View Full Version : Graphics Settings Comparison (relatively large pictures)

04-21-2002, 08:19 AM
personally, I find it interesting to see side by side comparisons of the variation in how graphics settings actually make a game look, and the range between the lowest possible settings, and the highest,

this is NOT intended to brag about having a computer that can do the higher settings, but to let people who have low end computers know what they would be getting if they upgraded, AND to give people with high end computers a sense of how low the graphics can be set.

to make the images web-manageable, I made all the comparison shots 12"x9" (75% of the size I play on) this makes for a huge expansion on the smallest resolution, and a huge shrink on the highest,... but it puts them on even ground, (in my book at least)
then converted to JPG with a compression setting as such:


first, is the shots of the settings used in each of the 4 comparison shots.


the first 2 shots:

and the second 2:

and since compressed like that REALLY doesn't do justice to the 1600x1200 one, heres the unadulterated one, (HUGE!)


I'll have some more pretty soon, I have already taken ones right near that shot zoomed in with the disruptor, and I think I want to do a close up shot on a rodian and/or stormtrooper, (mainly cause I was shocked by how amazing it looked at the high rez)

oh yeah, #3 is basically what I play at for single player, and I tone it down to 1024x768 and 16 bit color depth for multiplayer, so I always have plenty of FPS.

and, in case anyone is curious I'm running a Thunderbird 750 currently at about 800mhz, (normally at 1050mhz) 384mb ram, GF2GTS 32mb DDR@215/390

Con. Snake
04-21-2002, 08:25 AM
So that's what 1600x1200 looks like with no FSAA or VSYNC.....Glad I don't have to play like that.

04-21-2002, 08:28 AM
I've been testing different graphics settings recently.

I have found that by turning 'shadows' from 'volumetric' (highest setting) to 'simple' in the More Video tab, I can run the game at a much higher resolution with better frame rates.

I play single player with Volumetric shadows becauase they look really good, but multiplayer I use Simple shadows becuase it is faster. This is by far the easiest way of increasing performance I have found.

04-21-2002, 08:46 AM
snake, pshaw.

and actually vsync is on, all it does is make the FPS allign with the refresh rate, and (I don't think) wouldn't show on screenshots.

but I'll be building a new rig with a GF3Ti200, AthlonXP and 256mb ddr in a week or 2, ::happydance::

personally I don't use shadows in my strategy,... I don't know why, never have, and I don't really seem to need it, so I leave that on simple all the time.

here are the close up comparison between the best and worst settings,...




edit: oh yeah, heres an unshrunk shot with our friendly rodian and stormie..


Con. Snake
04-21-2002, 09:01 AM
I dont know why I said VSYNC, as I can usually only tell when the screen is in motion, but I can surely say FSAA(Then again if FSAA is off for performance, then VSYNC is usually off too) was off :) I feel sorry for those whose game look like the 1st one with the Stormie and Rodian....So, so sorry...

04-21-2002, 09:06 AM
it really makes THAT much difference?

::starts getting eager about having a GF3::

any opinions on how this looks? (I partially just don't want to waste a post on something that short, lol)


first try... not even skinned mostly,... and I think I'm gonna redo the lower part of it,

04-21-2002, 09:16 AM
imo, it needs to be longer. extend it half as much again.

04-21-2002, 09:43 AM
hmm, yeah, I thought so too, at least a little bit... and this definitely looks alot more handleable.


(This is in MilkShape3d btw)

eV_Illuminati X
04-21-2002, 10:24 AM
I use these settings ;-
4xS AA
(all other stuff is on max)
and looks gr8 :D

If u can run like this. ;)

eV_Illuminati X
04-21-2002, 10:31 AM
Looks like this @ 1280x1024 - not to bad IMO (http://jdneo.150m.com/low.JPG)
heres a close up face at the same settings (http://jdneo.150m.com/low2.jpg)

Con. Snake
04-21-2002, 10:53 AM
It looks like a futuristic martini.

Direct 3D bleeach. I'll take OpenGL thank you very much.

04-21-2002, 01:59 PM
lol. you don't need to change your res. if you want the textures smoother, just turn on anti-aliasing.

04-21-2002, 02:10 PM
Hey, can someone tell me the console command to take screenshots real quick?

04-21-2002, 02:17 PM
Unless you have a Geeforce 3 or Geeforce 4 you should NOT use antiliasing. It really eats a lot of your system and will most possible slow you down dramaticaly.
The only cards designed to specificaly use antiliasing is GF3 and 4

So no mate, don't tell people to use it unless they have really high specs. And for you people using it with not a top notch machine. TURN IT OFF. even if you have a 1GHz++ machine, does not matter. It is the graphic card that will be the boss to decide what you can and not can do.
And please don't argue against me....this is ment as a tip for those out there using it and encountering problems.

04-21-2002, 02:32 PM
At first I was running it on 2.5ish, but now I'm at 3, but without the trillionare. And I am running on a video card that is all most 2 years old!!!! with only 500mhz proccesor, 264ish ram, the videocard is only 16mb!!

ArmchairAthlete, like your name:D the fast shot code is...

bind x screenshot
The x is the letter chose
You can put "silent" at the end for clean shots
"with out the sheild meter or ammo meter"

04-21-2002, 02:42 PM
yeah, anti-aliasing is nice, but not the cure all,

and 800x600 will still look worse than 1152x865 even with antialiasing,

and remember different video cards behave differently...

like for some games, (I didn't play long enough on the settings to see) a GF2 series card will have WORSE preformance, at #2, than at #3, (which is why it is behind in quake 3 benchmarks, the default is 800x600, which is too low for GF2's and takes more work)

I know Tribes 2 is a big one with that, if you turn it down to medium settings and 800x600 with a GF2 you will almost certainly get worse FPS than if you set it to 1024x768 and full (or nearly full) settings.

I'm suprised it runs that well tie, my system doesn't like #4 very much, it can play once things are loaded, but it gets FPS drops when things load that are annoying.

04-21-2002, 03:06 PM
Ok, 4 questions:

1) Does it make a huge difference when using AA (graphics wise, someone has some screens showing it?!)
2) How much performance do you loose with the highest AA?
3) What's the difference between Quincunx, 4x and 4xS?
4) I'll get a G4 soon, how do you enable/disable AA?