Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by fpollan, Mar 15, 2013.
No crashing whatsoever, everything maxed but no AA, Post, nor DOF.
using exclusive too.
why no post ? youll miss effects
I'm one of the few users that suffer eye strain with some effects, like AA and the like, like when they brought the uber suppression effect to BF3 i had to stop playing, eye strain after 5 - 10 mins, i still remember my last game, my friend from round the corner was with me, TDM Kharg.
same with sleeping dogs, baked DOF + fxaa = me no play.
o thats too bad man, your missing out on sunshafts, but eye strains are horrible, i get that wuth DOF
Good Lord! These drivers plus whatever new patch was applied not only fixed all the graphic glitches, they DOUBLED my frame rates on the benchmark!
I don't use the TressFX because I think it is silly. Who cares about her hair? Besides, if you think about it, she is filthy and covered with blood and slime. How could her hair possibly be clean? It looks more natural without the flowing, princess like tresses. Girls aren't magic (well, sometimes maybe ). They have dirty hair sometimes.
tried exclusive fullscreen both enabled and disabled. no dice
actually crashed faster with it disabled.
guess I'll play without tessellation for the time being...
Hmm, sorry to hear, it solves most peoples issues with crashing.
But what would 2x SSAA then be?
I don't think it is displayed at 2 or 4 times your resolution like it is supposed to.
I get better fps using 4xSSAA than I do when I downsample from 3840x2160 to 1920x1080.
Nice OC on that 680. Are you using a modded BIOS or did you remove the hardware voltage control?
Got a 670 myself at 1215MHz and am struggling to maintain 50 fps with everything maxed and TressFX OFF. Did you turn shadows up to Ultra, out of interest? I know a 680, especially at that speed, is a faster card, but just curious.
I completed the campaign with Adaptive V-Sync (Half Refresh Rate) - so locked to 30 fps - and everything maxed (2x SSAA), was pretty.
Not sure what your point is. But this game doesn't require high frame rate or fast movements like some of the competitive FPS do. (Counter-Strike, BF3 etc). Constant/locked 30 fps is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
I prefer 4xSSAA at 30 fps to 2xSSAA at 60 fps for games like Tomb Raider. (Though, I admit that difference between 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA at 2560x1600p resolution is very subtle at best.)
As I said earlier, with wireless XBOX360 controller, 3rd person games like Tomb Raider is perfectly playable at locked 30 fps.
That being said, I understand that 4xSSAA (OGSSAA) is quite crazy (and some might call it an overkill) at 2560x1600p because it's essentially rendering at 5120x3200p and scale it down to 2560x1600p. However, it's still an improvement in term of image quality.
And I see Tomb Raider uses about 2.6~2.8GB of VRAM. Hehe.. graphic cards with 3GB VRAM is becoming the norm these days.
I'm not surprised. Driver forced downsampling involves another brute force scaling stage with zero optimization from software(game). 4xSSAA supported by software/game should perform better. And it's doing what it's supposed to do in more "optimized" way.
The latest build of Project CARS is another good example. It has in-game downsampling (OGSSAA) option which performs considerably better than manual downsampling through NV driver.
After all, driver forced downsampling is the last (emergency) resort when no other AA options are feasible.
It depends on the implementation. Some applies in horizontal pixels while some others apply in vertical pixel. (Basically, it's either 1x2SSAA or 2x1SSAA).
@ PowerK - My point was that Tomb Raider might not need a 60 fps due it's slower pacing but I personally can feel the difference between 60 and 30 fps. 30 fps feels laggy/sluggish to me and because the screen is updating only once per two refreshes movement also looks less smooth. I prefer my PC games to run at least 45 fps and anything below that starts to hinder both controller (Xbox 360) response and look decidely less smooth when moving. Obviously you don't mind that but I still find it surprising that you've bought almost two grand worth of graphics hardware to play a game at a console framerate! Of course, it's your choice but I just find that surprising.
why they cant made proper aa like msaa
I still fail to see your point.
I'm all for the eye-candy and frame rate. I almost never settle for anything less than 60 fps with first person shooters. But 3rd person games like Tom Raider is fine at constant 30 fps. For me, constant 30 fps with maximum eye-candy > 60 fps with less eye-candy for game like Tomb Raider when played with XBOX360 controller.
You also have to remember that my base resolution is 2560x1600p. In terms of fillrate hit, your 1920x1080p with 2xSSAA is about same as me playing 2560x1600p *without* any AA.
And you think you're playing with "PC framerate" at 60 fps ? PC framerate is at 120/144Hz(fps), my friend. :giggle2:
EDIT : That being said, this game looks like a pre-rendered CG movie at 2560x1600p with 4xSSAA. I love it. Few screenshots I took while playing.
IMO, It's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support.
Witcher 2 with ulbersampling (SSAA) option, Project CARS with (downsampling = SSAA) option, SleepingDogs with ExtremeAA (SSAA) option were all great.
However, it could've been better if Crystal Dynamics implemented traditional MSAA *with* alpha to coverage (transparency MSAA) like Ubisoft did with their Far Cry 3.
Far Cry 3 is another great looking title at 2560x1600p with 4xMSAA + Enahnced Alpha to Coverage (TrMSAA).
Your screenshots look incredible. You could take press release ones with your setup!
I agree with what you said - I played TR at 30fps because I couldn't get a constant 60 with below maximum settings. So I turned it all up (2x SSAA) and played at 30 fps with no hiccups - game played fine and looked great too.
Yup. *Consistent* 30 fps is perfectly fine with games like Tomb Raider (thanks to frame rate limiter). Surprisingly, a lot of people still don't understand consistent frame rate is better than frame rates jumping all over all the place.
There are games which require minimum 60 fps (and higher). These are usually racing games and first person shooters which require precise control and fast pace. Tomb Raider is far from any of those. And for games like Tomb Raider, maximum eye-candy at consistent 30 fps is better than frame rate jumping all over the place or reduced eye-candy with 60 fps.
Just an update for the record, I found a sweetspot. Frame rate cap at 45 fps.
This game looks and plays stunning.
Next Metro (last light) is coming with ingame SSAA
I also run 2800x1800 downsampled to 1920x1200 in Tombraider along with
2xSSAA. I do believe in some games, even they support ingame AA wich can enhanced to (SG)SSAA, still fail to cover everything, so the brute force attack comes in handy (when you got the power), to treat everything(uncovered alpha's and textures!)
I also alway's use the frameratlimiter (mostly at 59 it's important to eliminate lag to set it just below your refreshrate, or lower when you don't archive enough fps to get till 59)
Although, it's great to see another AAA title with out of the box OGSSAA support. I'm not really a fan of OGSSAA. (But it's indeed better than nothing).
Why? Because the SSAA AMD seems to be using with their Gaming Evolved titles such as Sleeping Dogs and now Tomb Raider is OGSSAA - the most inefficient SSAA there is. SGSSAA looks better at higher or the same performance. With in-game SSAA for example in Sniper Elite V2, Sleeping Dogs and Tomb Raider, I can still see quite a bit of shimmering. SGSSAA would be a much better solution.
That being said, I don't see a reason to use 2880x1800p downsampling with in-game 2xOGSSAA on your 1920x1200p monitor. Just use in-game 4xOGSSAA at 1920x1200p without downsampling. You actually get better image quality this way. Because 2880x1800p downsampling involves 1.5x1.5 driver OGSSAA and extra interpolation which results in "softer" (read blurred) image compared to straight up in-game 4xOGSSAA without extra interpolation. You're probably thinking this interpolation artifacts (softer image) being better. But it's not, IMO.