POTS 0 Posted June 30, 2009 I dont know why, or the difference from the first arma, but AA cost a lot in ArmA2. I kept it as a side issue, but the jaggies are really getting to me, but I cant turn it on or I suffer heavy fps loss. Fillrate is also a monster, but thats understandable. However, there is no reason why AA should consume half my frames on the normal setting. Even on low I lose 1/3 of my frames. I'm running an HD 4870 512mb, and never had this problem in the first arma. I'm currently using the demo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
York Shasta 10 Posted June 30, 2009 The impact AA has is dependent on what resolution you are running, among other things. What resolution (Or "Fill Rate") are you running at? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deadfast 43 Posted June 30, 2009 I haven't noticed any drastic difference with my HD4870 (about 2 frames between off and 2x and another 2 frames between 2x and 8x) at 1680x1050. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
POTS 0 Posted June 30, 2009 I'm running at 1024x1280 and on normal my fps drops from 60 to 35. On low it goes from 60 to 40. I dont know why. I get about 55 frames average in different situations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
randir14 10 Posted June 30, 2009 Same here, running Fraps I would see a 20 fps drop even when turning AA on low. Tried turning it off in-game and forcing AA in the video card control panel but that doesn't even seem to work. 1280x1024 res Ati 4850 512 mb AMD 7850 dual core @ 3.0ghz 4 gigs Kingston HyperX ram Vista Ultimate 64 bit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddogx 13 Posted June 30, 2009 Setting AA to low doesn't cause any visible framerate decrease for me. Very high AA eats about 5-10 fps depending on the situation, but I think that's well within the norm. Since I play on 1920x1080 anyway, AA on low is enough to kill the jaggies for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
no use for a name 0 Posted June 30, 2009 is anything 'forced on' in your nvidia/ati control panel? I had the same problem in Arma when I forced AA transparency, and my fps would take a huge plunge Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
POTS 0 Posted June 30, 2009 Nothing is forced on. The only forced thing in my catalyst control center is vsync forced off. Everything else is application settings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr.Pulp 0 Posted June 30, 2009 got the same issues here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=77137 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helmut_AUT 0 Posted June 30, 2009 I'm on an Nvidia 9600GT. While in A1 at the same resolution, 2xFSAA was barely noticeable with maybe 1 Frame difference, in A2 it's 5 frames - 30 avg down to 25. It is a bit more performance expensive than I thought, no clue why? Is it possible that the "LOW" is actually doing higher FSAA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
amfitamine 0 Posted June 30, 2009 Using the benchmark scenario in the demo I get a 7fps penalty (GTX275, 20fps) for using AA (any setting) with Shadows on high or verry high. Using AA (any setting) with Shadows on normal or lower doesn't result in any fps loss what so ever (27fps). If I disable AA I can turn shadows beyond normal without fps loss. Hope this helps you too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
