| selnor said: You sir are massively off the beaten track. The 10mb you refer to is EDRam. Faster than the normal DDR3 ram in the PS3 and 360's main ram. It's designed to handle upto 4xMSAA on it's own. Again you can use this for QSAA if you want but it's an inferior AA just like MLAA. QSAA and MLAA both blur textures. It's a fact. You can see that in any test and on PC games which let you change between MSAA, QSAA and MLAA. MSAA is harder on performance but gives better overall reults. Again more impressive is Reach. What the engine is doing as a whole is scary as hell. |
You did not address anything I wrote. As others pointed as well the eDRAM chip is a great addition and gives great bandwidth, but it's only 10MB. That's not enough for even 2xMSAA at 720p if you want 10bit HDR unless you resort to tiling. Once again: see Halo3, and look it up with Google.
And while MSAA is usually a better choice than QSAA -not always, mind you, depending on art style and motion blur the better edge smoothing of QSAA might work better than the texture crispness preserving MSAA, see KZ2- that has nothing to do with your statements that all SPE based solutions are "HUGE" drainers of resources and always cause blurring of textures. You understand that SPEs are general purpose processors, and that you can write your own AA algorythms, edge detection and so on?
And unless Reach -which looks very good as far as I have seen- is doing something exceptional about AA, I can't see its relevance. I pointed to U2 and GOW3 not in some pissing contest, but as example of games that 1) heavily use SPEs for pixel shading, terrain navigation, color correction, physics and 2) produce a combination of AA /resolution/lighting that would exceed the eDRAM limits. All without seemingly being as choked as you claimed.
