920 on a X58 mobo, but I don't seem to see any particular trends in this thread regarding CPU or chipset. 6GB of RAM in tri-channel mode. I am using Win 7 x64 with a 1920x1080 monitor running in full screen mode. I have never forced AA from a utility outside the game, nor have I ever edited the INI file. Again, let's please try comparing notes so that perhaps we can figure out who is suffering from non-implementation and who is suffering from significant performance degradation. Given that so many people read these forums, we may even spot a trend before the devs do. PS -- I have a batch file running a backup while I play. No noticeable performance loss. Edited January 19, 2012 by Benfea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerhowse Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Count me with those that doesn't see any difference with every AA options. Been playing with ATI CCC 4x FSAA before the patch. Took 3 screenshots to show you. From top to bottom : ingame aa @off , ingame aa @high, ati ccc fsas @4x http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/toraacompare.jpg/ Intel i5-2500K XFX 6970 2gb 1920x1200 fullscreen ATI Catalyst 11.12 Your card series is the one mentioned by the devs as being intentionally disabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenerdma Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 What in the hell is going on at Bioware right now? I'm losing my faith quickly... This is coming from a die hard Bioware and Star Wars fan. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunzo Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Oh yeah, here's where people with insane rigs gloat about their FPS. This game wasn't developed for insane builds. I have a GTS 3GB, Quad Core, etc and this game runs like crap on AA x 1 where other games with far better quality run smooth. Nvidia drivers are up to date for this game, it's the game that failed to optimize for Nvidia or ATI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anwg Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) AA definitely works for me: Without: http://i.imgur.com/d7Rob.jpg With: http://i.imgur.com/Aoemz.jpg My FPS went up too after patch. Edited January 19, 2012 by anwg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outlanderbz Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Let's try and compare notes so we can try figuring out who is affected by what. I did a direct comparison between AA set to "high" and "off", but did not compare "low". AA is definitely implemented. I did not notice significant performance degradation, but then when I looked at things, I was in a non-combat area so my finding here may be different once I try actual combat. I am using a nVidia 570 card. I've noticed that many of the complaints appear to be from people using ATI/AMD GPUs. I am using a Core i7 920 on a X58 mobo, but I don't seem to see any particular trends in this thread regarding CPU or chipset. 6GB of RAM in tri-channel mode. I am using Win 7 x64 with a 1920x1080 monitor running in full screen mode. I have never forced AA from a utility outside the game, nor have I ever edited the INI file. Again, let's please try comparing notes so that perhaps we can figure out who is suffering from non-implementation and who is suffering from significant performance degradation. Given that so many people read these forums, we may even spot a trend before the devs do. PS -- I have a batch file running a backup while I play. No noticeable performance loss. I am using a NVIDIA GTX 580 and notice a difference from off to low to high but when I had it set in the "client_settings" to force it, it still looked the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderslice Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I have good rig, gtx 580 wont bother with the other stuff, AA runs fine for, looks alot better also. AA is for people with better pc's. this not wow if you dont like the aa turn it off. I play on a 52" tv, so AA has really improved the graphics and it still runs 60 fps + and no overheating issues. I have bashed the game for other things but had to give credit where credit is due Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sliptallica Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 it makes no sense my FPS is always 60-100 and i never lagged ever before the update now i lag hardcore in pvp and against mobs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ordryth Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 oh GW2.. oh GW2, why are you still so far away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benfea Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 it makes no sense my FPS is always 60-100 and i never lagged ever before the update now i lag hardcore in pvp and against mobs.... Please include information about hardware so we can try and figure out who is being affected by what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbird Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Oh boy, this is starting to look like low/medium/high textures all over again. What I don't get is that, if we aren't allowed to use the high quality textures at all for some reasons - why the *hell* are Bioware still allowed to use them for advertising purposes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OddballEasyEight Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I notice absolutely no difference, im running fine at 40-50 fps in most cases (no, fleet doesnt