5 hours ago, Michael Moe said:

...and yet some drivers are better than others 😎

 

Michael Moe

Always the same people see improvements and higher fps with each release.

And others, myself included, never have had driver issues nor seen all those improvements.

Imho it is all about a correct driver install.

If the driver is updated then the profile should be 'Restore/Apply' d because it is uncertain if the offsets match the driver. So many faults and differences in performance and so on attributable to profile.

On 11/13/2018 at 5:14 PM, GSalden said:

Always the same people see improvements and higher fps with each release.

They're the ones who don't take ice with their whiskey! 😄

Out of interest I tested it, and I see no difference on screenshots I took for comparisons.

Tested following:

1. Nvidia CP default + 16x Aniso in P3D

2. Nvidia CP 16x Aniso + 16x Aniso in P3D

3. Nvidia CP default + Trilinear in P3D

The only difference I could spot was a 3rd one. 1st and 2nd = none.

1 hour ago, SimonC said:

Out of interest I tested it, and I see no difference on screenshots I took for comparisons.

Tested following:

1. Nvidia CP default + 16x Aniso in P3D

2. Nvidia CP 16x Aniso + 16x Aniso in P3D

3. Nvidia CP default + Trilinear in P3D

The only difference I could spot was a 3rd one. 1st and 2nd = none.

1 & 2 are the same and 3 is different. So your test seems to show things working OK.

...what I did was screenshot and zoom into the images. CP Restore/Apply. Then took shots of Tri, 2x,4x,8x,16xaniso. All show slightly different with clearer far distance for higher numbers. CP setting overrides for the same result.

9 hours ago, SteveW said:

...what I did was screenshot and zoom into the images. CP Restore/Apply. Then took shots of Tri, 2x,4x,8x,16xaniso. All show slightly different with clearer far distance for higher numbers. CP setting overrides for the same result.

That's right, it overrides, but setting 16x Aniso additionally to 16x Aniso already in the sim (or just instead) brings no improvement as stated in the first post, that was my point.

31 minutes ago, SimonC said:

That's right, it overrides, but setting 16x Aniso additionally to 16x Aniso already in the sim (or just instead) brings no improvement as stated in the first post, that was my point.

With 16 in the sim setting 16 in CP makes no change - why would it? They are the same.

Edited November 16, 20187 yr by SteveW

Setting aniso in the sim or overriding with CP is the same result - they are not re-rendered even more accurately they are already done:

 

Texture filtering: This is the method of projection of textures onto the facets. Anisotropic means that the view is calculated for all angles, linear simply meets the facet with the texture. At the far distance where textures are very small projections, anisotropic settings improve the clarity by interpolating the texture more accurately. 

 

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Texture filtering: This is the method of projection of textures onto the facets. Anisotropic means that the view is calculated for all angles, linear simply meets the facet with the texture. At the far distance where textures are very small projections, anisotropic settings improve the clarity by interpolating the texture more accurately. 

Been following this thread and...thanks for this explanation. After I did a little more experimentation, it is the AA settings moved out to my 1080 that improved my framerates....not the anisotropic settings.

Again, thanks for the explanation. 

Yes, AA and aniso are very similar in the way they merge pixels together. AA ultimately has a lot more to do. AA is done on each object in the scene as it is rendered in, rather than, what might be thought of as,  take a 'bigger' final view and 'compress' it down to reduce jaggedness, which does not result is as good a render as the AA on the card does to put items in amongst each other more accurately in the scene. 

...that's why simply having a larger monitor and more pixels is not a substitute for AA, and indeed aniso settings