2xSSAA vs 4xMSAA

[flycln 435]

23 hours ago, flycln said:

I feel like I'm in the sweet spot. 11GB of vram (2080ti) and a 3440x1440 ultrawide monitor. No vram issues whatsoever, smooth flying, pretty high settings.

 

23 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Likewise, You using the VRR setting in P3D with G-sync? Its brilliant. 

And then I tried the Tfdi 717 beta for v5...

That plane seems to be so poorly optimized at this point that it eats vram for breakfast. The PMDG 747 uses a lot less vram.

So it really is all down to 3rd-party developers to optimize their stuff to deal with P5D's vram consumption.

[captain420 3,099]

With a 4K 55" UHD TV. I see noticeable difference from 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA. The latter is better and I can see less jagged lines. For those who said this isn't needed on 4K screens is wrong.

[cwburnett 1,809]

1 hour ago, captain420 said:

With a 4K 55" UHD TV. I see noticeable difference from 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA. The latter is better and I can see less jagged lines. For those who said this isn't needed on 4K screens is wrong.

As @Nemo mentioned, it is about dpi, not resolution.  At 55" I'm surprised 4x is enough.  But a 32" 4K display may not require any AA at all to look crisp, because the pixels are so small.  As you lower resolution OR increase screen size, AA has to increase.  On a 32" display, the 3840 pixels are spread out over 28 inches; in a 55" display, the same number of pixels is spread out over 48 inches.  Pixel density is 138 per inch on the 32" display, but only 80 per inch on a 55" 4K screen. That lower dpi directly translates to a need for more AA to make the image look good (when viewed from the same distance - viewing distance is also directly related, but that's another bag of worms).

With respect to VRAM, the multiplier 2x/4x/8x determines how many passes of AA are completed and the more passes, the more VRAM and more work for the GPU.  From a performance perspective, and specifically related to poorly optimized dynamic lighting, if I have to back down from SSAA to MSAA, I back down from 2xSSAA to 8XMSAA.  On my system at least, 2xSSAA is better, and harder on my GPU, than 8xMSAA, ignoring the added VRAM demand.  I run a 43" 4K display at 30hz, so 2xSSAA works well for me.

Edited May 12, 2020 by cwburnett

[captain420 3,099]

2xSSAA is harder on the system than 8xMSAA?

[cwburnett 1,809]

21 minutes ago, captain420 said:

2xSSAA is harder on the system than 8xMSAA?

Yes, SSAA as a process is much harder on the GPU because it involves rendering the entire image at very high resolution, whereas MSAA more efficiently uses just adjacent pixels.  MSAA is a much faster and easier process, but sacrifices the quality achieved by the much more rigorous SSAA process.  This article provides some additional clarity: https://www.sapphirenation.net/anti-aliasing-comparison-performance-quality

[guibru 474]

3 hours ago, captain420 said:

With a 4K 55" UHD TV. I see noticeable difference from 2xSSAA and 4xSSAA. The latter is better and I can see less jagged lines. For those who said this isn't needed on 4K screens is wrong.

What you say is true, but it is useless.
4xSSAA with a 4K TV is too much, your GPU no longer works for nothing. This extra gain you can use it for another setting or keep it if you have scenes or planes very greedy in FPS.
There is always a balance between your CPU and GPU to get the best possible performance with your hardware.

4k ---> 4xMSAA or 8xMSAA

FullHD ---> 4xSSAA minimum  (flickering)

Edited May 12, 2020 by guibru