Anti-Aliasing Performance

This content was originally featured on Amdmb.com and has been converted to PC Perspective’s website. Some color changes and flaws may appear.

“Jaggies” is the result of rendering an edge using the display’s default pixel locations. Anti-aliasing removes these jagged edges by softening the edge to make it appear more smooth – creating the illusion of rendering an edge on the screen as if it were at a higher resolution. As a result, anti-aliasing is generally more important on lower resolution displays (i.e. 1024×768 on a 19″ monitor) as there are less pixels to render an edge. But many users, regardless of resolution and monitor size, use anti-aliasing to generally improve the way images look.

Here we will test the three major chipset’s in anti-aliasing performance. We will compare both the anti-aliasing quality in and their frame rates as recorded in X2: The Threat demo at 1024×768.

Trader's hut in Seyda Neen.

Setup:

Anti-aliasing quality test The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (town of Seyda Neen)
Anti-aliasing performance test X2: The Threat rolling demo

 

Results:

  Radeon 9500/9700 GeForce FX Series GeForce 4 Ti Series
0xAA

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 42
Radeon 9500 – 31.4 fps
Radeon 9700 – 42.6 fps

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 43
FX5200 – 19.6 fps
FX5600 – 24.9 fps
FX5900Ultra – 46.9 fps
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 44
Ti4800SE – 36.816 fps 
2xAA

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 45
Radeon 9500 28.5 fps
Radeon 9700
38.0 fps

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 46
FX5200 – 11.8 fps
FX5600 – 22.03 fps
FX5900Ultra – 43.413 fps

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 47
Ti4800SE – 27.872 fps
4xAA
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 48
Radeon 950022.4 fps
Radeon 9700 – 30.8 fps

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 49
FX52007.3 fps
FX5600 – 16.856 fps
FX5900Ultra – 38.382 fps

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 50
Ti4800SE – 18.25 fps
6xAA

ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 51
Radeon 950014.2 fps
Radeon 970021.8 fps

   
8xAA
 
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 52
FX56008.75 fps
FX5900U – 23.564 fps
 

Click the thumbnails for the whole image.

All in all, I feel that ATI’s anti-aliasing is superior to NVIDIA’s because of both performance and quality. ATI manages to produce a better anti-aliasing image with a lower anti-aliasing level. In the case of the Radeon 9700, we see that 2xAA looks and performs like 4xAA on the FX5900 Ultra. The Radeon 9700 has the potential of being a “doorman’s FX5900 Ultra”, but does it hold true? We will explore this in more detail shortly.

A reader wrote to me regarding the last video card round-up stating that though ATI’s anti-aliasing looks better than NVIDIA’s in a still image, NVIDIA’s anti-aliasing produced less anti-aliasing artifacts when in motion. I put this to the test to see if I can see a difference between the two and honestly I couldn’t really see a difference. Perhaps my eyes aren’t discerning enough to pick out differences while the screen is moving. Perhaps it’d be an interesting exercise at a later date to compare movement using a tool that captures to video.


2xAA Radeon 9700 vs. 4xAA FX5900 Ultra

When analyzing the anti-aliasing images and the performance numbers, we see something curious when comparing the FX5900 Ultra to the Radeon 9700.
At 1024×768, it would appear that the Radeon 9700 at 2x anti-aliasing looks and performs similar to the FX5900 Ultra at 4x anti-aliasing. It’s almost like getting a $400 card for $200. But let’s try 1600×1200 just to make sure.

1024×768 Radeon 9700 FX5900 Ultra
AA Level
2x
4x
AA Sample
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 45
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 49
Freelancer
56.0 fps
49.2 fps
Morrowind
32.3 fps
27.3 fps
UT2K3
127.3 fps
118.7 fps
X2 Demo
38.0 fps
38.4 fps
Price
~ $200 USD
~ $400 USD

The story changes at 1600×1200. At 1600×1200, we see that the Radeon’s 2xAA is nothing near the 4xAA quality on the NVIDIA. It would seem that NVIDIA’s 4x anti-aliasing looks better at higher resolutions and performs at similar levels.

1600×1200 Radeon 9700 FX5900 Ultra
AA Level
2x
4x
AA Sample
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 55
ATi & Nvidia Video Card Roundup #2 - Graphics Cards 56
Freelancer
47.4 fps
40.1 fps
Morrowind
33.2 fps
26.3 fps
UT2K3
66.2 fps
97.6 fps
X2 Demo
23.8 fps
25.1 fps
Price
~ $200 USD
~ $400 USD

So what can we conclude here? I think it’s safe to say that if you’re looking to play games at a lower resolution, a Radeon 9700 will probably be the best investment as the anti-aliasing quality and performance is superior (not to mention the cheaper price tag). However, if you’re playing at higher resolutions, the NVIDIA has the advantage in both image and performance. Consumers in the market for video cards will have to decide if the extra $200 USD on the FX5900 Ultra is worth the improved anti-aliasing performance at 1600×1200.

 

« PreviousNext »