Anistrophic Filtering quality issue

[Trivium Nate]

Dude do you have doom 3? How does Doom3 look on your computer?

 

[lhuser]

To what I see, I don't see any differences on the cards. I don't have a good vision either.

 

[MikeReiner]

The floor doesn't look much different on the 7600 GT. Still shiny.

The shine was never the issue.
Look at the bombsite shots... at a distance you can see the cracks way more clearly on the older card.. it blurrs much quicker on my 7600GT.....

Look clam down. I know about yout AF AA, I was just saying that 7600GT looks better than the other card

I'm having a lot of trouble understanding that.

Dude do you have doom 3? How does Doom3 look on your computer?

It looks great. 1600x1200 high quality no aa.. runs good.

To what I see, I don't see any differences on the cards. I don't have a good vision either.

Mine isn't that good either.. though I only have trouble seeing things at far distances.

 

[X1337]

With AA=4x , AF=16x

 

[MikeReiner]

first post updated, explaining in better detail what I notice being different and why there was a difference.

 

[alvino]

Comparing the first two pictures, I now know what you're talking about. If you ask me, the DirectX 9 one looks more realistic to me. More cracks and so forth. The DirectX 8 one has more glare and coolness to it, but I think the DX 9 one is slightly more realistic.

 

[lhuser]

Yeah, I now see the difference. DX8 is actually less realistic in terms of gaming and usually, it doesn't pull the nice details that DX9 does. I'd say it's like that and nothing can be dealt...BTW, that FX5500 is supposed to support DX9..why is it in DX8?

My FX5200 is DX9, so why not yours?

 

[Spec]

With that card...if you actually turn down the quality of anti-stropic filtering your FPS Goes way down. Horribly down to my opinion, but also, 8.1 will be better gameplay even though lower FPS, because it has a lower FPS Cap, just like with 9.0 in css the fps cap is around 200.

 

[MikeReiner]

Yeah, I now see the difference. DX8 is actually less realistic in terms of gaming and usually, it doesn't pull the nice details that DX9 does. I'd say it's like that and nothing can be dealt...BTW, that FX5500 is supposed to support DX9..why is it in DX8?

My FX5200 is DX9, so why not yours?

It supports DX9.. but only the FX5600 and above use it in source..
see the problem is.. nVidia did such a shitty job... if I run that FX5500 in DX9... i'm lucky to get 20 fps.. whereas 8.1 in the same area could yield about 50-60.

Run source, check the options>video>advanced.. you'll see that the hardware level is 9.0.. but the hardware will be either 8.0 or 8.1.. valve did that.. since it runs 9.0 so terribly.

Comparing the first two pictures, I now know what you're talking about. If you ask me, the DirectX 9 one looks more realistic to me. More cracks and so forth. The DirectX 8 one has more glare and coolness to it, but I think the DX 9 one is slightly more realistic.

The dust in the air is absent in 8.1.. i'm convinced that it's the dust in the 9.0 that does this.. which honestly, it makes sense.. your in a desert afterall..