Testing NVIDIA vs. AMD Image Quality
  1 / 8    
We wrote a [url="http://blogs.nvidia.com/ntersect/2010/11/testing-nvidia-vs-amd-image-quality.html"]blog post[/url] to bring broader attention to some very important image quality findings uncovered recently by top technology Web sites including ComputerBase, PC Games Hardware, Tweak PC, and 3DCenter.org. They all found that changes introduced in AMD’s Catalyst 10.10 default driver settings caused an increase in performance and a decrease in image quality. These changes in AMD’s default settings do not permit a fair apples-to-apples comparison to NVIDIA default driver settings. NVIDIA GPUs provide higher image quality at default driver settings, which means comparative AMD vs. NVIDIA testing methods need to be adjusted to compensate for the image quality differences. We saw similar issues in the new Cat 10.11. Please check out the blog for more details…

Nick Stam
We wrote a blog post to bring broader attention to some very important image quality findings uncovered recently by top technology Web sites including ComputerBase, PC Games Hardware, Tweak PC, and 3DCenter.org. They all found that changes introduced in AMD’s Catalyst 10.10 default driver settings caused an increase in performance and a decrease in image quality. These changes in AMD’s default settings do not permit a fair apples-to-apples comparison to NVIDIA default driver settings. NVIDIA GPUs provide higher image quality at default driver settings, which means comparative AMD vs. NVIDIA testing methods need to be adjusted to compensate for the image quality differences. We saw similar issues in the new Cat 10.11. Please check out the blog for more details…



Nick Stam

#1
Posted 11/19/2010 08:13 PM   
We wrote a [url="http://blogs.nvidia.com/ntersect/2010/11/testing-nvidia-vs-amd-image-quality.html"]blog post[/url] to bring broader attention to some very important image quality findings uncovered recently by top technology Web sites including ComputerBase, PC Games Hardware, Tweak PC, and 3DCenter.org. They all found that changes introduced in AMD’s Catalyst 10.10 default driver settings caused an increase in performance and a decrease in image quality. These changes in AMD’s default settings do not permit a fair apples-to-apples comparison to NVIDIA default driver settings. NVIDIA GPUs provide higher image quality at default driver settings, which means comparative AMD vs. NVIDIA testing methods need to be adjusted to compensate for the image quality differences. We saw similar issues in the new Cat 10.11. Please check out the blog for more details…

Nick Stam
We wrote a blog post to bring broader attention to some very important image quality findings uncovered recently by top technology Web sites including ComputerBase, PC Games Hardware, Tweak PC, and 3DCenter.org. They all found that changes introduced in AMD’s Catalyst 10.10 default driver settings caused an increase in performance and a decrease in image quality. These changes in AMD’s default settings do not permit a fair apples-to-apples comparison to NVIDIA default driver settings. NVIDIA GPUs provide higher image quality at default driver settings, which means comparative AMD vs. NVIDIA testing methods need to be adjusted to compensate for the image quality differences. We saw similar issues in the new Cat 10.11. Please check out the blog for more details…



Nick Stam

#2
Posted 11/19/2010 08:13 PM   
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?
In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?

In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.

#3
Posted 11/19/2010 08:46 PM   
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?
In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?

In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.

#4
Posted 11/19/2010 08:46 PM   
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?
In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.
[/quote]

best start your own thread on this one, it doesnt have anything to do with image wuality does it

no you cant make the GPU do the CPU's work, you are probably thinking of PhysX which uses the GPU to do physics calculations instea of the CPU, but that only works in games that are designed to use PhysX.

seems like you need a new CPU.
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']

I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?

In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.





best start your own thread on this one, it doesnt have anything to do with image wuality does it



no you cant make the GPU do the CPU's work, you are probably thinking of PhysX which uses the GPU to do physics calculations instea of the CPU, but that only works in games that are designed to use PhysX.



seems like you need a new CPU.

_ NVLDDMKM problems_ | _ problems getting a driver for a laptop graphics card_ | _What PSU do I need?_

[quote name='The Professor' date='11 August 2011 - 10:33 AM' timestamp='1313055223' post='1277858']

I think Qazax is a pretty cool guy. eh kills aleins and doesnt afraid of anything.

#5
Posted 11/19/2010 09:39 PM   
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']
I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?
In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.
[/quote]

best start your own thread on this one, it doesnt have anything to do with image wuality does it

no you cant make the GPU do the CPU's work, you are probably thinking of PhysX which uses the GPU to do physics calculations instea of the CPU, but that only works in games that are designed to use PhysX.

seems like you need a new CPU.
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']

I recently acquired a GTX 460 recently in a competition. It was supposed to be a GTS 450, but you guys were out and sent out 460's instead... thank you. I love the thing. My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.) So my question is, I've heard of people having their GPU's help with some of the calculations that the CPU is supposed to take care of, but have found no evidence of this... so would it be possible for Nvidia GPU's to have this function optionally? Like, if the computer detects a bottle-neck in performance, delegate some of the power or advantages of the rest of the system in order to provide a smoother performance?

In my opinion, how smooth the game plays is at least twice as important as how it looks. And while I know that my particular problem isn't your fault at all... it would be amazing if you could somehow help with that problem.





best start your own thread on this one, it doesnt have anything to do with image wuality does it



no you cant make the GPU do the CPU's work, you are probably thinking of PhysX which uses the GPU to do physics calculations instea of the CPU, but that only works in games that are designed to use PhysX.



seems like you need a new CPU.

_ NVLDDMKM problems_ | _ problems getting a driver for a laptop graphics card_ | _What PSU do I need?_

[quote name='The Professor' date='11 August 2011 - 10:33 AM' timestamp='1313055223' post='1277858']

I think Qazax is a pretty cool guy. eh kills aleins and doesnt afraid of anything.

#6
Posted 11/19/2010 09:39 PM   
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".

#7
Posted 11/20/2010 02:04 AM   
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".

#8
Posted 11/20/2010 02:04 AM   
He isn't saying AMD's image quality overall, is worse then NVIDIA's he is saying the DEFAULT settings for AMD are worse then NVIDIA's. Benchmark users need to rectify this before doing a comparison between Nvidia and ATI or else there benchmarks will be skewed towards AMD with regards to performance.

AMD has intentionally gone out of there way to achieve high performance scores at the cost of image quality while Nvidia has gone for high performance scores with no compromise on image quality. You can't compare these approaches like apples to apples.
He isn't saying AMD's image quality overall, is worse then NVIDIA's he is saying the DEFAULT settings for AMD are worse then NVIDIA's. Benchmark users need to rectify this before doing a comparison between Nvidia and ATI or else there benchmarks will be skewed towards AMD with regards to performance.



AMD has intentionally gone out of there way to achieve high performance scores at the cost of image quality while Nvidia has gone for high performance scores with no compromise on image quality. You can't compare these approaches like apples to apples.

Custom built PC | Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.66GHZ | ASUS P6T Motherboard | 6GB DDR3 1600 RAM | 2x 500GB SATA2 HDD's | Auzentech Forte S/C | Gainward Geforce GTX 560Ti "Phantom 2" 2048MB | Windows 7 Home Premium: Service Pack 1 - x64 | Thermaltake 750watt Toughpower Power Supply | Thermaltake Armor+ MX case.

#9
Posted 11/20/2010 02:54 AM   
He isn't saying AMD's image quality overall, is worse then NVIDIA's he is saying the DEFAULT settings for AMD are worse then NVIDIA's. Benchmark users need to rectify this before doing a comparison between Nvidia and ATI or else there benchmarks will be skewed towards AMD with regards to performance.

AMD has intentionally gone out of there way to achieve high performance scores at the cost of image quality while Nvidia has gone for high performance scores with no compromise on image quality. You can't compare these approaches like apples to apples.
He isn't saying AMD's image quality overall, is worse then NVIDIA's he is saying the DEFAULT settings for AMD are worse then NVIDIA's. Benchmark users need to rectify this before doing a comparison between Nvidia and ATI or else there benchmarks will be skewed towards AMD with regards to performance.



AMD has intentionally gone out of there way to achieve high performance scores at the cost of image quality while Nvidia has gone for high performance scores with no compromise on image quality. You can't compare these approaches like apples to apples.

