With DX9 the background is drawn on containing the slot for the object, or aircraft, and the anti-aliasing merge to combine with the background is made. With DX 10 and DX 11, the image or "transparency" containing the object to render has the AA'd edge pixel in place first, hence Transparency AA in NI. But at the limit of scaling the edge pixel is lost since it can't be computed at the wrong scale, so the transparency contains the un-anti-aliased edge pixel. The sparse grid sample pulls in true edge colours guaranteed to average to the proper value. I've dumbed it down a lot but that's more or less what's going on. So I add SG in case I happen to load up an A36, but any supersampling saps the rendering speed, and more as I increase in-sim detail.

No amount of fiddling with "Antialiasing - Mode" would promote any differences with the "Antialiasing - Setting" value chosen.

 

+1. Exactly what I said earlier in this thread but no one seems to listen any more...

+1. Exactly what I said earlier in this thread but no one seems to listen any more...

 

I clicked on your like comment button :smile:

 

But agree with Rob about checking yourselves use a framerate recorder and try override. My tests all use very bad weather, volumetric fog, and overcast, and found "Override" setting maybe a little less fps at times but less dropouts and overall average a little higher over the flight. Maybe using different screen resolutions can make big changes, possibly resolutions like 1920x1080 is more optimised than 1920x1200..

I read this thread carefully and every word.

Sadly my conclusions are:

1. There is an inherent problem with AA in P3D V2 and above.

Fixing the problem with lesser graphical settings and/ or a monster computer with a monster GPU is not a real solution to the ordinary person with current software's optimizations.

2. P3D is not meant to have the amount of real weather ASN is capable of injecting into it.

IMO the best "solution" is to run @ 4K.

 

And likewise IMO I think it's really a shame we should have these kind of issues in 2015 (soon to be 2016) and with today's hardware.

I use "Enhance Application Settings" not override.  Also recommend you don't run a different DXGI (like SweetFX/Reshade and/or any product that puts a DXGI in the root of P3D).

 

 

As far as monitors, one step up to 4K will make the AA look great without having to use NI SGSS AA.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I know its subjective and PC dependent, but Rob, can you also share what your sim display settings are when using this NI state?

Sim settings are 4X MSAA and 8X AF.

 

I read this thread carefully and every word.
Sadly my conclusions are:
1. There is an inherent problem with AA in P3D V2 and above.
Fixing the problem with lesser graphical settings and/ or a monster computer with a monster GPU is not a real solution to the ordinary person with current software's optimizations.
2. P3D is not meant to have the amount of real weather ASN is capable of injecting into it.

 

That's an odd conclusion.  No inherent problem with AA in P3D2.x or 3.x ... perhaps you mean the DX11 API and shader model?  I hate to disappoint, but DX12's AA is the same as DX11 ... if you want better AA you need to petition nVidia or AMD.  nVidia's solution is SGSS AA.

 

BTW, the same AA limitations are present with XP10 when using HDR and that's OpenGL API.

 

So if anyone is looking for better AA in the future, you'll have to hope nVidia or AMD come up with something like SGSS AA without the associated performance reduction (in their defense both have tried but SGSS is still the best AA).  Shader based usage from existing graphics API's aren't going to make AA better.

 

The solution options:

1.  Higher resolution monitor

2.  Use SGSS AA on lower resolution monitor

3.  Go back to DX9 and do away with HDR, tessellation, new shader model -- (leaves a rather less realistic environment)

 

Improved realism never comes for free ... more realistic = more the need for better CPU/GPU ... flight simulators have always been this way and as P3D and XP10 continue to improve adding more graphical features means it will place more demands on the CPU/GPU.  If one desires a more realistic experience then one has to pay for that experience via hardware.  The good news is that a $2200-$2700 system with 4K monitor can accomplish much of that maxed out realism with great AA.

 

This isn't going to change any time soon ... I don't consider my system "good enough" to run everything at MAX with many add-ons ... and no 64bit isn't going to change this either (it didn't make XP10 any faster and a 64bit P3D will not be any faster).

 

Wait for 8K monitors to get affordable next year (force prices of 4K monitors will be sold for <$200)... fortunately as the resolution increases the need for AA decreases.

 

I can understand someone not wanting to spend the money to have better AA, but blaming LM for bad AA is just not accurate.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Sim settings are 4X MSAA and 8X AF.

 

 

That's an odd conclusion.  No inherent problem with AA in P3D2.x or 3.x ... perhaps you mean the DX11 API and shader model?  I hate to disappoint, but DX12's AA is the same as DX11 ... if you want better AA you need to petition nVidia or AMD.  nVidia's solution is SGSS AA.

