Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Hades_warrior

New video settings - did anyone tryed?

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles

Hi. If this thread on this subject already exist, I apologize.

So, I found this in my video settings and left surprised but in the same time I was wondering if that makes performance in game any better or worse?

Or does the image looks better or not?

Some people say that TXAA is bad choice if you play FPS games where everything is fast paced and with TXAA image is blurry.

We have FXAA which we used to have for years and is not so much GPU consuming as TXAA is (which is another issue with TXAA).

The best anti aliasing is MSAA but this game doesn't support that. Not for now at least. But I heard that TXAA is mixture of FXAA and MSAA.

And of course there is this AMD's feature called FidelityFX CAS.

 

I was wondering how many of you tryed this new additions in WoWS settings and do you like it or not?

Considering how bad this game is optimized, im very worried that this settings could make things even worse.

 

2021-02-18-162648111.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Players
1,767 posts
10,991 battles
1 hour ago, Hades_warrior said:

Hi. If this thread on this subject already exist, I apologize.

So, I found this in my video settings and left surprised but in the same time I was wondering if that makes performance in game any better or worse?

Or does the image looks better or not?

Some people say that TXAA is bad choice if you play FPS games where everything is fast paced and with TXAA image is blurry.

We have FXAA which we used to have for years and is not so much GPU consuming as TXAA is (which is another issue with TXAA).

The best anti aliasing is MSAA but this game doesn't support that. Not for now at least. But I heard that TXAA is mixture of FXAA and MSAA.

And of course there is this AMD's feature called FidelityFX CAS.

 

I was wondering how many of you tryed this new additions in WoWS settings and do you like it or not?

Considering how bad this game is optimized, im very worried that this settings could make things even worse.

 

2021-02-18-162648111.jpg

tried ticking them, makes my game pretty laggy

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
6,843 posts
30,298 battles

Picked TXAA, improved my graphics quite  a bit. But I had some serious issues with my graphics, like jaggy bow waves etc.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_HSJ_]
Players
3 posts

I use TXAA myself. The AA in this game is literally horrible (if you play ships with great edges like Georgia you will understand). But TXAA is also very blurry. We can't have everything i guess. Still better than FXAA (for the crappy edges) and no lag/stutter at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LSCA]
Players
2,104 posts
16,928 battles
17 minutes ago, Wulf_Ace said:

tried ticking them, makes my game pretty laggy

of course txaa increase change for lag, thats why you need also better card for that as that use more vertex/triangles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles
3 hours ago, Wulf_Ace said:

tried ticking them, makes my game pretty laggy

My game was laggy today with and without this settings.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
11,530 posts
3 hours ago, Wulf_Ace said:

tried ticking them, makes my game pretty laggy

 

So they do work? Excellent! :cap_like:

4 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

My game was laggy today with and without this settings.

 

 

It says 'upscale', notice. Means enhanced lag. :cap_haloween:

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TF]
Players
298 posts
3,513 battles

I enabled TXAA and disabled everything else, runs fine. It seems that multisample AA x8 gives a bit better result but seems also to require more power ? I'll try other combinations for science.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles
3 hours ago, Aragathor said:

Picked TXAA, improved my graphics quite  a bit. But I had some serious issues with my graphics, like jaggy bow waves etc.

 

3 hours ago, Eisaggeleas said:

I use TXAA myself. The AA in this game is literally horrible (if you play ships with great edges like Georgia you will understand). But TXAA is also very blurry. We can't have everything i guess. Still better than FXAA (for the crappy edges) and no lag/stutter at all. 

I turned down TXAA because of blurry image. My game started to lag when I turned TXAA on but lag remained even after turning that thing off.

 

3 hours ago, gabberworld said:

of course txaa increase change for lag, thats why you need also better card for that as that use more vertex/triangles

So you think that my GTX 970 with 4GB is bottleneck for this game?

 

6 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

So they do work? Excellent! :cap_like:

 

It says 'upscale', notice. Means enhanced lag. :cap_haloween:

Yea they should write on that 'downscaled' so we get reduced lags :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LSCA]
Players
2,104 posts
16,928 battles
20 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

So you think that my GTX 970 with 4GB is bottleneck for this game?

 

dependents off what monitor resolution you play, yes, lag can be caused also something else like mods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,440 posts
15,193 battles
3 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

So you think that my GTX 970 with 4GB is bottleneck for this game?

Depends on your settings and resolution. But a GTX 970 should not bottleneck WoWs at all as long as you don't run the game on all max settings with 8x AA and at 1440p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles
18 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

 

dependents off what monitor resolution you play, yes

I disagree. for 1080p GTX 660 is enough. This game is not GPU heavy at all. Other thing is that its terrible optimized.

If I can play without problems Battlefront 2 by DICE which is hardver heavy than I should be able to play this as well.

 

13 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

Depends on your settings and resolution. But a GTX 970 should not bottleneck WoWs at all as long as you don't run the game on all max settings with 8x AA and at 1440p.

My GTX 970 is superior for this game so there is no chance for bottleneck on that side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LSCA]
Players
2,104 posts
16,928 battles
6 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

I disagree.

 

 

fine, but if i tell that i have GTX 970 too? i dont have lag tho soo it must be something at your side

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
6,843 posts
30,298 battles
13 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Other thing is that its terrible optimized.

This is the crux of the matter. I have an RX 580 8gb. I can play Cyberpunk77 with high settings with high fps, no problem.

WoWS? I had to play with the settings to get decent performance and limit the amount of pixellation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
11,530 posts
15 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

This is the crux of the matter. I have an RX 580 8gb. I can play Cyberpunk77 with high settings with high fps, no problem.

WoWS? I had to play with the settings to get decent performance and limit the amount of pixellation.

 

 

560.. I actually turned texture quality to 'Low'. Somewhat blurry, but not that you'd notice in battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,440 posts
15,193 battles
Just now, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

560.. I actually turned texture quality to 'Low'. Somewhat blurry, but not that you'd notice in battle.

This is one of the least things that give you better FPS. All it does is require less VRAM and as long as you have more than 2 GB on your graphics card there is zero reason to use anything but high quality textures.

FPS killer in WoWs are: Sea rendering quality, Shadows, additional Reflections. Other settings with moderate negative FPS impact are MSAA, Foliage

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
11,530 posts
18 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

This is one of the least things that give you better FPS. All it does is require less VRAM and as long as you have more than 2 GB on your graphics card there is zero reason to use anything but high quality textures.

FPS killer in WoWs are: Sea rendering quality, Shadows, additional Reflections. Other settings with moderate negative FPS impact are MSAA, Foliage

 

Here are my current settings. I only ticked the two new boxes today to see if they do something, they seem to smooth up things (make more blurry, in other words...), but I didn't notice any impact on performance. I've locked the FPS to 30 (yes, 30!) and my ping is varying somewhere between 30 to 40. The experience seems to run smoothly, but, of course, it can vary day to day.

 

So... you think I might just as well try it with higher texture settings?

 

image.thumb.jpeg.1fa659851b03156d9e7fec5bb7226b36.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,440 posts
15,193 battles
5 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

So... you think I might just as well try it with higher texture settings?

As i said, texture settings should always be as high as possible if enough VRAM is available. Textures usually do not impact FPS at all. Worst thing that can happen is that textures are extracted and not enough VRAM is available, in that case your computer will swap textures into the normal RAM which is much slower than your video ram (VRAM) and this can cause stutter or lag, but it won't impact FPS. I don't know why you lock your FPS at 30, but i assume you have your reasons. Also your resolution looks really weird. Why not full-screen windowed?

What i would try out is to untick the 2 new settings, you don't need them when you have MSAA and FXAA enabled, because TXAA is exactly this, it combines these two settings. Reduce sea rendering quality to low or medium at best, reflections to low and you should be good to rock a solid 60+ FPS (except in some ports, Developers Table and Hawaii seem to be the least hardware hungry).

You have already a screenshot of your settings, so you can easily switch back to what you have if you are not happy with the new result.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles
1 hour ago, gabberworld said:

 

fine, but if i tell that i have GTX 970 too? i dont have lag tho soo it must be something at your side

This game have bad days and lags are bigger than usual. So today was probably one of those days.

My Discord latency was also high for some reason. But that doesnt explain why my clan mates also have lag spikes in game. Not as much as me but they did have.

1 hour ago, Aragathor said:

This is the crux of the matter. I have an RX 580 8gb. I can play Cyberpunk77 with high settings with high fps, no problem.

WoWS? I had to play with the settings to get decent performance and limit the amount of pixellation.

 

Indeed. Its naive to expect from weegee to optimize this game for us. They rather think of ''how to make more $$$?''

25 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

So... you think I might just as well try it with higher texture settings?

You can try but I doubt that GTX 560 (which was my previous card) could handle this game at max settings, maybe without AA on.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
816 posts
17,281 battles

from a different thread :

 

 

MSAA is multisampling, usually superior to anything else in regards of image quality, taxing on HW

FXAA is shader based AA, low HW impact, blurry but over MSAA is capable of AA some effects like gunfires, or railings etc

TXAA is like a mixture of the above, uses MSAA but with shader optimizations from FXAA, less HW hungry than pure MSAA, less blurry than FXAA

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
11,530 posts
9 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

As i said, texture settings should always be as high as possible if enough VRAM is available. Textures usually do not impact FPS at all. Worst thing that can happen is that textures are extracted and not enough VRAM is available, in that case your computer will swap textures into the normal RAM which is much slower than your video ram (VRAM) and this can cause stutter or lag, but it won't impact FPS. I don't know why you lock your FPS at 30, but i assume you have your reasons. Also your resolution looks really weird. Why not full-screen windowed?

What i would try out is to untick the 2 new settings, you don't need them when you have MSAA and FXAA enabled, because TXAA is exactly this, it combines these two settings. Reduce sea rendering quality to low or medium at best, reflections to low and you should be good to rock a solid 60+ FPS (except in some ports, Developers Table and Hawaii seem to be the least hardware hungry).

You have already a screenshot of your settings, so you can easily switch back to what you have if you are not happy with the new result.

 

Thanks. I wonder, what would happen if I kept the TXAA and disabled the MSAA and FXAA, just theoretically. I'm a little hesitant to reduce the sea rendering quality (because I like the look of it... :Smile_hiding:). I've actually locked the FPS to 30, as I don't think I need to get 60 (or do I?) and 30 is a lot more stable than having 60 was when I was using that. As for the full screen... I mostly run all games now windowed, I prefer to see the tool bar and I keep switching in and out with Alt+Tab a lot. Performancewise, full screen might be more optimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,329 posts
6,643 battles
1 minute ago, RAYvenMP said:

from a different thread :

 

 

MSAA is multisampling, usually superior to anything else in regards of image quality, taxing on HW

FXAA is shader based AA, low HW impact, blurry but over MSAA is capable of AA some effects like gunfires, or railings etc

TXAA is like a mixture of the above, uses MSAA but with shader optimizations from FXAA, less HW hungry than pure MSAA, less blurry than FXAA

Strange. On my end it was more blurry than FXAA.
I clearly noticed the difference in binocular mode with TXAA on. Image was so blurry I couldn't tell in what direction enemy ship has pointed hes guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
11,530 posts
Just now, Hades_warrior said:

Strange. On my end it was more blurry than FXAA.
I clearly noticed the difference in binocular mode with TXAA on. Image was so blurry I couldn't tell in what direction enemy ship has pointed hes guns.


Ah... more realistic, then, would you say?  :cap_look:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LSCA]
Players
2,104 posts
16,928 battles
3 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Thanks. I wonder, what would happen if I kept the TXAA and disabled the MSAA and FXAA, just theoretically. I'm a little hesitant to reduce the sea rendering quality (because I like the look of it... :Smile_hiding:). I've actually locked the FPS to 30, as I don't think I need to get 60 (or do I?) and 30 is a lot more stable than having 60 was when I was using that. As for the full screen... I mostly run all games now windowed, I prefer to see the tool bar and I keep switching in and out with Alt+Tab a lot. Performancewise, full screen might be more optimal.

 

if its stable 30 then yeah, it should be fine in this game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×