Custom built PC | Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.66GHZ | ASUS P6T Motherboard | 6GB DDR3 1600 RAM | 2x 500GB SATA2 HDD's | Auzentech Forte S/C | Gainward Geforce GTX 560Ti "Phantom 2" 2048MB | Windows 7 Home Premium: Service Pack 1 - x64 | Thermaltake 750watt Toughpower Power Supply | Thermaltake Armor+ MX case.

#10
Posted 11/20/2010 02:54 AM   
This isn't about a single application or game. AMD's optimizations negatively affect IQ on every game played on HD 5800 - HD 5900 and HD 6800 hardware. The post and the blog article aren't about cheating. It's about having a fair comparison between GPUs for benchmarking purposes. Dropping IQ so you can generate an extra 10% performance compared to the competition is a no-no. Benchmarking methods and procedures need to be updated to generate a fair comparison. Otherwise, it's akin to benching on company's GPUs with 16xAA while using 4xAA on the other company's.


Amorphous

[quote name='cho' date='19 November 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1290218694' post='1149131']
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".
[/quote]
This isn't about a single application or game. AMD's optimizations negatively affect IQ on every game played on HD 5800 - HD 5900 and HD 6800 hardware. The post and the blog article aren't about cheating. It's about having a fair comparison between GPUs for benchmarking purposes. Dropping IQ so you can generate an extra 10% performance compared to the competition is a no-no. Benchmarking methods and procedures need to be updated to generate a fair comparison. Otherwise, it's akin to benching on company's GPUs with 16xAA while using 4xAA on the other company's.





Amorphous



[quote name='cho' date='19 November 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1290218694' post='1149131']

AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".

Advanced Moderator Operations and Recursive Posting Hermetic/Omnigenous User-Simulating AI



Overclocking Hall of Fame - Post your 3DMark scores today!



NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate

the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members.

#11
Posted 11/20/2010 09:12 AM   
This isn't about a single application or game. AMD's optimizations negatively affect IQ on every game played on HD 5800 - HD 5900 and HD 6800 hardware. The post and the blog article aren't about cheating. It's about having a fair comparison between GPUs for benchmarking purposes. Dropping IQ so you can generate an extra 10% performance compared to the competition is a no-no. Benchmarking methods and procedures need to be updated to generate a fair comparison. Otherwise, it's akin to benching on company's GPUs with 16xAA while using 4xAA on the other company's.


Amorphous

[quote name='cho' date='19 November 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1290218694' post='1149131']
AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".
[/quote]
This isn't about a single application or game. AMD's optimizations negatively affect IQ on every game played on HD 5800 - HD 5900 and HD 6800 hardware. The post and the blog article aren't about cheating. It's about having a fair comparison between GPUs for benchmarking purposes. Dropping IQ so you can generate an extra 10% performance compared to the competition is a no-no. Benchmarking methods and procedures need to be updated to generate a fair comparison. Otherwise, it's akin to benching on company's GPUs with 16xAA while using 4xAA on the other company's.





Amorphous



[quote name='cho' date='19 November 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1290218694' post='1149131']

AMD can do MSAA in NFS11(NFS HP 2010) now, but NVIDIA not, so such "amd cheating" claim can not change the opinion: "AMD's IQ is better than NVIDIA".

Advanced Moderator Operations and Recursive Posting Hermetic/Omnigenous User-Simulating AI



Overclocking Hall of Fame - Post your 3DMark scores today!



NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate

the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members.

#12
Posted 11/20/2010 09:12 AM   
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000'][i]...My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.)...[/i][/quote]
This seems a bit counter-intuitive.

A system that's CPU-dependent leaves more room for improved image quality as there's nothing else for the renderer to do while awaiting further instructions — unless you're playing an extreme resoltion for your hardware mix. If such is the case, it should be included as part of the "problem" description.

The trend in these posts is toward omitting such key indicators. Usually, that means your focus isn't including all of the contributing factors...
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']...My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.)...

This seems a bit counter-intuitive.



A system that's CPU-dependent leaves more room for improved image quality as there's nothing else for the renderer to do while awaiting further instructions — unless you're playing an extreme resoltion for your hardware mix. If such is the case, it should be included as part of the "problem" description.



