Metro: Last Light

View Stats:
gerry193 Jan 6, 2014 @ 4:51am
Is SSAA worth it?
Anyone with good GPU(s) and CPU playing with 2X SSAA ON?
Is it worth the frame drops (2x SSAA & everything maxed, my fps drop as low as 30-40 on my i7 3770K @ 4.2, GTX 670SLI)? When I play without SSAA my fps never go below 60. Personally, I don't see a big difference with SSAA ON. So, what do you guys think?
Showing 1-15 of 27 comments
< >
diwolf Jan 6, 2014 @ 9:50am 
I played with 20-30 fps. Where is the problem?
Lactose the Intolerant Jan 6, 2014 @ 10:11am 
There really isn't a difference. You might as well turn it off and play at a solid framerate.
TheReal Jan 6, 2014 @ 12:01pm 
SSAA of course gets you a really smooth and fine image and it's better against alising then pretty much any other AA method. However it costs a lot of performance.

Is it worth it? Depends. I have GTX 780 OC'ed and its playable with 2xSSAA but I decided to go without SSAA, since my frames with 2xSSAA were sometimes at the very limit to be enjoyable.

Since the games has some really nice post processing AA which is always enabled, even without any AA, the game looks good.
Last edited by TheReal; Jan 6, 2014 @ 12:01pm
Solamon77 Jan 6, 2014 @ 1:21pm 
I'd say no. The picture quality improvements are minimal compaired to the very significant FPS drop.
trek554 Jan 6, 2014 @ 2:23pm 
Originally posted by diwolf:
I played with 20-30 fps. Where is the problem?
obviously somewhere between your eyes and your brain if you think 20-30 fps is fine.

there are very few areas where you can even notice SSAA is even on. its much better to have a smoother 60 fps that you can notice and feel everywhere.
Last edited by trek554; Jan 6, 2014 @ 2:23pm
Astori Heichalot Jan 8, 2014 @ 9:39am 
Originally posted by trek554:
Originally posted by diwolf:
I played with 20-30 fps. Where is the problem?
obviously somewhere between your eyes and your brain if you think 20-30 fps is fine.

there are very few areas where you can even notice SSAA is even on. its much better to have a smoother 60 fps that you can notice and feel everywhere.

I have seen people saying 20fps as "smooth" lol

wanna see bigger blind idiot?
try this
http://wccftech.com/30fps-vs-60fps-30fps-better-story-telling-games/
bigbenisdaman Jan 8, 2014 @ 6:03pm 
Originally posted by Heichalot:
Originally posted by trek554:
obviously somewhere between your eyes and your brain if you think 20-30 fps is fine.

there are very few areas where you can even notice SSAA is even on. its much better to have a smoother 60 fps that you can notice and feel everywhere.

I have seen people saying 20fps as "smooth" lol

wanna see bigger blind idiot?
try this
http://wccftech.com/30fps-vs-60fps-30fps-better-story-telling-games/

This really don't apply to games though. Movies are made to be displayed at 24 fps. They include alot of smoke and mirror's/motion blur to achieve a "smooth" look to them. Most games does not. They try to implement motion blur, but usally imo its very overdone and just plain annoying.

This being said, Metro is one of the few games that does play smooth at lower framerates (lower meaning close to 30 but def not 20). The bad part is, if you're averaging, say 30 fps, then you're going to be dipping in the 10's...a lot. This game fluxuates frame's pretty drastically (like looking one direction is 80fps, turn a little it goes to 50fps).

I understand when people say 20 fps is smooth though, as if that's all your rig is outputting and you get enjoyment out of it, go for it. No use in bashing people on they percieve as smooth/playable just to show a epeen. My main rig plays this game great at higher details, my small rig plays this game great, at lower details (little rig ended up costing me around $450 with a full version of Win 7 ) All depends on comfort factor to me and not really graphics anymore, this game was sooooo overhyped on graphics btw. Yes it looks good, but not really any better than 2033.

