Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Anand] GTX 560 Ti 2Win Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Anand] GTX 560 Ti 2Win Review - Page 4

post #31 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bojinglebells View Post
resolution has nothing to do with the need of AA, its pixel density

you could make this ignorant argument for resolution over 10 years ago when CRTs were king and people regularly changed the resolution they gamed at based on what their hardware allowed them to run. Running 1600x1200 on a 19" CRT meant far less noticeable jaggies relative to 1024x768 on that very same 19" CRT

with LCDs we've been hovering around the 100 pixel per inch mark regardless of size, and while the 30" @ 2560x1600 screens are slightly above the curve, they're not exceptionally so.
Okay, so you're telling me that on the old crt monitors, they have variable pixel densities depending on which resolution is chosen, and the higher it is the more dense the pixels are? On the lcd side you're saying that mostly all of the monitors have a static pixel density that is common amongst all of them, give or take some, and that no matter what resolution it's at the density wont change? With that said, does that mean that the higher the pixel density is, the less AA you need to use? What I was basing my previous post on is that a 1920x1200 30in monitor may need more AA than a 30in 2560x1600 monitor because it has less pixels in the area that they are contained in. Am I correct? This is new to me, and I'm trying to understand it.
post #32 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by airisom2 View Post
Okay, so you're telling me that on the old crt monitors, they have variable pixel densities depending on which resolution is chosen, and the higher it is the more dense the pixels are? On the lcd side you're saying that mostly all of the monitors have a static pixel density that is common amongst all of them, give or take some, and that no matter what resolution it's at the density wont change? With that said, does that mean that the higher the pixel density is, the less AA you need to use? What I was basing my previous post on is that a 1920x1200 30in monitor may need more AA than a 30in 2560x1600 monitor because it has less pixels in the area that they are contained in. Am I correct? This is new to me, and I'm trying to understand it.
well, I don't know of any 30" monitors @ 1920x1200, but yes, if we take a 27" monitor @ 1920x1080 and compare it to a 27" monitor @ 2560x1440, the latter will need less AA. Of course the latter will also be more GPU intensive because its a higher resolution, just like cranking up the AA to make 1920x1080 appear to be as smooth as jaggie free as the 2560x1440 assuming the same screen size would be GPU intensive.

But, for instance, if we compare a 23-24" monitor @ 1920x1200 to a 2560x1600 monitor @ 30", we could argue that each monitor would need AA equally as much.

Ideally we'd get to a pixel density in the 300+ per inch range (such as what we see on smartphones and pads or high end magazine print) to where AA would be pretty much irrelevant. Granted, that would mean 9+ times the resolution per inch of screen space which would destroy our current hardware
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #33 of 48
wouldn't the 1gb be a bottleneck at higher resolutions?
post #34 of 48
All these smart people on OCN who don't know how vram works in SLI. I'm so impressed. As always.
BlueStorm
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Xeon W3520 GTX 470 SLI 3x2GB OCZ Gold 1600Mhz 2xSamsung Spinpoint F3 RAID0 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 x64 750W Corsair TX NZXT Tempest 
  hide details  
Reply
BlueStorm
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Xeon W3520 GTX 470 SLI 3x2GB OCZ Gold 1600Mhz 2xSamsung Spinpoint F3 RAID0 
OSPowerCase
Windows 7 x64 750W Corsair TX NZXT Tempest 
  hide details  
Reply
post #35 of 48
in all honesty, i can run ultra at 1080p totally smooth up till the night sniping level when i start to get freezes. thats will msaa off. but im wandering if the game really needs to render 1GB of video at any moment. thats alot of stuff. its been found if you check the forums on battlefield 3 and crysis 2 that these games fill up as much vram as possible with the most relevant textures, and they uae system ram for the rest. thats why I never seen more than about 1010mb vram usage, and people with 1,5GB cards saw 1,5Gb, both perfectly smooth. however your right about the drop for 4xmsaa, thats because the game likely does then really render more than 1GB at any one time. The argument stands tho, at 1080 you really dont need aa, as far as im concerned settings at ultra means its maxed.

If your going to bring aa into this then sli 64x csaa is truely maxed lol.

I got solid near 60fps too. since i only have 4GB of total system ram so im convinced at the moment thats why i got freezes
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5750 @ 3.8 (19x200)1.31vcore /1.21vtt  GA-P55M-UD4 EVGA GTX 480 @ 875/1800/2000 1.075vcore 8GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000mhz 9-10-9-27 1T 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
1TB Western Digital Black 64mb OS Boot 3x 60GB Vertex2E Raid 0 : 700mb/s  Prolimatech Megahalems Rev.B Zalman VF3000F 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 42" Panasonic TXP42G20 1080p Plasma XFX 850w Pro XXX Edition (Silver) Fractal Design Arc Mini 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
G9x Razer Goliathus Yamaha RXV671 reciever / Q Acoustic 2020i speakers Belkin n52e Keypad 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5750 @ 3.8 (19x200)1.31vcore /1.21vtt  GA-P55M-UD4 EVGA GTX 480 @ 875/1800/2000 1.075vcore 8GB Corsair Dominator @ 2000mhz 9-10-9-27 1T 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
1TB Western Digital Black 64mb OS Boot 3x 60GB Vertex2E Raid 0 : 700mb/s  Prolimatech Megahalems Rev.B Zalman VF3000F 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 42" Panasonic TXP42G20 1080p Plasma XFX 850w Pro XXX Edition (Silver) Fractal Design Arc Mini 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
G9x Razer Goliathus Yamaha RXV671 reciever / Q Acoustic 2020i speakers Belkin n52e Keypad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 48
People are making a bit too much of the VRAM issue. 1GB is still plenty for most games at 1200p or less. Only uninformed consumers buy cards based solely on "It haz teh moar Jiggabytes!!!11"
post #37 of 48
wake up anandtech , BF3's already out ! dalai lamao

gpu seems good and performs kinda surprising surpassing 560 SLI frames in some benchmarks and for 520$ it seems worth
`ArK
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E MSI HD 5670 1GB Gskill Ripjaws 4GB 2x2GB DDR3 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD 500GB Caviar Blue Antec A20 Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit Acer V203H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G100 SilverStone Strider 500w NZXT Tempest 410 Logitech G100 
Mouse PadAudio
Steel Series QcK Mass Cowon EM1 
  hide details  
Reply
`ArK
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E MSI HD 5670 1GB Gskill Ripjaws 4GB 2x2GB DDR3 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD 500GB Caviar Blue Antec A20 Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit Acer V203H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G100 SilverStone Strider 500w NZXT Tempest 410 Logitech G100 
Mouse PadAudio
Steel Series QcK Mass Cowon EM1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #38 of 48
$520 oh my !
post #39 of 48
6950's 2gb cards are only 30 bucks more and there drivers are better. I regret buying my 560TI Hawk, In BF3 ultra I would get constant FPS drops from 45 to 35 and even 15. They stay like that for like 5 mins. I have 16gb Corsair Vengence I don't think my ram is the problem, DAMN VRAM! MSI WHY! WHY!!!!!!!!!!
post #40 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianHak View Post
They stay like that for like 5 mins. I have 16gb Corsair Vengence I don't think my ram is the problem, DAMN VRAM! MSI WHY! WHY!!!!!!!!!!
But... MSI made a 2GB 560 Ti
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Anand] GTX 560 Ti 2Win Review