The trend in these posts is toward omitting such key indicators. Usually, that means your focus isn't including all of the contributing factors...

Intel Siler DX79SI Desktop Extreme | Intel Core i7-3820 Sandy Bridge-Extreme | DangerDen M6 and Koolance MVR-40s w/Black Ice Stealths | 32 GB Mushkin PC3-12800LV | NVIDIA GTX 660 Ti SLI | PNY GTX 470 | 24 GB RAMDisk (C:\Temp\Temp) | 120 GB Intel Cherryville SSDs (OS and UserData)| 530 GB Western Digital VelociRaptor SATA 2 RAID0 (C:\Games\) | 60 GB G2 SSDs (XP Pro and Linux) | 3 TB Western Digital USB-3 MyBook (Archive) | LG BP40NS20 USB ODD | LG IPS236 Monitor | LogiTech X-530 Speakers | Plantronics GameCom 780 Headphones | Cooler Master UCP 1100 | Cooler Master HAF XB | Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1

Stock is Extreme now

#13
Posted 11/20/2010 10:57 AM   
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000'][i]...My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.)...[/i][/quote]
This seems a bit counter-intuitive.

A system that's CPU-dependent leaves more room for improved image quality as there's nothing else for the renderer to do while awaiting further instructions — unless you're playing an extreme resoltion for your hardware mix. If such is the case, it should be included as part of the "problem" description.

The trend in these posts is toward omitting such key indicators. Usually, that means your focus isn't including all of the contributing factors...
[quote name='Dogoneshame' date='19 November 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1290199597' post='1149000']...My previous GPU was a GTX 260. Moving on, my problem with games is that I'm bottle-necked when it comes to CPU... I have 4GB RAM, and a 460, but only 2.6 dual-core... As such I need to set most quality settings to low or very low in order to have a game that's playable (>30 FPS is what I consider playable.)...

This seems a bit counter-intuitive.



A system that's CPU-dependent leaves more room for improved image quality as there's nothing else for the renderer to do while awaiting further instructions — unless you're playing an extreme resoltion for your hardware mix. If such is the case, it should be included as part of the "problem" description.



The trend in these posts is toward omitting such key indicators. Usually, that means your focus isn't including all of the contributing factors...

Intel Siler DX79SI Desktop Extreme | Intel Core i7-3820 Sandy Bridge-Extreme | DangerDen M6 and Koolance MVR-40s w/Black Ice Stealths | 32 GB Mushkin PC3-12800LV | NVIDIA GTX 660 Ti SLI | PNY GTX 470 | 24 GB RAMDisk (C:\Temp\Temp) | 120 GB Intel Cherryville SSDs (OS and UserData)| 530 GB Western Digital VelociRaptor SATA 2 RAID0 (C:\Games\) | 60 GB G2 SSDs (XP Pro and Linux) | 3 TB Western Digital USB-3 MyBook (Archive) | LG BP40NS20 USB ODD | LG IPS236 Monitor | LogiTech X-530 Speakers | Plantronics GameCom 780 Headphones | Cooler Master UCP 1100 | Cooler Master HAF XB | Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1

Stock is Extreme now

#14
Posted 11/20/2010 10:57 AM   
maybe when nvidia brings Transparency multisampling back up to the same level of quality as that in Release 197 for GT200b and lower gpu's, then i will care.
maybe when nvidia brings Transparency multisampling back up to the same level of quality as that in Release 197 for GT200b and lower gpu's, then i will care.



In Memory of Chris "ChrisRay" Arthington, 1982-2010

CPU:Intel i7 920 @ 3.8(D0), Mainboard:Asus Rampage II Gene, Memory:12GB Corsair Vengeance 1600
Video:EVGA Geforce GTX 680+ 4GB, Sound:Creative XFI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro, Monitor:BenQ G2400WD
HDD:500GB Spinpoint F3, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Red, 1TB WD Black
Case:NZXT Guardian 921RB, PSU:Corsair 620HX, OS:Windows 7 SP1

#15
Posted 11/20/2010 04:30 PM   
  1 / 8    
Scroll To Top