|
What can match 8800GTS?
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. September 2008 @ 06:27 |
Link to this message
|
None of the textures are particularly high res, so it all gets a bit bland as you increase the res. The clarity is still there because the textures are expanded to the correct resolution, but the detail in them is lost.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 00:29 |
Link to this message
|
So games like FEAR are better for high res screens? I know the visual fidelity in FEAR is pretty extreme. The textures are just amazing and everything is absolutely awesome in 1920. I could never get my GTS to do soft shadows with AA though. Soft shadows only worked without AA. Which really isn't bad at all on this screen.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 07:15 |
Link to this message
|
Not sure I really noticed the difference, I enabled it all, AA is certainly present, not sure about the soft shadows - meh, I've got shadows, so it's fine by me... :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 14:21 |
Link to this message
|
Try soft shadows without AA. You'll see what I mean. Unless ATI cards can do soft shadows and AA at the same time. I haven't tried it with the 4870 yet.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 18:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wouldn't know, but I remember all the past hoo-hah about HDR+AA combined and the likes, as far as I know, the HD2000 series onwards solved all that.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 20:13 |
Link to this message
|
The 8800GTS did AA with HDR in Oblivion just fine. It was a bit much for the card at 1920 x 1200. At 1680 x 1050 I could use 4xAA which looked like 1920 with 2xAA.
The 4870 can handle full 1920 with 4xAA. Oblivion still looks sweet... with a few minor mods of course :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 20:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Estuansis:
At 1680 x 1050 I could use 4xAA which looked like 1920 with 2xAA.
What?
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
16. September 2008 @ 20:28 |
Link to this message
|
Dead serious. The AA is such in Oblivion that it cleans up the image SIGNIFICANTLY. I was more than happy to settle for a lower res with some AA. No jaggies whatsoever. Anywhere.
I also depends on what screen you have. Your 30" Dell should be pretty good out of native res. Try it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. September 2008 @ 17:06
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
22. September 2008 @ 23:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
can anyone while gamign actually tell the differnce between 1650 and 1920?
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 23:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
I honestly cant.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 01:27 |
Link to this message
|
For me, there's a big difference. In IQ AND jaggies. When out of native res the image just isn't as detailed. Try playing something like FEAR for a few hours at 1920, then pause the game and switch it over to 1680. The difference is immediate and noticeable. The jaggies are way more pronounced and it feels like the screen just took a dump on your desk.
Some aren't as sensitive to non-native resolutions, but I've been using my 24" screen for over a year now and I can't stand anything less than 1920 res. I'm sure if it was on a 1680 native res monitor it would be far better. But I HATE playing games out of native res. Some are acceptable with AA, but in general, it looks like crap.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 06:58 |
Link to this message
|
I can tell the difference instantly. The dell 30" is very poor out of native res, for the simple reason that there's only a 31% difference in pixel count between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 on a 24". The next resolution down for me, however, is 1920x1200, which is a 78% change in pixel count, it's vast, it's like running 1280x800 on a 24".
Spam, you're one to talk, you use minimum graphics settings... <ugh>
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
23. September 2008 @ 09:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
hehe, yeah your right, maybe maxed out ill tell the difference :D
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 15:03 |
Link to this message
|
Maxed out, the difference between 1920 and 1680 is the difference between pretty and ugly. It makes everything so "out of focus" and less detailed. 1680 certainly took a lot away from my Crysis experience. Other than Crysis, I have no need for a 4870. But I wanted native res, and let me tell you, the game looks TWICE as good now. But on a 1680 monitor, it looks as good as 1920 does on my monitor.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 15:29 |
Link to this message
|
That's only because you have LCD monitors. I was talking about 1600x1200 on a CRT vs 1920x1200 on a LCD.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 17:46 |
Link to this message
|
Well then there's really no difference. CRT monitors are a bit smaller though and not widescreen *drool* @_@
High res widescreen is the way to be. So much more detail :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 19:44 |
Link to this message
|
To say there's no difference between a CRT and LCD image quality wise is absurd...
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
23. September 2008 @ 21:25 |
Link to this message
|
Not quite what I meant. I just mean to say that the IQ difference between a CRT at high res and an LCD at a similar res are very small. Quality LCDs can match CRTs in IQ. Mine does.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 06:34 |
Link to this message
|
I guess that's the beauty of S-IPS then. The image quality on my LCD is leaps and bounds ahead of both the CRTs I owned, and one of them was meant to be very good.
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 09:18 |
Link to this message
|
Maybe. I only used a TN panel and the CRT is SO MUCH better looking.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 09:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
That'll be why then... :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 12:22 |
Link to this message
|
Get a Dell Ultrasharp 24" and bask in the glory. The image quality is awesome :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 13:49 |
Link to this message
|
I had planed on getting a 30" HP which has the same panel as Sam's monitor. Alas, that fell though. At least I sold like 10 of them.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 16:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
Note: The Ultrasharp (S-IPS), not the TrueColor (TN)
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
24. September 2008 @ 16:30 |
Link to this message
|
Umm, the HPs used the S-IPS panels.
Quote:
The LP3065 uses the same S-IPS panel as the Dell 3007WFP-HC, but it offered a significantly better image out of the box. Unlike the Dell, the colours on the HP do not appear oversaturated and inaccurate. Whereas the Dell produced browns that looked red and reds that bordered on bright pink, the colours on the LP3065 were far more natural, without being dull or washed out.
|
