I note that Word Not Allowed recommends Anisotropic Filtering setting in NVIDIA Inspector to be USER DEFINED/OFF but the pinned PDF above recomments Application Controlled.

 

I would appreciate any comments about the difference in these settings and which is best to use.

 

I have the GTX 580.

 

Thanks

 

Greg

Use Word Not Allowed guide from his blog, avsim guide is not upadated so often but here is the lates version: http://#####.wordpress.com/fsx-software-and-hardware-guide/

 

So, it's same like in PDF!

Thanks for this link. This link suggests the application controlled, but unlike all the others which set the Anisotropic Filtering setting to 16X chooses [OFF-Point].

 

Do you know why that is chosen?

 

Greg

Thanks for clarifying!

 

Greg

Aniso on in the sim has been my standard since the faster processors came out, as the IQ is much better than TriLinear.

As far as 'Application-controlled' or 'User-defined' goes - the first allows FSX to judge and display how it sees and processes objects in the distance and as you approach them, while 'User-defined' gives you the opportunity to modify or make distant mipmap resolution a little better - or a little worse. Many simflyers run 'User-defined' and 16x, as it has little effect on performance and there's not a lot of difference between the two. It's pretty subjective.

In DX10 both AA and AF (Aniso) are selected in FSX, and yet AA and AF both appear to have an impact.

Also for any setting which you use or recommend, someone else will argue that you have the wrong setting. This is the way of FSX. :lol:

I've been messing with DX10 for too long, but just to add - AF should normally be set to "Trilinear" in the sim, allowing Inspector to disable it with "Trilinear Optimization='OFF'": Because of the mode = "User defined/Off" we can then choose the type or amount of Anisotropic Filtering through the "AF - Setting, which, in most cases is "16x".

Well, in DX10 we have always used Steve's suggestions, as he is a graphics expert/programmer/designer, and DX10 handles both AA and AF quite differently, but in this case I'm talking DX9, Word Not Allowed.

 

The issue 'whether to use NI or FSX to control the AF, depends upon many user-set variables, Word Not Allowed, but it is general practice when using a modern GPU - to let the GPU handle both AA and AF: i.e. at the hardware level, where it is far more efficient than the application, or game.

 

Poor wording, in my post above perhaps, but I was kind-of more-so addressing "When choosing Inspector to handle AF - do this, then this... etc.," because the actual method employed by Inspector is pretty vague, to say the least.

 

The description I gave is the method used to ensure that AF is actually being controlled by NI, and not by FSX.

To do this you need to set 'Trilinear' in FSX, thus preventing FSX from overriding NI's hardware AF: pushing this off to the GPU will lessen FSX's work, and allow the video card to do it's job (in some way dependent upon the gpu, but nowadays - any modern gpu should be very capable of doing this job better than FSX can).

 

You suggested ACES might have expressed FSX could do it better - there were not too many GPU's around such as those we have today. That being said - there are still older cards out there, so they should allow FSX to set AF. One might try both methods to see which one works best for any particular system. There's not ever a magic bullet or pat answer.

 

As far as your system goes, Word Not Allowed, and with your knowledge and experience - I have no idea why your "system suffers so badly when filtering using NI" - only you know how it's set up.

 

AF via NI should not be any harder than when set via FSX, unless the LOD is set to higher than recommended level - like 6.5, or there are textures without alphas or mips, but for absolute sure - one other parameter (like LOD) mistakenly set high or low - or worse - guessed at - will have an impact on your visual experience - particularly with AA (high levels of SS or Sparse Grid), and AF - as AF is primarily dealing with distance and mipmapping.

 

Setting FSX configuration parameters depends upon one's experience and knowledge of the specific technology being 'tweaked' at the time., and just what visual experience you're looking for.

 

This is an ever-changing world, and we do the best in our individual Guides to be as accurate and correct as is possible, and using the best resources available, so that the Simflyer gets the best possible experience, but....... some folks like SweetFX - some don't, some like DX10 - some don't. Some get OOM's and some don't! :lol:

 

For a good explanation of AF go here to the Nvidia site.

 

All the Best!

Word Not Allowed - if you want your old job back - be my guest - please - go and ask Tom Allensworth, but as long as I am moderator here - do not respond to mine or anyone else's post in this aggressive, argumentative and condescending manner, particularly in splitting hairs over things like Hardware AA and AF, and especially in settings where Nick, Tabs and I actually agree upon.

 

Further, should you publicly oppose me, or anyone else in this fashion again - I will ban you from the Avsim forums. Period.

 

Paul J

I'm confused. Guess I missed a deleted post there? Hope so.

Hi Martin: Anisotropic Filtering is part of a process used by FSX in order to smooth the size-changes of buildings, bridges, railroads, etc., and other scenery objects as the distance from the users viewpoint changes. FSX textures contain several different resolutions which are used to create this illusion. It is accomplished by using progressively smaller or larger texture mipmaps blended together, modified slightly to account for the user viewpoint, and containing greater or lesser detail, dependent upon the users direction of travel. AF smooths the change, something like anti-aliasing does in edge-blurring, such that the action is barely visible.

 

The discussion circles around whether AF should be FSX-controlled, or GPU-controlled, the case being very often users setting "Anisotropic=1" in the sim, (letting FSX do it's thing), with others setting 'User-defined/Off' in Inspector with "Trilinear" set in FSX, and with differing settings shown in other guides. Some difficulties are - DX10 or DX9 - they both respond differently: the naming of these settings is confusing to many simflyers, me included. AF is a feature that attempts to sharpen receding lines as a texture map recedes into the background. The sharpening works much like the "unsharp mask" feature in graphics editors by increasing contrast of "soft" edges against a contrasted background.These two functions work against each other. If you max out AA, you are defeating some of the chosen lines that AF is trying to sharpen. Mipmap settings will also sharpen edges as you increase the setting. Also, maximum realism is achieved differently on different cards. While AF is a fairly benign setting, it shouldn't be controversial, with one persons opinion being absolutely correct, and all others being wrong, as with most settings - it's pretty darned subjective, and at the mercy of hundreds of different inputs, and in the end with only a slightly noticeable improvement in the IQ! Quoting Nick Needham - "It's very often six of one and a half-dozen of another".

 

With a modern, fast gpu, DX9 mode - "Trilinear" should be entered in the "Filtering" box in FSX settings in order to prevent FSX using it's own Anisotropic filtering.

Nvidia Inspector should then have the AF Mode set to "User-defined/Off", with 16x being set in "AF Setting".

 

There should be little performance drop with these settings, and setting this way, one will know immediately if one has the wrong profile selected, or if one has, say - a driver issue.

 

Find a balance between AA, AF and mipmapping.(ATI/AMD). There are also settings in the Inspector for "Quality vs. Performance" , and this should usually be set for Quality or High Quality.

 

I hope this is a little clearer and if you find ambiguities like this, in either DX9 or 10 sections of the Avsim Guide, please - let me know, and I will correct them asap. I'm currently working on clarifying other information, plus adding new generally unpublished work, which will be released sometime in the next two - three weeks.

 

All the Best - and apologies for being long-winded!

Sorry Paul, you have misunderstood.

 

I know how AF works. My confusion was because I couldn't uunderstand why Word Not Allowed was chastised. I can't see anything in this thread that could be regarded as untoward.

 

Perhaps there was a deleted post I missed? If so, my sincerest apologies. :smile:

 

As for AF set to application controlled, as I said in the other thread, for me the issue is over REX water. There is a very significant improvement in frame rate when set to application controlled, and a minimal decrease in IQ.

 

When I say an increase in frame rate, it's actually a "drop" in frame rate over REX water. A drop in frame rate that is mitigated by setting AF to application controlled.

 

 

This may of course be a completely different issue to the one Word Not Allowed describes, but the issue I spotted, and posted about on the REX forum was confirmed to be a valid one, both by REX forum members and by the REX developers.

 

So in regard to REX water Word Not Allowed's observations are correct. As for not over water, then as I said, Word Not Allowed's issue may be different to mine.

 

There should be little performance drop with these settings, and setting this way, one will know immediately if one has the wrong profile selected, or if one has, say - a driver issue.

 

 

As you can see from the post on the REX forum, from back in February, most in the thread were delighted that setting AF to application controlled, provided a significant increase in fame rate. This is not subjective, many of us replicated it.

 

So the above is the aspect of this issue that interests me, but again, Word Not Allowed may have a different issue to me.

 

From the REX forum...

 

 

 

 

http://www.realenvir...__fromsearch__1

 

 

 

Quote

 

In case it's of any interest to anybody...

 

II have been plagued with an issue where i would have high frame rate till I flew over REX water. As I did so, the frame rate would plummet, a loss of 50%.

 

Not such a problem at an AA setting of 8XS, but very apparent at 8XSQ. Forcing me to use a lower AA setting than my rig could handle, and I favored, or very low water setting.

 

I manged to fix the issue as follows...

 

In Nvidia Inspector, I set anisotropic filtering to application controlled, rather than the recommended user defined/off, recommended by PMDG and others. Anisotropic should be ticked on of course in FSX,

 

No frame rate loss at all now over REX water at 8XSQ.

 

It seems FSX is far better at handling REX water, than Nvidia Inspector.

 

Hope this is helpful to you chaps, I'm as pleased as punch and nicely set up for REX Essential now

 

History has a myriad of examples of questioning those "in the know". New information often leads to old theories being turned over completely...

 

Just because a number of people agree on some issue does not make that THE definitive solution, particularly as a number of others have determined an issue and found a setting long considered to be overtaken to be better after all...

 

I for one am glad for those who spend hours of their own free time tweaking, experimenting and publishing their results. A number of definite improvements to image quality and in-game performance are the result of these hours of research. I thank you for taking the time AND passing your information on to us, at no cost...

 

I do not condone aggressive behaviour on any forum, we should all be able to discuss all issues with respect to our hobby and interests, as long as we maintain netiquette and respect for one another. Of course we cannot comment on the current situation, as it would appear that a post has been removed.

 

A

The issue is the same.

 

Then I am in agreement with you Word Not Allowed. If anybody would like to read the thread posted on the REX forum, they can see that the issue was confirmed. A loss of frame rate to the tune of 50% was hard to miss.

 

 

 

When REX Essential was released, the issue became less apparent than when i first identified it.

 

REX set to DXT1 and reload textures helps. The new compression algorithm helps, but it is still present, to a degree.

 

From the other thread...

 

 

Just tested again. Nearly twelve months since I last tested this.

 

Over water, with AF at application controlled. In the QW Avro = VC 78-88 Outside view 120, up to my monitors refresh rate.

 

Over water with AF set to 16x in Nvidia Inspector = VC 59-71 Outside view 120.

 

So 20% reduction in frame rate with Inspector at 16x. Compared with application controlled.

 

Not as much as the 50% penalty I noticed 12 months ago, but still significant. Upgraded REX to Essential plus, and different settings in REX might account for 20% penalty instead of 50% I saw 12 months ago.

Martin,

 

same here... I saw the issue on a couple of sites, read the REX forum thread, tried it out and came to a similar conclusion that AF in-game seems to be better in general...

 

A

Thanks Andrew. I have no doubt about this at all. How could I when I can replicate it at will. As can you, as can Word Not Allowed. As did others on the REX forum. :smile: