4xAA Faster than 2xAA 6800GT

O

oozish

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Messages
1,465
Anyone notice this? I just did benchemall with AA set to 2 vs. AA set to 4 (AF set to 1) and got about 54 average fps in Far Cry, then when set to 4xAA I got this:

Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.15.38.46. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 59.72

1600x1200 not selected


Looks like Nvidia has really optimized their 4xAA! I read about this but it's very amazing to see in action a higher quality setting beating a lower quality settings.
 
There is no way 4xAA would be faster than 2xAA with the same game settings, and resolution. Some other factor must have screwed it up.

edit, I ran it myself, with a custom system file.

2xAA
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+, MMX, 3DNow, ~2.5GHz
Memory: 1024MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6172 (English)

Detailed info dir:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.18.17.20.25.\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: D:\Farcry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 53.09

1600x1200 not selected
Click to expand...

4xAA
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+, MMX, 3DNow, ~2.5GHz
Memory: 1024MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6172 (English)

Detailed info dir:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.18.17.23.59.\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: D:\Farcry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 45.74

1600x1200 not selected
Click to expand...

Maybe you should rerun the test? I dont see how 4x would ever be faster than 2x with the same settings and res.
 
fallguy said:
There is no way 4xAA would be faster than 2xAA with the same game settings, and resolution. Some other factor must have screwed it up.

edit, I ran it myself, with a custom system file.

2xAA


4xAA


Maybe you should rerun the test? I dont see how 4x would ever be faster than 2x with the same settings and res.
Click to expand...


Using 61.72

Quality setting in Nvidia display panel/optimizations on:
Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.17.23.42. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.17.29.22. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 50.64

1600x1200 not selected
(AA Low; no AF)

==============================================================
AA Medium/no AF

Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.17.32.03. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 48.72

1600x1200 not selected

I'm not replicating it this way...I don't know what the difference was....still it's so damn close to even. Of course I'm not making this up, but I must have done something wrong; I'm scratching my head and kicking myself for not saving the results.

Anyway, as you can see from the test above, there's only a 2 second difference between both settings.

It's strange that my differences are much less than yours. What's up with that?

The good news is that I'm cpu limited (is that good news?) hehe, at ALL resolutions up to 1600x1200/capping out around 60+fps without AA/AF on at all.
 
My driver settings are for max quality thru and thru, same for the game. Every option is set to the highest. In doing so stresses the card more, try that and see what happens.
 
fallguy said:
My driver settings are for max quality thru and thru, same for the game. Every option is set to the highest. In doing so stresses the card more, try that and see what happens.
Click to expand...


These benches are taken with no other programs (firewall/virus/ect.) turned off and at stock GT clocks, fyi. Settings on highest possible in driver properties.
Benchmarks SAY: said:
2xAA:


Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.17.59.53. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 59.24

1600x1200 not selected
-==============================================
4xAA
Benchmark session result
Detailed info located here:
C:\Program Files\BenchemAll\result\2004.07.19.18.06.03. - New Sequence\

-----------------------------------------------------------
Far Cry

Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo

Custom config file: C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Crytek\Far Cry\system.cfg
640x480 not selected
800x600 not selected
1024x768 not selected
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 54.72

1600x1200 not selected
Click to expand...
==========================

Goes from a 2 second difference to a 5 second difference; ok that's in line with your benches but still a bit better. I wonder I might have mistakingly used a different rez when I thought the 4x was better, lol. Something wacky. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top