Turning on Antialiasing

Quite possibly the biggest difference between Half Life 2 and Doom 3 (other than the fact that Half Life 2 is infinitely brighter) is that aliasing is far more pronounced in Half Life 2 than in Doom 3.  The aliasing isn’t overwhelming and at resolutions of 1280 x 1024 and above it is minimized relatively well, but it’s still something we’d like to get rid of.

Enabling 2X AA proved to help somewhat but not as much as we would have liked, thus we turned our attention to enabling 4X AA on the cards compared here today. We haven't included any screenshots in line because they would have to be scaled down to fit on this page, so we are offering a zip file of all of the screenshots we are talking about here.

Our first test was 1024 x 768 with 4X AA enabled - we found that while 1024 x 768 with 4X AA enabled gave us some very solid image quality, we preferred playing at 1280 x 1024 without AA.  Most cards offered slightly reduced performance playing at 1280 x 1024 vs. 1024 x 768 with 4X AA.

Next we looked at 1280 x 1024 with 4X AA enabled - here we found that 1280 x 1024 with 4X AA enabled was a good alternative to 1600 x 1200, however with most cards 1600 x 1200 ran faster than 1280 x 1024 with 4X AA enabled.  In the end the choice here comes down to whether your monitor supports 1600 x 1200 or not; if it does, then by all means, 1600 x 1200 is the resolution to run at, otherwise 1280 x 1024 with 4X AA is a good alternative. 

Finally we have 1600 x 1200 with 4X AA enabled - this is truly a beautiful setup and while you can definitely play it on even a GeForce 6800, it is best paired with a GeForce 6800 Ultra or Radeon X800 XT or better yet, two GeForce 6800 Ultras.  You don’t get a much better looking game than Half Life 2 at 1600 x 1200 with 4X AA enabled. 

So interestingly enough, although Half Life 2 definitely appreciates antialiasing being enabled, in reality the performance hit is just not worth the resulting gains in image quality – especially when compared to just cranking up the resolution and leaving AA disabled.  For those of you that are interested in enabling AA anyway, we have provided some AA benchmarks on the next pages. But before we get to the benchmarks let's have a look at AA image quality.

First let's look at both ATI and NVIDIA with everything disabled:


Antialiasing Disabled on ATI


Antialiasing Disabled on NVIDIA

So far so good, both ATI and NVIDIA look identical (except for the birds flying around in the background, but regardless of how many breadcrumbs we left out they would not stay still).

Now let's turn on 4X AA:


4X AA Enabled on ATI


4X AA Enabled on NVIDIA

You can immediately see the benefit of having AA turned on in Half Life 2 (these screenshots were taken at 1024 x 768), but let's zoom in for a closer look to see if either card is doing a better job:

ATI (4X AA - 200% Zoom)
NVIDIA (4X AA - 200% Zoom)

From the screenshots above it is tough to tell the difference between the two competitors. It looks like NVIDIA may have a slightly more blurry AA implementation than ATI, but it is really tough to tell the two apart.

The Slowest Level in the Game Turning on Anisotropic Filtering
Comments Locked

79 Comments

View All Comments

  • alexlck - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    In map AT_coast_05.dem, GF6800U have no performance penalty with 4xAA@1024x768?
  • HardwareD00d - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    hey, #27, I was gonna say that ;)
  • jediknight - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Well, it's obvious from the benchmarks. They don't lie.

    ATI RULZ NVIDIA SUXORZ!!

    (lol@#3)
  • bob661 - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Do you need HL2 to play CS: Source? Thanks.
  • wien - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    #24 There is.. It's called Counter-Strike: Source
  • bob661 - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Anyone know if there's multiplayer support in HL2? Thanks.
  • L1FE - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Nice and thorough comparison. That 6600GT looks more and more enticing...
  • Rekonn - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Great article, looking forward to reading the next one with slower cpus. Being cpu limited with an A64 4000+ is a little scary, I wonder what kind of fps an XP3200+ gets when paired with an AGP 6600GT. (still running an overclocked Barton 2500+)
  • Jalf - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    I'm surprised at how well NV stacks up... And good to see the 6800 GT beat the X800 Pro. Not because I'm an NV fan, but simply because it makes it easier to choose. When the 6800 GT wins over the equivalent ATI card, even in an ATI-optimized game, then it's kinda easy to choose what to buy... :D
    It's a lot harder with the other cards, where both companies scores some wins in different games.
  • Regs - Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - link

    Yeah, I'm hoping a CPU round up will come after part two! I can afford a 400 dollar video card but not paired with a 700 dollar AMD CPU.

    I did notice a lot of stuttering in my gaming experience with a A64 3000 + 6800 GT/1024 MB pC3200. I was playing at 1280x1024 with 4x/8x max details. So likely I would have to cut out the 8x Aniso to have smooth gameplay. I don't know if that was what Anand was mentioning about with the "Shimmering" of textures with the Manhatten calculations.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now