Anti-Aliasing Levels Correspond to What?

I know this has been asked before, but is there any documentation as to what the rF2 AA levels (1 though 8) correspond to in terms of NVIDIA and AMD settings? Or, if they are unique combinations, what they include?

I ask because if I maintain a consistent test environment, my FPS is far from linear as my work my up from Level 1 to Level 8. The FPS will go up and down as you proceed up to Level 8 (for example, Level 4 has identical FPS to Level 1, both significantly higher than Level 3, but slightly lower than Level 2). This suggests it's not just "improving" settings as you go higher, but some alchemy that would be interesting to understand. The patterns is also inconsistent between super-sampling and adaptive multi-sampling (i.e., not just consistently and proportionally lower for super-sampling), suggesting again that there is some interesting alchemy of settings that may already be part of one of those two base sampling schemes.

Unfortunately, for my AMD rig, I cannot get rid of extremely distracting (to me) flickering shadows in the distance (they stop flickering when close to your car) unless I use super-sampling. When I do use super-sampling, the best performance/quality combo is achieved when using AMD CCC settings, not one of the 8 rF2 levels. I don't use Riva Tuner, but if I understood what the rF2 settings were doing, it might convince me to never use it, or that I need it to fine tune. Super-sampling kills frame rates, so I cannot achieve both good looking, flicker-free visuals and proper (consistently above 60) frame rates at the same time (R9 290X @ 1920x1200 with shadows and most other graphics settings maxed). FPS using multi-sampling is no concern (except for the flickering).

 

This might help, though it's for older cards

http://www.geeks3d.com/20110915/amd...lity-anti-aliasing-for-radeon-hd-6900-series/

 

How does that relate to the 8 levels in rF2?

 

It's my understanding that the levels shown in rF Config are picked up from the GPU driver. This can and will change between different GPUs and driver revisions.

 

Yes, that's what I've seen. So my old driver for a 770 had 8 levels in rF2 and the new driver for a 970 has only 4 levels in rF2. And, back in the beginning of rF2, my AMD driver may have had 6 levels?

 

Sorry but with everything we know about GPU performance and detail for 3 years whoever told you to buy a 290 for rF2 needs their head red.

 

I read somewhere recently that the 900-series drivers no longer support CSAA and maybe another type... as a result, less AA levels visible to rF2.

 

Why there is no definitive answer or documentation regarding in-game AA levels is highly frustrating. Your question has been asked many times without explanation from ISI (as far as I can see); we have to rely on educated guesses from users in the forums.

Relying on forum members for answers is not a bad thing per se, however an answer from the people who make the sim would be appreciated by everyone who uses rF2.

 

Exactly. Especially with issues like this one which have an important effect in performance. It is quite confusing that increasing level of AA does not always reduce FPS.

Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 mediante Tapatalk

 

I have to disagree, I am running triples on a single Amd card with almost everything maxxed out, 15 Ai and I have never dropped below 60fps, I always used nVidia cards before I picked up this Amd card at about half the price of a similar spec nVidia card and I couldn't be happier with it.

 

+1

had the 290 for a year before this 980 and the 290 ran everythign maxed with eyefinity 5925x1080 always well above 60fps.

regards aa, isnt it just level1-2x level2-4x and so on?

 

This makes some sense based on my testing where various levels were giving pretty much identical performance. So the 8 levels are still select-able, but in reality some of them are using the same features/settings.

 

Me, too. If you don't use super-sampling, it performs extremely well. NVIDIA is also brought to its knees by full super-sampling. The advantage it has is sparse-grid super-sampling. SGSS also gets rid of the flickering shadows in rF2, but at less performance cost. But what we need is for ISI to overhaul and improve shadows so that no version of super-sampling is needed. The rest of the graphics don't benefit from it and look great using even middle settings (rF2 levels) if you have high resolutions.

 

No, that was point of my post.

 

I agree with TechAde; I think the game picks it up somewhere from the video card drivers' settings.

GTX 970
Rfactor 2 - None, Lvl 1, Lvl 2, Lvl 3, Lvl 4
Nvidia Control Panel - "Use global setting", 2x, 4x, 8x

So does setting rFactor at Lvl 1 then use the "Use global settings" option in the Nvidia control panel (which is set to application controlled on my PC as I bet it is on most people's systems)? So basically Lvl 1 would most likely correspond to no AA in most people's cases? I don't see what else it could be because if you thought of it a different way and made Lvl 1 = 2x then that would leave nothing for Lvl 4.

 

Why? I ran it for a year on a 280X and it was magnificent. Unless there's a problem specific to the 290 you are aware of that we're not.

 

I think he meant its overkill to run rf2. Obviously, if it can run it at full balloons over 3 screens.

 

Because the 8 levels of FSAA listed are exactly the 8 settings in game.

So yes, it's GPU specific and taken from the driver.

 

Isn't there a DirectX API to get the levels and get a short description text for each level? Can't believe this doesn't exist...
Anyway, what I do is activate the option in the nVidia control panel that says "Enhance the application settings", so that way I can understand what anti aliasing type I am using and let the sim tell the driver where anti aliasing is worth and where it is worthless to get maximum performance without too much visual degradation.
Hope this helps.

 

They sure don't correspond in terms of FPS on my system if the listing is in order of lowest quality to highest quality (which it appears to me, but I am not an expert, that's why I asked my original question). That site says "EQAA brings advanced smoothing of aliased edges without requiring additional video memory, and with a minimal performance cost." At 2x that may be true. At 4x, the basic setting has much worse performance than the ones with EQAA, etc. Not consistent. I am also getting curious/unexpected results with Adaptive Multisampling. Knowing AMD, it's all some CCC issue that will get mysteriously fixed in a future release...and then broken again later.

And I see another thread about NVIDIA Win 10 driver issues. Can't win.