For the OP, if you're playing at 1080p and above, most games you're not going to tell the differance in AA. I can put it maxed out, or on 0 and can tell no differance in visualls other than a "fuzzy" look to certain things with it maxed.
SuperCrumpets Jan 9, 2014 @ 10:18pm 
Originally posted by Heichalot:
Originally posted by trek554:
obviously somewhere between your eyes and your brain if you think 20-30 fps is fine.

there are very few areas where you can even notice SSAA is even on. its much better to have a smoother 60 fps that you can notice and feel everywhere.

I have seen people saying 20fps as "smooth" lol

wanna see bigger blind idiot?
try this
http://wccftech.com/30fps-vs-60fps-30fps-better-story-telling-games/

that was the dumbest thing ive ever read lol.
i have an 144hz monitor and its so amazing it single handedly made me want to play FPS games again. even going under 100fps feels bad and choppy and 30fps literally makes me feel sick now, as well as straining my eyes horribly when everytime i move the camera around the entire screen turns into a giant blur and i cant see until i stop moving.

30fps doesnt have "magic" just horrid blur while at 120+ you can see things perfectly clearly with next to 0 blur even while spinning around ridiculously fast

OP, turn it off Frame rate is everything
Last edited by SuperCrumpets; Jan 9, 2014 @ 10:20pm
Astori Heichalot Jan 10, 2014 @ 12:44am 
Originally posted by Chocolate Milk:
that was the dumbest thing ive ever read lol.
i kno rite lol
Pingas™ Jan 14, 2014 @ 1:35pm 
Originally posted by diwolf:
I played with 20-30 fps. Where is the problem?
There's no possible way you can enjoy a game that runs at 20-30 fps.
CursedPanther Jan 14, 2014 @ 5:13pm 
Originally posted by ♥Pingas™:
Originally posted by diwolf:
I played with 20-30 fps. Where is the problem?
There's no possible way you can enjoy a game that runs at 20-30 fps.
It really is a subjective matter. It can also mean his standards are so low that it's not worthy of consideration.
LeadStarDude Jan 14, 2014 @ 5:42pm 
Honestly I think it depends on the size screen you are playing on & how far away you sit from that screen. If you are playing on a large 24" or bigger monitor that you are sitting less than 2 feet awy from then it will really make the game look better. If you are playing on a 20" or smaller screen then I see no real value in using it. Same for playing on a HD TV. If you are sitting across the room playing on a 40" or smaller HD TV then there is no need for SSAA, but if you have a 46" or bigger screen then the SSAA really makes the game look a lot smoother.
trek554 Jan 14, 2014 @ 6:22pm 
even staring right at the screen it makes little difference. its only noticeable on things like the pig cages. other than that you would have to toggle it off an on over and over to try and see the difference as the standard AAA method in this game does a good job.
CursedPanther Jan 14, 2014 @ 6:25pm 
Originally posted by LeadStarDude:
Honestly I think it depends on the size screen you are playing on & how far away you sit from that screen. If you are playing on a large 24" or bigger monitor that you are sitting less than 2 feet awy from then it will really make the game look better. If you are playing on a 20" or smaller screen then I see no real value in using it. Same for playing on a HD TV. If you are sitting across the room playing on a 40" or smaller HD TV then there is no need for SSAA, but if you have a 46" or bigger screen then the SSAA really makes the game look a lot smoother.
That's exactly why display unit manufactures have designated optimal viewing distances according to screen sizes, so that customers should know better before yelling how jagged and pixelated the images look because they're almost pressing their noses flat onto their screens. At the end it all goes down to the build quality of the display unit(it can also be a projector btw).

The truth is if one is actually 'playing' the game and not 'assessing' and viewing at an appropriate distance, he shouldn't notice any aliasing. SSAA x2/x4 becomes useful when the viewer is sitting closer to the screen than intended. Still SSAA serves as a feature for the group of graphic perfectionists becuz it sacrifices performance heavily. FXAA & TXAA are the better options when it comes to achieving similar results.
Last edited by CursedPanther; Jan 14, 2014 @ 6:27pm
trek554 Jan 14, 2014 @ 6:32pm 
FXAA and especially TXAA can blur too much though. SMAA seems like the best overall method for most people since it has little to no impact on performance and looks great.
Showing 1-15 of 27 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50