Widescreen Gaming Forum

At insanely-high-resolutions like 1600x1200+ (oops! i mentioned a non-WS resolution! :P ) you don't really need AA. There are so many pixels on screen, that diagonal lines dont appear jagged.

AA is a God-send if you are running low resolutions where a 45' line looks like series of steps. :lol:

So dump the AA and pump up the resolution i say. 8)

AA still does help a lot :) Ive been playing morrowind again the past few days and at 1920x1200 with 4XAA and 16XAF it looks amazing :)

However, i find that a lower resolution with AA looks better than a higher without it. 1680x1050 with AA instead of 1920x1200 for example.

If you are seeing jaggies at that resolution then something is wrong.

Dependent on the pixel pitch, you'll see jaggies without AA. With it, it's better at tricking your eyes.

However, I'd rather have something at native res with no AA, than a non-native with. Of course, the best is native+AA, but there we are... ;)

If you are seeing jaggies at that resolution then something is wrong.

I see jaggies even at 1920x1200 ... although I do have a particular eye for detail ... :wink: ... and I can assure you nothing is wrong ... :lol:



@ PS ... I'd much rather have non-native with AA than native without ... even if that native is 1920x1200 ... :? :lol: ... wouldn't the world be boring if we were all the same ... :lol:
... but (now) I don't think I have a game that I can't run at 1920 with at least 2xAA ... :wink: :lol: ... just hoping Oblivion or GRAW don't upset things.

I agree, mate :D - nothing I've tried playing yet hasn't done at least 40fps at 1920x1200 with 2xAA and max settings...

meh.. this 2005, while sure if I look hard enough I notice them, but they seem much more natural and therefor hidden then my last large screen crt monitor. The crispness of the games blows me away, I dont think id ever turn on AA again for fear of bluring it. ;)