 

BTW, the same AA limitations are present with XP10 when using HDR and that's OpenGL API.

 

So if anyone is looking for better AA in the future, you'll have to hope nVidia or AMD come up with something like SGSS AA without the associated performance reduction (in their defense both have tried but SGSS is still the best AA).  Shader based usage from existing graphics API's aren't going to make AA better.

 

The solution options:

1.  Higher resolution monitor

2.  Use SGSS AA on lower resolution monitor

3.  Go back to DX9 and do away with HDR, tessellation, new shader model -- (leaves a rather less realistic environment)

 

Improved realism never comes for free ... more realistic = more the need for better CPU/GPU ... flight simulators have always been this way and as P3D and XP10 continue to improve adding more graphical features means it will place more demands on the CPU/GPU.  If one desires a more realistic experience then one has to pay for that experience via hardware.  The good news is that a $2200-$2700 system with 4K monitor can accomplish much of that maxed out realism with great AA.

 

This isn't going to change any time soon ... I don't consider my system "good enough" to run everything at MAX with many add-ons ... and no 64bit isn't going to change this either (it didn't make XP10 any faster and a 64bit P3D will not be any faster).

 

Wait for 8K monitors to get affordable next year (force prices of 4K monitors will be sold for <$200)... fortunately as the resolution increases the need for AA decreases.

 

I can understand someone not wanting to spend the money to have better AA, but blaming LM for bad AA is just not accurate.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Would a 4K 32" Monitor with no SGSS look a lot better then a 1080p monitor with 2xSGSS...I'm about to buy a 4K monitor because Im so fed up with the AA and I cannot run 4x SGSS with my current card. 

Would a 4K 32" Monitor with no SGSS look a lot better then a 1080p monitor with 2xSGSS...I'm about to buy a 4K monitor because Im so fed up with the AA and I cannot run 4x SGSS with my current card. 

 

  If you can't run 4x SGSS with your current card then running 4x the resolution is going to prove rather difficult as well.

Agree with Dave, without knowing what your current GPU is Ron ... any hints?

 

If running 4K res, the minimum GPU I would recommend is a 970 (around $300 or less).   FYI, the font/text/icons are going to look very small on a 4K 32" monitor.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Agree with Dave, without knowing what your current GPU is Ron ... any hints?

 

If running 4K res, the minimum GPU I would recommend is a 970 (around $300 or less).   FYI, the font/text/icons are going to look very small on a 4K 32" monitor.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Ya so I have a 970 and its find with 4XSGSS until I hit cloud cover, I planned on getting a 980TI plus a 4K monitor and that would cover my AA problem and the fact that I won't need SGSS right? Plus everything will look amazing.  What size Monitor is good for P3D?

I tried with 2x and 4x DSR ( 3 seperate windows ) with no AA and objects from bearby look real good.

However, objects mls away still need AA.

I tested this on 3 native 1920x1089 HD tv's.

Setting AA ingame to 2x helped.

 

With the native resulution I had set it to 4x or 8x...

Recently added another 780ti to my system so that I could SLI into SGSS 8x goodness but nope... with any serious amount of cloud cover, it's a no-go. And, on top of that, SLI requires ever-so-precious CPU headroom.

 

I don't have much experience with FSX nor any with Steve's DX10 fixer but I heard a rumor that he built in a feature whereby some AA functions excluded clouds and particulate. If that's true, we need that. Bad...

I don't have much experience with FSX nor any with Steve's DX10 fixer but I heard a rumor that he built in a feature whereby some AA functions excluded clouds and particulate. If that's true, we need that. Bad...

 

Big time!

Recently added another 780ti to my system so that I could SLI into SGSS 8x goodness but nope... with any serious amount of cloud cover, it's a no-go. And, on top of that, SLI requires ever-so-precious CPU headroom.

 

I don't have much experience with FSX nor any with Steve's DX10 fixer but I heard a rumor that he built in a feature whereby some AA functions excluded clouds and particulate. If that's true, we need that. Bad...

 

Hi Garrett,

 

DX11 API is different from DX10 API, AA was tightened up ... there was a "trick" that worked under DX10 but that same "trick" doesn't work under DX11.  Beau (LM) had attempted to use that trick back in P3D V2.2 Beta and unfortunately it didn't work.  There was a "possible" alternative but it would have broken all weather engine compatibility.

 

SGSS 8X is a tall order for 2-way SLI with a 780Ti ... I've tried my Titan X 2-way SLI with 4X SGSS AA at 4K res in very dense clouds and it can "just" handle it, but GPU usage on both cards is close to 95%, not to mention VRAM usage jumps considerably.

 

Cheers, Rob.