count). of course, i had AA enabled before the patch too by using the .ini file trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanghetsu Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Even though the 'anti-aliasing' option is now available in the menu, it is non-functional, it does nothing. When hovering over it with the cursor it states the feature has not been implemented yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romiz Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 80% drop in fps. running a Q9550 at 3.6ghz; GTX 285, 8gig of 4-4-4-12 800 memory and rest isn't important setup. Fix it. Thanks. I'm not going to pay for a game that has no basic game features. Especially one that looks like it should run on 5y old machines. There is no issue since AA is not in the game yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerhowse Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 There is no issue since AA is not in the game yet. Yes there is. There are even multiple screenshots in this very thread proving that it is in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pursang Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 There is no issue since AA is not in the game yet. Looks like somebody's in denial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sliptallica Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Please include information about hardware so we can try and figure out who is being affected by what. processor is a intel core i5 2430 CPU 2.40 Ghz 4 gig of raam graphics card is Nvidea. i accually dont remember which kind of nvidea but it was good enough to run it perfect before the update Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasstavad Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'm actually very happy with the patch today. AA on high is noticable, if not 16x it still makes a difference and I'm still pegged at 60 fps (vsync on). I turned it off for a sec to see and jumped right to 110. There are some bugs that the patch introduced and some they didn't address but overall I don't see any additional performance related issues... and all I did today was run around IF and play warzones. I do have a very high end system - but if there severe performance drops I believe I would have noticed something. However, it still surprises me what some folks consider high end. Some of the system specs I see listed make me cringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sliptallica Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'm actually very happy with the patch today. AA on high is noticable, if not 16x it still makes a difference and I'm still pegged at 60 fps (vsync on). I turned it off for a sec to see and jumped right to 110. There are some bugs that the patch introduced and some they didn't address but overall I don't see any additional performance related issues... and all I did today was run around IF and play warzones. I do have a very high end system - but if there severe performance drops I believe I would have noticed something. However, it still surprises me what some folks consider high end. Some of the system specs I see listed make me cringe. yea but u shouldnt need a ridiculous high end system for an MMO. the one i use as u can see from my last post isnt ridiculously amazing but it worked like a charm. but the update did something that is now making it crap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozena Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 No it's working for me oO but horrible. Low AA = no AA though, no visual difference. On a side note, I'm getting 5 second freezes in republic fleet station every 10 seconds now... Set your AA options on your card. You don't even need the option to be in-game in order to use AA. Geez people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harower Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 UPDATE on methods I have tried. Post injection AA = To blury for my tastes. Combined super sampling + multi sampling = blurry which I managed to reduce with a better AA compatability bit but I get flickering around the edges of screen. Similiar to what the Post AA does. The FPS loss was not worth it. 16xMSAA via SLI AA split resulted in next to no use of second GPU. The effect was very very nice though. But I was getting massive shimmering in cutscenes due to poor SLI compatability bit profile I ended up settling on 8xMSAA with 4x transparency super sampling. The only down side is because it is edge detect and not a true FSAA the details on armor don't get AA very well. Only Super sampling does that great albeit if you can manage to reduce the blurr. 2xSSAA + 4xMSAA = 40-80fps fluctuates a lot depending on location but blurrs. 16xMSAA via deciated SLI = 40-80fps also but poor shimmering in cutscenes and wasted GPU useage. 8xMSAA sli enabled = capped at 111fps nice and sharp but doesn't AA the fine details of gear very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
novarok Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Count me with those that doesn't see any difference with every AA options. Been playing with ATI CCC 4x FSAA before the patch. Took 3 screenshots to show you. From top to bottom : ingame aa @off , ingame aa @high, ati ccc fsas @4x http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/toraacompare.jpg/ Intel i5-2500K XFX 6970 2gb 1920x1200 fullscreen ATI Catalyst 11.12 do you mean these screenshots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts