Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   WebNews (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)
-   -   ATI cheating with Anistropic Filtering? @ W2S (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/ati-cheating-anistropic-filtering-w2s-4985/)

jmke 17th May 2004 10:23

ATI cheating with Anistropic Filtering? @ W2S
 
Quote:

There seems to be quite a fuss about the way ATI forces bilinear/trilinear filtering on their new range of Radeon x800 series of cards following an article posted over at Computerbase.de.

Dave Baumann over at Beyond3D has done a screen grab of compressonator images for Ati's X800 XT, 9800 XT and a Geforce 5950 for comparison.

It certainly looks fishy. I'm keen to hear ATI's response - is it:


a.) "Differences between how R420/RV3x0 handles mip map transistions in comparison to R3x0"
b.) "An error in the R420 driver path" - "Its new, we got the settings mixed up" / "Its confused between RV3x0's texturing abilities".
c.) "A bug" *cough*
http://www.warp2search.net/modules.p...icle&sid=18001

jmke 18th May 2004 09:37

ATI's response
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15971
Quote:

There has been a lot of discussion about our trilinear filtering algorithms recently.

The objective of trilinear filtering is to make transitions between mipmap levels as near to invisible as possible. As long as this is achieved, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to implement the filtering.

We have added intelligence to our filtering algorithm to increase performance without affecting image quality. As some people have discovered, it is possible to show differences between our filtering implementations for the RADEON 9800XT and RADEON X800. However, these differences can only be seen by subtracting before and after screenshots and amplifying the result. No-one has claimed that the differences make one implementation "better" than another.

Our algorithm for image analysis-based texture filtering techniques is patent-pending. It works by determining how different one mipmap level is from the next and then applying the appropriate level of filtering. It only applies this optimization to the typical case – specifically, where the mipmaps are generated using box filtering. Atypical situations, where each mipmap could differ significantly from the previous level, receive no optimizations. This includes extreme cases such as colored mipmap levels, which is why tests based on color mipmap levels show different results. Just to be explicit: there is no application detection going on; this just illustrates the sophistication of the algorithm.

We encourage users to experiment with moving the texture preference slider from “Quality” towards "Performance" – you will see huge performance gains with no effect on image quality until the very end, and even then, the effect is hardly noticeable. We are confident that we give gamers the best image quality at every performance level.

Microsoft does set some standards for texture filtering and the company’s WHQL process includes extensive image quality tests for trilinear filtering and mipmapping. CATALYST passes all these tests – and without application detection, which could be used if you wanted to get a lower-quality algorithm go undetected through the tests.

Finally, ATI takes image quality extremely seriously and we are confident that we set the bar for the whole industry. We don’t undertake changes to our filtering algorithms lightly, and perform considerable on-line and off-line image analysis before implementing changes. This algorithm has been in public use for over a year in our RADEON 9600 series products, and we have not received any adverse comments on image quality in that time. If anyone does find any quality degradation as a result of this algorithm, they are invited to report it to ATI. If there is a problem, we will fix it.



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:25.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO