GSdx: native resolution
#21
@seinfeldx, it's "4870".. not 4780..
[Image: a0iic2.png]
Vista Home Premium 64-bit | E8500 @4.2GHz (526x8) ~1.30V
Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P | 4Gb 1066mhz Corsair XMS2
Radeon HD 4850 OC 10% | 1.14TB (640+500gb) WDC
Antec Nine Hundred | Antec Earthwatts 500w
Reply

Sponsored links

#22
lol at seinfeld =P I sense some 'fanboyism' against dual graphic cards.

@Jlagreen: ya know, to be honest, I don't really know much about PCsx2 using my SLI system. My PC intuition (which may be incorrect btw) tells me that PCsx2 doesn't use much of the SLI advantages, if at all (I mean, especially when we're talking about pure FPS boosts [the ends justifying the means]). Also, for FPS, it's always the cpu that gives out first anyways.

IMHO SLI might actually not be the 'best bang for your buck', especially right now. I mean by all means it was pretty kickarse a couple months back. [I built my computer right before the apocalyptic ATI takeover that is now xP]

PS: but hey, if any pros read this, I'd be happy to hear their opinions on pcsx2 and SLI technology, though I'm pretty sure SLI isn't really used in Pcsx2 much
3.0ghz E8400 Dual Core Processor
4 Gigs Corsair DDR2 RAM
(2x)8800GT SLI (dual cards)
Ninja
Reply
#23
Um sorry to burst any bubbles,but PCSX2 has NO advantage at all when running in SLI mode compared to single gfx card mode.
Only 1 of your gfx cards will be used.
Anyway please stay on topic or create a new thread to continue the discussion
[Image: newsig.jpg]
Reply
#24
creamsoda: my mistake but i know the series number Tongue
My guess is that the best res is multiple of native res of each game or res equal or multiple of your native res of your monitor but i really want to hear from someone that really knows.
C2D E6550 @ 2333 Mhz oc 3010 Mhz vcore 1.2750v | HD2600XT | P5KC | 1 + 1 GB G.Skill 6400HK 860 4.4.3.5
Reply
#25
You guys should know it's IMPOSSIBLE to force your monitor to draw more pixels than what it can handle. Same goes for the video card..

If your monitor's max resolution is 1900x1200, then that's the max it will be able to draw.. how the hell can an emulator force the monitor to do more than that?..

So those of u who are thinking you're getting any extra "AA" by putting in 4000x4000, I think it's all in your head..
[Image: a0iic2.png]
Vista Home Premium 64-bit | E8500 @4.2GHz (526x8) ~1.30V
Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P | 4Gb 1066mhz Corsair XMS2
Radeon HD 4850 OC 10% | 1.14TB (640+500gb) WDC
Antec Nine Hundred | Antec Earthwatts 500w
Reply
#26
not really sure but when i posted " multiple of your native res of your monitor" i meant max 1280*1024 emulator with 1024*768.
C2D E6550 @ 2333 Mhz oc 3010 Mhz vcore 1.2750v | HD2600XT | P5KC | 1 + 1 GB G.Skill 6400HK 860 4.4.3.5
Reply
#27
(01-01-2009, 07:37 AM)creamsoda Wrote: You guys should know it's IMPOSSIBLE to force your monitor to draw more pixels than what it can handle. Same goes for the video card..

If your monitor's max resolution is 1900x1200, then that's the max it will be able to draw.. how the hell can an emulator force the monitor to do more than that?..

So those of u who are thinking you're getting any extra "AA" by putting in 4000x4000, I think it's all in your head..
I think it calculates avarage from points making smoother image. Obviously monitor cant draw more pixels than it has Smile

Easiest to see from window borders on left. My monitors native resolution 1680x1050.


first shot with internal resolution 1680x1050
[Image: 1680x1050tp6.th.jpg]

vs

3360x2100
[Image: 3360x2100ye2.th.jpg]


EDIT: I wish hardware AA worked with DX10 tho Smile

EDIT2: Rama. Is it better to have multiples of native resolution or something like 2048x2048?
Reply
#28
(01-01-2009, 07:37 AM)creamsoda Wrote: You guys should know it's IMPOSSIBLE to force your monitor to draw more pixels than what it can handle. Same goes for the video card..

If your monitor's max resolution is 1900x1200, then that's the max it will be able to draw.. how the hell can an emulator force the monitor to do more than that?..

So those of u who are thinking you're getting any extra "AA" by putting in 4000x4000, I think it's all in your head..

http://forums.pcsx2.net/thread-2747-post...l#pid13835

My post there should explain that.The monitor IS NOT drawing your custom resolution you set in the plugin,it is prerendered with DirectX THEN stretched to fit your resolution you have on your monitor.
And yes there are differences with higher resolutions,although I can't see any after about 1600x1200
[Image: newsig.jpg]
Reply
#29
(12-31-2008, 12:23 AM)Jlagreen Wrote: So now I want to increase graphics quality a little more but I don't have a clue to what I should increase...

then i would recommend to use anti aliasing. there is a guide in the old forums, but maybe i can sum it up:
  • only works with nvidia cards
  • maybe only possible with xp, i don't know about vista
  • you have to use nhancer (tuning utility for nv cards)
  • make a new profile for pcsx2 and add the exe file (have to do this every time you update pcsx2 because then the exe changes)
  • enable aa and be sure to use the compability mode for stalker or vanguard
  • works only in fullscreen and when the internal resolution equals the resolution of your monitor

on my 24" tft, using 4x aa looks way better than internal resolutions like 4096x4096. i will put a link to the original guide here (which has screenshots too), when i can find it.
Reply
#30
well but it doesn't work with Vista in DX10 and that is because neither NV nor ATI really support AA in DX10 applications.
Maybe it works with DX9 but consider that AA only helps the edges while prerendering in high resolution improves overall image quality a lot. AA basically is also only increasing internal rendering resolution on edges (which of course is actually all we need). So if you set 4xMSAA the area which are detected as edges will be not rendered in 1920x1200 but in 3840x2400 and then stretched back to fit monitor resolution. This way the shown pixel has more detailed information as it was prerendered in higher resolution. And this of course costs performance.
But there might be one possible advantage of using the graphics driver instead of the graphics plugin and this is to improve picture quality also in CPU intense scenes. So this might be interesting. I will try and mess a little with DX9. As in FFXII now I experienced 2 fights which use shadows and these are rendered by CPU so with high internal resolution the FPS drop a lot.

And by the way you can clearly see a difference in higher internal resolutions. I can see one easily between 1920x1200 and 2720x1700 (which is similiar to 2xAA applied). But with 3840x2400 the improvement is veryvery little and only noticeable during fast movements but then the speed drops too much.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)