Instal Steam
login
|
bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana)
繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional)
日本語 (Bahasa Jepang)
한국어 (Bahasa Korea)
ไทย (Bahasa Thai)
Български (Bahasa Bulgaria)
Čeština (Bahasa Ceko)
Dansk (Bahasa Denmark)
Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman)
English (Bahasa Inggris)
Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin)
Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani)
Français (Bahasa Prancis)
Italiano (Bahasa Italia)
Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria)
Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda)
Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia)
Polski (Bahasa Polandia)
Português (Portugis - Portugal)
Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil)
Română (Bahasa Rumania)
Русский (Bahasa Rusia)
Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia)
Svenska (Bahasa Swedia)
Türkçe (Bahasa Turki)
Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam)
Українська (Bahasa Ukraina)
Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
OT:
I've heard conflicting reports about performance differences. The ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Nvidia blog says they experienced dips on their test rig.
Imo, yeah, the halos are a bit of an eyesore, but if it's going to make an already subtle effect even more subtle *and* supposedly cause a however slight performance decrease, I'd pass on it.
FXAA is performance free, it also works on games that don't support proper AA. So no, it is godlike for older, low-end rigs. And especially useful for engines that don't support standard AA, or any kind of AA. And i am not talking about newer engines with deferred lighting either. But older games that use DX6.
And obviously any AA is better than no AA, even if it's shader based.