CoH 2 And Poor Performance High End Hardware, Fixes When?
14 Dec 2013, 11:10 AM
#21
Posts: 46
erm what? these are methods of anti aliasing not resolution . FXAA and Supersampling have nothing to do with the screen resolution. Games played at 1920x1080 are exactly that regardless of the AA used.
14 Dec 2013, 19:40 PM
#22
Posts: 642
Resolution and anti-aliasing have nothing to do with each other, but they both aim to do the same through the different methods.
Resolution is just how many pixels the game wil be rendered in. Obviously the more pixels you render in, the better and sharper the image, but also the more work your GPU must perform (single most taxing work, actually).
Anti-Aliasing, no matter what kind it is, is an algorithm that grabs a pixelated edge in the image and blurs it a little bit. ome methods are faster than others, some methods are more accurate than others.
Increasing Anti-aliasing does NOT increase your resolution, you cannot create pixels out of thing air. You can, however, mimic the effects of a higher resolution.
That's why 4K monitors are so damn expensive (the cheapest is $800 and sucks, the ASUS is $2000). They laugh at 1080p resolution, giving you a LOT more pixels to work with.
Good luck with your framrate using that amount of quality in a current videocard though.
Resolution is just how many pixels the game wil be rendered in. Obviously the more pixels you render in, the better and sharper the image, but also the more work your GPU must perform (single most taxing work, actually).
Anti-Aliasing, no matter what kind it is, is an algorithm that grabs a pixelated edge in the image and blurs it a little bit. ome methods are faster than others, some methods are more accurate than others.
Increasing Anti-aliasing does NOT increase your resolution, you cannot create pixels out of thing air. You can, however, mimic the effects of a higher resolution.
That's why 4K monitors are so damn expensive (the cheapest is $800 and sucks, the ASUS is $2000). They laugh at 1080p resolution, giving you a LOT more pixels to work with.
Good luck with your framrate using that amount of quality in a current videocard though.
14 Dec 2013, 20:35 PM
#23
60
Posts: 93
erm what? these are methods of anti aliasing not resolution . FXAA and Supersampling have nothing to do with the screen resolution. Games played at 1920x1080 are exactly that regardless of the AA used.
Resolution and anti-aliasing have nothing to do with each other, but they both aim to do the same through the different methods.
Resolution is just how many pixels the game wil be rendered in. Obviously the more pixels you render in, the better and sharper the image, but also the more work your GPU must perform (single most taxing work, actually).
Anti-Aliasing, no matter what kind it is, is an algorithm that grabs a pixelated edge in the image and blurs it a little bit. ome methods are faster than others, some methods are more accurate than others.
Increasing Anti-aliasing does NOT increase your resolution, you cannot create pixels out of thing air. You can, however, mimic the effects of a higher resolution.
That's why 4K monitors are so damn expensive (the cheapest is $800 and sucks, the ASUS is $2000). They laugh at 1080p resolution, giving you a LOT more pixels to work with.
Good luck with your framrate using that amount of quality in a current videocard though.
"Supersampling" is an antialiasing technique that is simply a brute-force approach and is used in NVIDIA's GeForce2 GPUs and other modern graphics processors. A graphics processor that uses supersampling renders the screen image at a much higher resolution than the current display mode, and then scales and filters the image to the final resolution before it is sent to the display. A variety of methods exist for performing this operation, but each requires the graphics processor to render as many additional pixels as required by the supersampling method. Additionally, because the graphics processor is rendering more actual pixels than will be displayed, it must scale and filter those pixels down to the resolution for final display. This scaling and filtering can further reduce performance."
http://www.nvidia.com/object/feature_hraa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersampling
15 Dec 2013, 00:36 AM
#24
Posts: 28
...
15 Dec 2013, 00:47 AM
#25
Posts: 28
..
15 Dec 2013, 02:05 AM
#26
60
Posts: 93
Right, it's one of the techniques of anti-aliasing, but how one of AA is applied doesn't mean all other techniques do it the same way. If you've read the Nvidia article, then you should've gotten the sense that it is quite old and outdated, that there should be better ways to apply AA today.
Furthermore, that article states that SSAA doesn't increase the game's resolution either as it downsizes the supersized image back to its original resolution.
