Is super sampling the best anti aliasing method? Can't really think of anything that gets rid of jaggies like SSAA does aside from pixel softening on CRTs.
>>337128554
Yes, and its also the most expensive.
It's the best if you have a really good PC.
It's literally just making the game a higher resolution, which takes vastly more computing power than other anti-aliasing algorithms.
>>337128651
Isn't combinations of high amounts, like at least x8 going all the way up to x32, of MSAA and CSAA used at the same time more taxing on performance?
>>337128554
It's horribly inefficient. If you're running an old game, sure SSAA to your heart's content, but with more recent stuff you're very likely to have to sacrifice framerate for it.
>>337128554
it's the most effective one when it comes to actual polygonal graphics, but it's also VERY demanding. That's why people tried to move away from it already a decade ago, first coming up with MSAA, and then when the Deferred Shading became the dominant way of doing lighting (but also renders MSAA useless), the post-processing AA methods started popping up.
At the moment, I prefer the SMAA post-processing AA. Even at 1x, it tackles good majority of jaggies, with very small fps hit, and does not rape 2D elements like HUD and fonts like FXAA, if injected on a game. At 2x or 4x, it pretty much demolishes jaggies entirely.
>>337129028
>At 2x or 4x, it pretty much demolishes jaggies entirely.
Doesn't using multiple samples of SMAA blur the screen worse than FXAA and MLAA? People usually stick to SMAAx1 because of this whenever they inject SweetFX.
>>337128942
They don't go that high, MSAA goes to 8 and CSAA is technically 16, but is really just an enhanced 8
MSAA and CSAA have to be implemented by devs into whatever engine they're using
Games that use 'deferred rendering', which is pretty much any DX11 title and some older ones as well, are incompatible with traditional MSAA implementations, it takes a lot of work to get it to play nice and has a much bigger performance impact than it does with older games.
SSAA is just rendering at a higher resolution, which users can usually do themselves, either in-game or through editing a config file. Great quality, awful performance.
>>337129028
SMAA is nice but like all post-process AA, it doesn't do anything in motion. It will smooth edges but won't do anything for the flickering you get without proper AA.
>>337128942
Not quite, because youre kinda comparing apples to oranges.
SSAA, also known as Full Screen AA, literally just renders the whole image at higher resolution, then scales down it to fit the playing resolution. This means that 1080p becomes 2160p at mere 2xSSAA.
Meanwhile, MSAA only focuses on edges of polygonal objects, and renders said sections at higher quality, thus saving tons of performance. However, because of this elimination of sections, it does not touch things like alpha-mapped textures.
>>337129178
No. It's just that 1x SMAA is the only one freely available for anyone to use for now.
SMAA utilizes some MSAA-like depth detection to focus it's post-processing on areas that really need it. In a way, it's like a hybrid of MSAA and FXAA.
The good thing about SMAA is that it mostly ignores textures.
>>337129231
Isn't TXAA supposed to solve the flicker?
Not that I would use it, it blurs the image.
>>337129231
>They don't go that high
MSAA only goes up to x16 in modern games at most but older games allowed up to x64. CSAA can go up to x32 to my knowledge but the only game I know that does that natively is Just Cause 2.
>MSAA and CSAA have to be implemented by devs into whatever engine they're using
For the most part, they both can be used via drivers alongside high amounts of samples like I was talking about before. There are still some engines that have limitations though. I think Wolfenstein '14 doesn't support MSAA at all.
>>337129568
Yea. It works decently in GTAV since you're always in a car speeding by shit, but again like you said it blurs shit so much it looks like the game had a pass of youtube compression.
>>337129231
>SMAA is nice but like all post-process AA, it doesn't do anything in motion.
that's not exactly true. Every frame is processed by the PP-AA methods before displaying it. It's just that depending on the tech used, their accuracy can vary quite a bit.
It's true though that you pretty much need to use some rendering-resolution affecting methods to completely get rid of flicker. Luckily, downsampling has become a common thing, and many games already include a 3D rendering resolution slider.
>>337129568
yes, but like you said, it's blurry shit.
>>337129028
SMAA is probably the best in regards to quality vs performance, but it still leaves around a lot of jaggies that become visible when in motion.
Pic related, a d SMAAd GTA4. It seems fine at first look, but if you look at the railing on the bridge you can see all the jaggies left in there, and that when in motion looks like murder.
Seems like I've been upstaged while picking a picture for this post: >>337129231
FXAA all day everyday. AA is a placebo and you dont need higher than fxaa
>>337129835
spoken like a true consolecuck
>>337128554
How did Dark Souls 1's AA work?
What kind was that?
>>337129568
TXAA is NVIDIA's proprietary tech, devs >>337129568
have to pay money for it.
Also, Fallout 4, which uses TXAA, becomes extremely blurry in motion when it's enabled. It does get rid of the jaggies, but the blur is far, far worse than even FXAA.
>>337129959
The console versions had MSAAx2. Not sure about PC.
>>337129959
literally FXAA, which is amongst the oldest, fastest, but also blurriest post-processing methods
>>337128812
>It's literally just making the game a higher resolution
Wrong. SSAA means using more than one sampling point per pixel. Rendering at double resolution is equivalent to 2x ordered grid SSAA, but inferior to 2x rotated grid, which any competent programmer would implement.
>>337129959
A very primitive, blurry form of MSAA.
They also made the game's actual rendering resolution reduce after a certain distance, making everything a blurry mess. With DSFix on PC you can set the depth of field's resolution cone to higher values.
>>337130158
>which any competent programmer would implement
Then the amount of competent programmers making video games could be counted on one hand, most games offer FXAA and nothing else.
>>337130291
Because SSAA is fucking expensive and most people are on consoles or mid range PCs. Supersampling is only viable if your GPU is literally over 4 times faster than necessary.
