ati, nvidia, 8xaa, and bias

B

biggles

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
2,225
Are most of the reviews comparing the 4890 vs the 275 biased for not including 8xaa benchmarks? Because the 4890 generally does better with 8xaa. This makes the reviews favor nvidia.

Also, after picking up a 4890 recently and gaming at 8xaa with 1680x1050, it looks great, noticeably better than 4xaa. I can't find any aliasing at all while playing GRID or Oblivion. Is there a need for aa higher than 8xaa for my resolution or higher?
 
its fairly well established at this point that ati's implementation of 8x aa on 48xx hardware is more efficient than nvidia's, but not all games are even playable with 8x aa at 16x10 let alone 19x12 or 25x16 so whatever lead ati makes in that scenario becomes a mute point.
 
rennyf77 said:
its fairly well established at this point that ati's implementation of 8x aa on 48xx hardware is more efficient than nvidia's, but not all games are even playable with 8x aa at 16x10 let alone 19x12 or 25x16 so whatever lead ati makes in that scenario becomes a mute point.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was going to post.
 
I realize that some games are not playable with 8xaa at 16x10 or above, but it seems that most recent games play just fine. Exceptions that come to mind include Crysis and the new Stalker.
 
1. I would have to disagree that most recent games are playable @ 1920, 2560 w/8xAA

2. I see a number of sites that do use 8xAA. Not majority, but there are sites that do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top