| Potable_Toe said: An article by Digital Foundry was put up yesterday( http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-focus-mlaa-heads-for-360-pc ) explaining the process, it was also accompanied by a video comparrison of numerous games with and without it runing side by side and it does make a fairly large difference, definately noticable. |
Digital Foundry article was put up Okt 2010. ( http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-mlaa-360-pc-article ) This is old news.
And the reason why MLAA is not easy to use for PC/360 games (except Fable 3):
"AMD's solution has much in common with Sony's, but is fundamentally different in many ways. The fact that the God of War III MLAA operates on SPU has some very specific advantages - the Cell's satellite processors are far more flexible in terms of how they can be programmed, leading some to believe that GPU implementations will struggle to match the quality level.
More obvious to the end user, AMD's approach is a post-process filter that works through the entire completed frame, including the HUD and any on-screen text. This results in exactly the same kind of artifacting on text as seen with The Saboteur on PS3. As the MLAA algorithm works on the whole screen, it simply doesn't know the difference between a genuine edge and text, resulting in a noticeable impact to quality, along with occasional dot-crawl on HUD elements.
Artifacts can be minimised by running at higher resolutions, and the cards that the MLAA mode runs on should be able to cope with most - if not all - games at 1080p and higher anyway. However, the effects can never be eliminated with the current implementation. Sony's MLAA tech, in contrast, works on the frame before the HUD and text are added, producing a noticeably cleaner result. "
