|
rolltide101x said: As far as looks 1080p with no AA will look better than the other 2 options overall. Resolution is pretty much the "end all" when it comes to looks. But if it injured the frame rate I would go with the 792p with 2x MSAA. But seriously 792p with 2x MSAA? My laptop could run it at 792p with atleast 4x MSAA. |
From what I understand the MSAA is processed in the render time when you created the framebutter... so they need to do that in the eSRAM that is small... so the MSAA uses a lot of space in the eSRAM...
FXAA is a post-processing AA that uses little space in eSRAM... so using it they free up the eSRAM space to up the resolution to 900p.
Without AA they can go up to 1080p.
From what he said you can fill the 32MB eSRAM with: 1080p noAA or 900p FXAA or 792p 2xMSAA.
That's what they archived in tests... of course they can try to optimize the use of eSRAM to reach something like 1080p FXAA or 900p MSAA... I don't know it is possible but I think they will try.
AnandTech said in a article that 1080p 2xMSAA needs close to 60MB of RAM storage for the framebuffer... to reach 60fps you need to use eSRAM because using the DDR3 for framebuffer the data won't be ready in time for 60fps.