There are far better and efficient methods to apply AA now. They don't mess with having to supersize and downsize resolutions or at least not as much as SSAA does: http://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/31801/what-are-the-differences-between-the-different-anti-aliasing-multisampling-set
What CombatMuffin said is partially true. Most AA, specifically Multisampling and its derivatives, applied in most modern games don't resort to the brute force method that Supersampling does such that resolution and AA are somewhat independent from each other.
I know it's only one method of AA, and other methods differ, but FXAA and SSAA are the ones used by Company of Heroes 2 and that's what my post was very clearly about.
I was just responding to the "high-end cards should be able to run with max AA" statement which doesn't really take into account how much of a performance hit SSAA really is.
If you want to make a case for Relic adding MSAA or any of the other 10+ methods and variants go ahead, I welcome more options.
I'm saying it gets rendered at 2880x1620 then downscaled to 1920x1080 with a filter to minimize jagged edges.
I'm interested to know how a display that physically has 1920 * 1080 ~ 2MP can physically, hell virtually even, go up to 4.6MP to replicate 2880x1620 resolution.
Whether the monitor can display it or not you still take the performance hit of rendering 4.6MP rather than 2MP, which is what my post was meant to say.
My apologies if my post made it seem like you magically got a higher visible resolution, that obviously isn't the case.
15 Dec 2013, 03:45 AM
#27
Posts: 642
Ah, yes. That makes more sense.
It doesn't really "render" the scene apparently. In theory it does, but it doesn't display that rendered image. Its sound almost like a buffer within the card before actually displaying it.
In any scenario, AA is never really recommended for people looking for performance in their games. Playing at your monitor's native resolution is actually the best way to go (Be it 1920x1080, or whatever).
I am very disappointed that CoH2 wasn't properly optimized. I only have the venerable 8800 GTX which is VERY old now, but I cringe at the idea of spending $1000 for a 30 fps increase, when I've seen people get higher framrates in far more eye candy games.
Hell, my GPU plays games like Assassins Creed and Battlefield 4 with better performance.
It doesn't really "render" the scene apparently. In theory it does, but it doesn't display that rendered image. Its sound almost like a buffer within the card before actually displaying it.
In any scenario, AA is never really recommended for people looking for performance in their games. Playing at your monitor's native resolution is actually the best way to go (Be it 1920x1080, or whatever).
I am very disappointed that CoH2 wasn't properly optimized. I only have the venerable 8800 GTX which is VERY old now, but I cringe at the idea of spending $1000 for a 30 fps increase, when I've seen people get higher framrates in far more eye candy games.
Hell, my GPU plays games like Assassins Creed and Battlefield 4 with better performance.
15 Dec 2013, 04:30 AM
#28
60
Posts: 93
Ya, I find the performance of the game rather lackluster myself as well, and you can't even SLI/Crossfire to make it better.
I can only imagine the card that would be needed to run coh2 on high at 4k.
I can only imagine the card that would be needed to run coh2 on high at 4k.
15 Dec 2013, 05:45 AM
#29
1
Posts: 2075 | Subs: 2
very disappointed that CoH2 wasn't properly optimized. I only have the venerable 8800 GTX which is VERY old now, but I cringe at the idea of spending $1000 for a 30 fps increase, when I've seen people get higher framrates in far more eye candy games.
The only card that is 1K is the Titan and my $350 R9 290 outperforms it in COH2. You dont have to spend 1K for high quality gaming, maybe 400ish.
15 Dec 2013, 21:10 PM
#30
Posts: 642
The only card that is 1K is the Titan and my $350 R9 290 outperforms it in COH2. You dont have to spend 1K for high quality gaming, maybe 400ish.
That's true. I'm not sure how companies go about their GPU support, but they probably went for mid range card optimization and left more specialized rigs as well as outdated ones behind, which goes to show why SLI isn't well supported.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
16 | |||||
13 | |||||
75 | |||||
25 | |||||
14 | |||||
7 | |||||
6 | |||||
4 | |||||
3 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.939410.696+5
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
VS
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
999 users are online:
1 member and 998 guests
M3g4s34n
M3g4s34n
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50004
Welcome our newest member, Abtik Services
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Abtik Services
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM