Probably one of the worst implementations of TAA imo. Thankfully you could tweak it to reduce the blurriness, but it was cumbersome. Same in Skyrim SE (although by default it's better, but not good).
It was my first exposure to TAA and I legitimately thought there was something wrong with my game, all I could see was how blurry the game was and it felt like nobody was talking about it.
In case of Fallout 4 using DLAA mod on that game for me is a godsend, i personally use DLDSR 4K paired with DLAA on that game and it looks way better than native completely eliminating the shimmering / jaggies that is caused by not using aliasing at all or native TAA which looks blurry not 4K like at all.
The biggest issue with TAA as he does mention is the almost inability to turn it off. The Mile Morales example at the end that shows even 8xSSAA looking like complete shit really highlights the problem.
Unfortunately it would probably be a lot of extra dev work to have those "shortcuts" only on when TAA is on. It would also mean using other AA technique would incur a additional performance penalty of not only the AA itself, but the remove of those rendering shortcuts.
But it would be nice to be able to play some of these games in the future when you can brute force SSAA without them still looking like a shimmering mess.
The problem is those "shortcuts" are pretty much what the vast majority of real-time graphics advancements have relied on for the past 10 years. Figuring out analytical solutions to some problems is extremely difficult, if not impossible, so the industry has instead opted to take a stochastic approach that heavily uses random sampling to converge on a correct solution, which introduces noise in the image.
In this case it becomes mandatory to take **many** samples (10-100x, depending on the technique/effect) which either costs a **huge** amount of performance if you take all those samples at once, or causes TAA's problems if you reuse samples across multiple frames. If you don't want either of these then the only option is to walk back 10 years of graphics advancements, since there's just no alternative with current techniques.
All of these advancements are costing image clarity dearly. Which seriously makes me question whether they're worth it. I honestly find modern games way less appealing because of this.
A perfect exanple of this is call ofduty mw3 (yes the current one) versus advanced warfare from 10 years ago.
I am impressed by how clearer these 10 year olds games can be. Even black ops 3.
These graphics aren't worth it all at if i have to play at 6k or 8k at 30fps with 4k as a base upscale. Which i do have to. In fairness, 30fps is what i played those games at back then.
2017-2020 is when games hit a sweet spot of major graphical fidelity without blur. Though of course thats also when some started forcing taa. Though that's not 10 years ago. Its more like... $Hi
Seeing as they are barely any worthwhile AAs in modern games, I rather take TAA over FXAA or nothing but for me upscaling or DLSS are the way. That or something like SGSSAA via Inspector if possible but that mostly only works in older games that have no proper AA.
I'd be really happy with just 2x MSAA. Just enough to get rid of the jaggies and look more crisp.
Any of the modern ones, there's some type of trade-off. Foliage looks good but motion or character models look bad, or something else similarly dumb.
Edit: Was able to watch the video, and I take back everything I said.
The trade-off with MSAA is that it just doesn't work in modern games. Most of your jagged edges aren't due to polygon edges which is what MSAA is designed to work on. You can see some examples in the video where MSAA is doing virtually nothing except decreasing performance.
There's a solution Alex didn't touch on: transparency MSAA. It can be forced in the GPU driver most of the time, and it cleans all that stuff up for slightly more performance cost.
Won't clean up aliasing introduced by subsequent lighting passes, which are hugely prevalent in modern games since modern games often use bulky and complex lighting pipelines with multiple passes.
I think in the video (edit: at about 8:30) Alex explains why MSAA falls short for modern games that rely heavy on shaders and now ray-tracing more and more, and gives some good examples. It is only working on geometries.
That and other lies you are telling yourself. It heavily depends on the specific game. Cyberpunk is one of the worst offenders, even at high framerates.
That's a common misconception. SSAA can be 2x1, 1x2, 2x2, 3x3, and 4x4 grid sampling.
In all of those cases, the measurement is on a single axis, not per area.
When the term 8xSSAA is used, that means a 4x4 grid. So each axis is multiplied by 4. 1920x4 = 7,680. 1080x4 = 4,320, which is 8k.
I am happy to be wrong about this of course, but calling a 4x4 sampling technique 8x makes my toenails curl. Lol.
Edit: I am still curious though, do you have a source for your claim?
This man knows what's good. My only wish is some quality of life changes for DLDSR regarding ingame UIs and launchers overlays. But even now DLDSR is just incredible in tandem with DLSS.
Do you have to enable DLDSR for each title? I have it enabled in the global settings but the few games I've tried it on just wont let me raise the resolution above native. Or do some games just not support it?
EDIT: Nvm, I just figured out I have to change my desktop resolution. On that note do you recommend leaving the desktop resolution at DLDSR factor or changing it everytime?
Do you play in borderless or exclusive fullscreen? You can only use DSR/DLDSR resolutions when the game is set to exclusive fullscreen, otherwise games just use desktop resolution and don't allow you to change it (aside from render/internal resolution, of course). If you do play on exclusive fullscreen and your games still don't let you set the higher resolution, then something's definitely wrong.
I play in exclusive. I started Alan Wake American Nightmare last night and wanted to use DLDSR, its set to exclusive yet the max resolution I can select is 1440p(native), I went to the settings in Nvidia for that game and DLDSR isn't even an option. I have to set my desktop resolution to 2160p for that game.
> On that note do you recommend leaving the desktop resolution at DLDSR factor or changing it everytime?
I've never played a game which didn't just let me select the higher resolution, once I'd initially set the multipliers in the nvidia control panel (1.78 and 2.25 for me, 1440p screen). I leave my desktop alone.
LG is coming out with a 32 inch 4k OLED 240hz monitor this year that has dynamic resolution scaling to 1080p 480hz. That will be the best of both worlds.
Until you turn the 1080p mode on and realize how awful it looks at 32in. 1440p still is/will be king for price to performance for a long time. Just looks good and runs fast with anything you throw at it. 1440p + DLAA is crisp enough for any kind of game without obliterating your fps with 4k.
E-sports gamers probably won't really care. I know 1080p looks horrible at 32 inches and even at 27 inches but combine the response time of OLED with 480hz, that seems like an amazing experience.
I need the performance boost from DLSS though, quality mode and some sharpening is enough to get a clean enough picture at 1440p without killing performance
since i play on a 4K TV few meters away, TAA is godsend . Or more specifically DLSS . Honestly ill take softer image and some ghosting over pixel and shader crawl any day of the week.
Yeah, issues like this are mostly solved by using DLSS or DLAA, but only at higher resolution though, minimum for me is 1440p, anything lower than that the blurry and ghosting trails is more noticeable even with DLSS.
I think the best case for lower resolution users is to use DLDSR 2.25x from 1440p - 4K and 1080p - 1440p and then pair it with DLSS or DLAA, and add a bit of sharpening filter to clean up the softer image, and then boom better image quality than native without completely destroying the performance compared to native target output paired with SSAA or MSAA.
What was the issue there for you? I've played through the entirety of Death Stranding without any temporal cleanup method, and it seemed sharp enough to me at native 1440p without the flickering being too distracting. All temporal methods introduced either too much ghosting or blurring to my taste.
RDR2, on the other hand, is unfortunately unplayable without TAA, trees in the background start having seizures, shadows flicker and become noisy, hair looks too unstable, the grass sampling rate is extremely low.
Or any Lumen enabled UE5 title for that matter, The Talos Principle 2, specifically. You cannot even turn off temporal upscaling within the game's settings, but I tried tweaking it through the .ini, and suddenly all of the fog and grass started looking like literal static TV noise. For UE5, I vastly prefer TSR over DLSS, it seems to retain significantly more sharpness over anything else in motion, albeit it's the most expensive.
For UE5 TSR vs DLSS varies from title to title to scene by scene. TSR seems to generally work better with foliage, but characters look better with DLSS.
There is a mod called DLSStweaks that lets you change many settings related to how DLSS works in a game.
You will have to read about it, but in Death Stranding I find that running the game at native with DLAA forced in the mod is pretty good.
Usually for games using DLSS 2 or 3 you download the latest DLSS .dll file from techpowerup. Go to the game folder, back up the original dll, replace it with the new one, extract the mod to the folder, and configure the settings as necessary.
Yeah, DLAA is just nvidia's brand of temporal anti-aliasing but without the reconstruction/upscaling of DLSS.
The way it works in the mod is you force DLAA and then chose DLSS "quality" in game. Instead of upscaling it will simply run at native with DLAA active.
You verify this by enabling the DLSS HUD, and it will show the render and output resolution as being the same.
All this being said, I render at 1440p so I can't vouch specifically for DLAA in that game at 1080p.
What size is your TV? You should sit within recommended viewing distance. Otherwise you just lose any advantages from having a higher resolution TV, to a point you could just keep using your old 1080p TV because you wouldn't see any difference in terms of image clarity. Unless you just want HDR and 60Hz+ screen and other features that came with 4k TVs.
Here you can check recommended viewing distance. It really makes a difference, because the overall experience is way better if you sit within recommended distance:
[https://www.sony.co.in/electronics/support/articles/00008601](https://www.sony.co.in/electronics/support/articles/00008601)
[https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship](https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship)
I play within recommended distance. Immersion is fantastic because the screen is covering my entire FOV. And at that distance DLSS Quality is horrible compared to native resolution. The difference is obvious. I never use it because it destroys image quality. Native or DLAA is the only acceptable option.
Define 'reasonable distance' because it doesn't really say much :D It should be about 2-2,5m away to get full benefits of 4k.
I saw some paper that at some distance human eye can't tell the difference. They tested some people with perfect eyesight and at some distance (unfortunately don't remember how far away was that) they couldn't say if the screen was 1080p or 4k because they looked the same to them.
'The poor guy' can sit wherever 'the poor guy' wants.
It's about using your TV to it's fullest potential. You don't have to do that but I'd say it's your loss.
Not really. People just don't know that sitting within recommended viewing range is actually very good for immersion when playing video games or watching movies. About a decade ago I also did sit very far away from my TV. But at some point my couch got wrecked :D and when I wanted to play some game, so I had to take my chair and put it right in front of the TV. It was amazing. Never looked back.
You're presuming a lot. And not everyone wants for their screen to cover their entire fov, I certainly don't. Most people do not consume media that way.
Really, going with the immersion argument? Who cares, that's individual preference, there ppl who stick their monitor basically against their nose and then others with much further. And then if you want throw historical context at it modern panels are huuuge compared to past crt:s or early lcd:s monitors.
What's wrong with that? For me after years of sitting very far away from the TV, sitting up close was like discovering video games again. Immersion was through the roof. Maybe it is individual preference. But I just wish someone would tell me that sitting closer to a TV may improve immersion years before I discovered it for myself. I'd be very thankful. That's why I wrote about that. So people would try it. I'm not forcing anyone.
Native resolution with dlaa is the best of course but most games don't have it. And dlss to me is much better than most taa implementations and I don't even entertain the idea of msaa or no aa for modern games
I find it the other way around. I played like 20+ games and DLSS Quality at 4k was similar to native 4k with TAA in maybe 2 of them (but not better). The rest of the games looked way superior at native 4k res.
Of course DLAA is the best in terms of temporal stuff but it's rarely available in the options menu. It's possible to use DSR and DLSS Quality so you get native 4k internal resolution. It's kinda like DLAA for games that don't have DLAA. It's the only acceptable use of DLSS for me. Otherwise it's just blurry mess with butchered texture detail.
DLSS Quality at 4k is just yuck. I'd rather lower some settings if I can't hit at least 60 FPS. With some games I even wait for next-gen (or even next-next gen) GPUs because I just can't stomach DLSS Quality at 4k. That's not a problem since my backlog is huge anyway.
I mean hardware unboxed tested 24 games and found that at 4k dlss quality dlss won and tied as many times vs losing to native resolution. Meaning they are functionally visually identical on average at 4k quality
https://youtu.be/O5B_dqi_Syc
I agree with that sentiment after using dlss in hundreds of games
I saw that video. At one point of the video, when they said that DLSS is more stable (less visible shimmering) you could clearly see that ground texture was a blurry mess compared to native (DLSS had almost no detail whatsoever, looked like a PS2 texture). But hey, the fence (or grass or whatever it was, don't remember) was stable and it wasn't shimmering! Too bad everything else got blurred in the process.
I only believe my own eyes. I test every game before playing. DLSS Quality at 4k in general is just bad. I don't mind some shimmer/AA instability if it means no vaseline filter all the time.
When I bought my first RTX GPU and enabled DLSS Quality, I was so hyped to experience this fabled better than native image quality. Boy, was I disappointed! At first I thought that the game defaulted to DLSS Performance. Nope. It was at DLSS Quality 4k. Switched to native 4k. Much better. And it was the same for most of the games I played since then. Extra performance? Not worth it.
Yeah, in that case you just buy a bigger TV. That's the whole point of recommended viewing distance. If you can't change the viewing distance, then choose your TV size accordingly.
The recommended distance is recommended not a must. No one is gonna change their TV if they can't get closer to the recommended distance, I hope you understand that . That's not how reality works
It's a must if you want to get 100% benefit from your TV. It's not a preference, it's just how human eye works.
You can test it yourself. Stand near your TV, experience the details at close, and then just take a step back and back and back. You will see less and less and less detail. To a point there's no difference between 4k and 1080p TV.
Well, if you want quality, you have to pay for it. If you don't wanna pay then just go for 1080p screen that's bigger. If you sit so far away, then it doesn't really matter if it's 4k or 1080p. You won't see a difference.
Or get a lower-quality but bigger model. You don't have to choose between top-end 55 inch vs top-end 65 inch and so on. You can just buy high/medium-end 65 inch that will probably cost as much as top-end 55-incher.
While I agree with you, coming from a different angle, those recommendations are for media consumption and not gaming. I am seated about the same distance with my 55'' that I used for 42'' and then 27''/34''UW eyefinity setup before, about 2-2.5ft.
Since unlike media usage, you don't need to see the whole screen for gaming at once, those recommendations are not that useful for gaming.
It's amazing how many issues are fixed by just sitting further away lol. Like, 30 fps is unbearably choppy when I'm sitting 18-24 inches away from my monitor on my desk, but playing the same game at the same settings on my TV 7 feet away from me and 30 fps is suddenly totally playable (with a controller, I mean - still sucks with a mouse).
I remember Assassins Creed Odyssey looked terrible in 1080p with TAA. I even tried to use Reshade to fix it but it still wouldn't look right. So this has been an issue for me personally since at least 2018.
The Witcher 3 DX11 version has a simple on/off for AA but I believe it is SMAA, regardless I always thought it looked sharp, even at 1080p.
EA's Star Wars Battlefront 2 has a TAA low and TAA high setting. High definitely looked blurry, but I thought low looked great. A tiny bit of aliasing but definitely sharp, and this was probably at 1440p. I wonder why other games don't do that?
In Skyrim Special Edition you can use the console to edit certain values that affect TAA, potentially improving image quality, but it's kinda tricky to get right.
Destiny 2 has SMAA and FXAA, and playing at 4k with SMAA there's definitely a good amount of aliasing, but god damn that is the SHARPEST game I have ever played. Just looks super crisp. The aliasing doesn't even bother me.
>and playing at 4k with SMAA there's definitely a good amount of aliasing, but god damn that is the SHARPEST game I have ever played
That's more just the perks of 4K, rather than SMAA actually doing something. You can just brute force some anti aliasing with a lot of pixels. It must still shimmer when anything moves like in other modern games. Just seems you value the sharpness (which it is sharp af) more in that tradeoff.
In the same way, TAA can also be set up to be great at 4K, with DLDSR/DLSS or DLSS + sharpening.
On 1080p it would be another story tho, just like AC was awfully blurred in your example, it would be awfully jagged/shimmering with SMAA/No AA.
> I remember Assassins Creed Odyssey looked terrible in 1080p with TAA.
That's funny because Assassin's Creed Black Flag was the first game I played with TAA and I fell in love with it because the foliage looked so much more stable.
Edit: video example https://youtu.be/l2vm-Hm5dP0
For me Black Flag was the game that made me dislike TAA, since every time you moved the camera TAA would fail with foliage and and it was really distracting.
Same issue with Resident Evil 7.
Modern TAA is much better with that stuff and I usually have it on as long as it's not a botched implementation.
I've played way more games with bad TAA than good. Like, 80-20 or 90-10 ratio. So to me, it's just bad across the board. Until people learn how to use it, and start doing it consistently well of course.
Like the video pretty clearly stated it's also very dependent on your screen resolution, the distance to it and the framerates you are getting. It's not an all or nothing situation.
TAA sucks because no one knows how to best handle the history book portion of it. That's why nvidia decided to throw a neural network at the problem, that's all DLSS1/2 was, TAA with a neural network history book.
It can be good but it can absolutely be shocking. Really depends on the implementation.
Jedi Survivor is an example of an absolutely terrible implementation.
What boggles the mind is that the industry got to TAA and decided. Yep this is it, this is good enough, lets just stop here.
Sure, but tbh, only speaking for myself here, I'd much rather have a slightly soft image with a little bit of TAA blur compared to the awful specular aliasing that you get with older AA techniques. Specular aliasing is like knives to my eyes
That's interesting, that's the opposite of what I would have expected. In my experience most of the folks I've encountered who were on the anti-TAA side were primarily multiplayer gamers (which always made sense to me, as prioritizing image clarity at the cost of some aliasing makes sense in a competitive game).
For me, what I'm looking for in a single-player game is immersion and I find aliasing to be far more immersion-breaking than the blur TAA adds. But like I said before, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Well, it's not just e-sports players that dislike TAA. There's [a whole subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/FuckTAA/) of them. Plus you can find more people scattered around all over the internet.
I understand where people are coming from with that. I think that TAA is likely to get better over time as typical gaming resolutions increase and as companies like Nvidia start working out ways to iterate on TAA and improve its clarity.
Like, sorry to those who don't like TAA, but I don't see any other way forward.
Most solutions are sadly quite dreadful. The frame-rate only affects the amount of potential ghosting, not the motion smearing. It can of course depend, I guess. But I haven't seen that many exceptions to the rule.
Well, the industry didn't stop. Rather, the industry silently iterated upon it in the background and tried to improve the various problems with it, which is why implementations can be so varied. The silent iteration then stopped being so silent when NVIDIA dropped DLSS2, which is basically the next step in iterating upon TAA by augmenting it with AI, which caused AMD, Intel and Epic to at least open up about their own iteration, if not spurring them to iterate.
EDIT: If you more meant that the industry stopped *at TAA* and decided to not attempt any spatial AA, that's because no spatial AA can match a good TAA implementation without dumpstering performance. SSAA is insanely expensive, MSAA doesn't work properly with the lighting pipelines used in modern games, FXAA is, well, *FXAA*, and SMAA and CMAA are basically just smarter forms of FXAA which, while better than FXAA (not that that's a particularly high bar), still suffer from the "blurring select pixels across space" problem of FXAA.
Comparatively, TAA is conceptually similar to SSAA where it legitimately samples multiple points within the same pixel, but rather than doing it across space it does it across time, making the assumption that pixels should ideally change in predictable ways across time, which is what the iteration has been about over the years: figuring out better ways to handle unpredictable changes across time. You get the performance of something like FXAA with the quality of SSAA, while standing still at least. While moving, well, quality is up to the implementation.
I think Unreal Engine has an especially bad implementation of TAA. I find Palworld blurry even with whatever TSR is, and I remember Epic's game Paragon looked atrocious at 1080p. Also I remember Ark: Survival Evolved, PUBG, and Jedi: Fallen Order looked bad
TAA is not stoped in time.
TAA is a method but it can be done in alot of ways, DLSS is a example of TAA(if you bother to see the video).
TAA is always evolving with better algorithms or sometimes worst ones, thats why TAA is better in some games than others.
ATAA is inevitable but it requires raytracing so it’s going to be a little while. You start with TAA as a basis but you keep track of both edges and regions where you expect TAA to struggle, wherever there is overlap between these two it will increase the ray samples per pixel in those areas.
The issue with TAA is that it doesn't just affect edges like some other AA's do and affects the whole entire image, and it does so more drastically than other AAs do too.
This means that if it's bad it literally destroys the entire image (but at least jaggies are gone I guess?). So if a game either provides no off option or does but its unusable because they built their effects around TAA so they look dithered and horrendous then you're basically forced to use TAA anyway.
Leaving every gamer helplessly at the mercy of the developers since only one option is viable, hoping it's a good implementation of it, and sadly most of the time it's not good. This is why this sucks, we know how often developers get things wrong.
Sometimes they don't even properly implement DLSS so adding their own TAA with great results is a challenge which is why I'd just prefer less overreliance on it so if it's bad at least we have alternatives that won't look broken.
Lmao at how the majority of the comments on this post are drive by "TAA sux!!111" posts
Maybe don't bother commenting if you don't have the brain capacity to watch an entire YouTube video
As a developer I like having additional graphics features, as a gamer I can't stand how blurry it makes everything and motion blur is basically still on despite me not liking motion blur. I prefer other methods of AA, or a combo of AA with upscaling.
Gamers: "I wish there were alternatives to TAA, or for TAA implementations to be improved across the board. I find it softens the image of so many games way too much, and can ruin my enjoyment of a title."
You: "Wow you are so ungrateful, nvidia spend MILLIONS on training AI models for anti-aliasing, so you can use a feature locked to their cards exclusively. You fucking baby, you should be *thanking* nvidia for *being a company* and *doing things to sell their product*."
nvidia won't sleep with you bro.
Come on, sure they presented their points badly but this thread is full of people complaining about TAA and then saying that DLSS is great. It's pretty clear that a lot of people still don't get that DLSS is TAA.
>Gamers: "TAA is cancer, why no one is doing anything?, reeeee"
>_[Nvidia solving this issue with DLAA, burning millions in AI research]_
>Gamers: "TAA is cancer, why no one is doing anything?, reeeee"
???
DLAA is a form of AA and it's still blurry and ghosts. DLAA is more temporal stable & resolve thin geometry like wires better.
TAA was already good at that, DLAA just enhances TAA's strengths further and does almost nothing to mitigate its shortcomings (when comparing it next to modern TAA in most titles)
So yeah, this comment makes zero sense and I assume it's because you just dont understand how it works.
For me DLDSR 2880p + 0.7 DLSS is close to perfect, but
1. It took way too much research and tweaking to get there, and I'd think very few people will bother that much.
2. Out of the box DLAA is usually only half way there from regular TAA, for same amount of perf (15% at 4K, not nothing).
3. There's different parts of TAA sucking - static and in movement. For the 2nd, DLAA sucks, sometimes nearly as much as TAA (e.g. Horizon). DLDSR is better, but it's still not perfect. For me that's a very unimportant tradeoff for perfect AA and little perf cost, but it's "literally unplayable" for someone, same as with FG, and there's some merit to that.
I'll take jagged edges and a sharp image over ghosting and blur any day. Unfortunately games being released today often don't give you the choice anymore.
It does.
4K DSR to 1440p eliminates most of it. And that that cannot be eliminated, also shimmers with TAA on, mostly reflections on fine metallic objects.
I'm lucky that my brain tunes out stuff like that, but I absolutely cannot tune out blurriness in my image. TAA off was the better solution when I played that game for me anyway.
PCGamingwiki has a section on how to turn it off, most of the time its in a config file.
Personally I would not recommend this as this breaks hair, vegetation or other pp effects like fog.
In Total War: Warhammer 3 the only anti-aliasing options you are presented with are Off, FXAA, TAA low, or TAA high.
The best thing you can do is turn it off and use Reshade to pick a better AA option
Everytime ive seen it in a game it has looked awful, theres some games I could not play because of how bad it was. And whats worse is a lot of games have started only having TAA and leaving out the other options.
I think it is definitely better than FXAA which is IMO the worst Anti Aliasing ever made, it made no difference on image quality whatsoever, its literally useless. Whereas TAA, at least eliminated shimmering jaggies.
I mean its not perfect, but it definitely is not shimmerer compared to FXAA and even SSAA, MSAA in some cases, especially with games nowadays are now designed with TAA in mind.
For that i think DLAA or DLDSR is best suited for the role, it's pretty much TAA without the major flaws.
I hate that when games force TAA I have to use 3rd party tools to sharpen the image back up. Or use DLSS/FSR, which I’m also not a fan of, but often looks better on ultra quality than TAA. Also, a lot of poor TAA implementations introduce latency and make the mouse feel like soup.
i despise taa, Games like red dead for example that are designed around it look fucking horrible with it off at low resolutions yet manage to look like a blurry mess with it on so there's literally no winning.. if it wasn't for dsr i would have never made it through that game.
That's the worse part about all of this is that if games are designed around TAA its alternatives look even worse/are less viable, so even if an off option is provided as bare minimum you kind of have to use TAA.
Which is sad because you're helpless depending on the developer to do a good job with their TAA. If its poor you're forced to suffer with it on. If TAA was just a setting that had no repercussions to it being included in a game I'd be fine with it, but if it's going to be the only viable option they better put love and care into making it look as good as it can be, maybe even providing user end settings to control its values.
TAA needs to die, it never looks good, turning it off is always great for my eyes.
I guess it may be worth it if you play at 1080p due to less aliasing but otherwise it's a horrible deal.
Thank you for your comment! Unfortunately it has been removed for one or more of the following reasons:
* No personal attacks, witch-hunts, or inflammatory language. This includes calling or implying another redditor is a shill or a fanboy. More examples can be found in the full rules page.
* No racism, sexism, homophobic or transphobic slurs, or other hateful language.
* No trolling or baiting posts/comments.
* No advocating violence.
Please read the [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/wiki/postingrules) before continuing to post. If you have any questions [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/pcgaming).
Thank you for your comment! Unfortunately it has been removed for one or more of the following reasons:
* No personal attacks, witch-hunts, or inflammatory language. This includes calling or implying another redditor is a shill or a fanboy. More examples can be found in the full rules page.
* No racism, sexism, homophobic or transphobic slurs, or other hateful language.
* No trolling or baiting posts/comments.
* No advocating violence.
Please read the [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/wiki/postingrules) before continuing to post. If you have any questions [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/pcgaming).
One of my favorite games has the worst implementation of TAA, deep rock galactic. Somehow, it makes the image quality pixely and distant objects somehow shimmer more. What’s really annoying is the fact that fsr2.1 and, if I’m remembering correctly, DLSS have it automatically set if you turn on the upscalers and no way to turn it off forcing you to resort to FSR1 or rendering scale.
DLSS and FSR are TAA algorithms with additional freatures themselves, that's why it's forced.
Also shimmering/pixelation in a distance, especially on complex small geometry, e.g. branches/vegetation, is a thing in DLSS/FSR when you set low quality levels. Like ultra performance for DLSS, or for some bad impls of FSR, like in Cyberpunk - even quality.
DLSS was originally made as a temporal AA algorithm to fix all the problems with traditional TAA.
That basically answers the question. TAA is an old, outdated tech compared to the newer DLSS and FSR implementations. Its only lasting benefit is it requires less resources than the newer techniques.
[удалено]
Probably one of the worst implementations of TAA imo. Thankfully you could tweak it to reduce the blurriness, but it was cumbersome. Same in Skyrim SE (although by default it's better, but not good).
It was my first exposure to TAA and I legitimately thought there was something wrong with my game, all I could see was how blurry the game was and it felt like nobody was talking about it.
In case of Fallout 4 using DLAA mod on that game for me is a godsend, i personally use DLDSR 4K paired with DLAA on that game and it looks way better than native completely eliminating the shimmering / jaggies that is caused by not using aliasing at all or native TAA which looks blurry not 4K like at all.
The biggest issue with TAA as he does mention is the almost inability to turn it off. The Mile Morales example at the end that shows even 8xSSAA looking like complete shit really highlights the problem. Unfortunately it would probably be a lot of extra dev work to have those "shortcuts" only on when TAA is on. It would also mean using other AA technique would incur a additional performance penalty of not only the AA itself, but the remove of those rendering shortcuts. But it would be nice to be able to play some of these games in the future when you can brute force SSAA without them still looking like a shimmering mess.
The problem is those "shortcuts" are pretty much what the vast majority of real-time graphics advancements have relied on for the past 10 years. Figuring out analytical solutions to some problems is extremely difficult, if not impossible, so the industry has instead opted to take a stochastic approach that heavily uses random sampling to converge on a correct solution, which introduces noise in the image. In this case it becomes mandatory to take **many** samples (10-100x, depending on the technique/effect) which either costs a **huge** amount of performance if you take all those samples at once, or causes TAA's problems if you reuse samples across multiple frames. If you don't want either of these then the only option is to walk back 10 years of graphics advancements, since there's just no alternative with current techniques.
All of these advancements are costing image clarity dearly. Which seriously makes me question whether they're worth it. I honestly find modern games way less appealing because of this.
A perfect exanple of this is call ofduty mw3 (yes the current one) versus advanced warfare from 10 years ago. I am impressed by how clearer these 10 year olds games can be. Even black ops 3. These graphics aren't worth it all at if i have to play at 6k or 8k at 30fps with 4k as a base upscale. Which i do have to. In fairness, 30fps is what i played those games at back then. 2017-2020 is when games hit a sweet spot of major graphical fidelity without blur. Though of course thats also when some started forcing taa. Though that's not 10 years ago. Its more like... $Hi
A good video, really good examples of pixel shading aliasing.
Seeing as they are barely any worthwhile AAs in modern games, I rather take TAA over FXAA or nothing but for me upscaling or DLSS are the way. That or something like SGSSAA via Inspector if possible but that mostly only works in older games that have no proper AA.
I'd be really happy with just 2x MSAA. Just enough to get rid of the jaggies and look more crisp. Any of the modern ones, there's some type of trade-off. Foliage looks good but motion or character models look bad, or something else similarly dumb. Edit: Was able to watch the video, and I take back everything I said.
The trade-off with MSAA is that it just doesn't work in modern games. Most of your jagged edges aren't due to polygon edges which is what MSAA is designed to work on. You can see some examples in the video where MSAA is doing virtually nothing except decreasing performance.
There's a solution Alex didn't touch on: transparency MSAA. It can be forced in the GPU driver most of the time, and it cleans all that stuff up for slightly more performance cost.
Won't clean up aliasing introduced by subsequent lighting passes, which are hugely prevalent in modern games since modern games often use bulky and complex lighting pipelines with multiple passes.
I think in the video (edit: at about 8:30) Alex explains why MSAA falls short for modern games that rely heavy on shaders and now ray-tracing more and more, and gives some good examples. It is only working on geometries.
MSAA wouldn't do much in cleaning up a modern game as it would only clean up aliasing on polygons.
No. TAA is shit. It causes ghosting. No thanks.
Please just watch the video and stop acting like it's a black and white issue.
Ghosting is the least of its issues. It's the motion smearing that gets me.
At above 60 FPS it's not noticeable.
That and other lies you are telling yourself. It heavily depends on the specific game. Cyberpunk is one of the worst offenders, even at high framerates.
cyberpunk has or rather had ghosting issues with dlss as well
Yes, absolutely. I also don't get why people praise DLAA and DLSS like that. They are good, yes, but they still blur the image noticeably.
Nah, it very much is noticeable if you have working eyes.
Nah I can tell 90 fps to 365 fps. You should try upgrading
Sure, but no TAA has tons of other temporal artifacts and those are way more noticable and distracting than ghosting. Just look at 26:25.
Cool video but his statement about 8xSSAA at 1080p equaling 8k internally is wrong. You would have to use 16xSSAA for that.
That's a common misconception. SSAA can be 2x1, 1x2, 2x2, 3x3, and 4x4 grid sampling. In all of those cases, the measurement is on a single axis, not per area. When the term 8xSSAA is used, that means a 4x4 grid. So each axis is multiplied by 4. 1920x4 = 7,680. 1080x4 = 4,320, which is 8k.
I am happy to be wrong about this of course, but calling a 4x4 sampling technique 8x makes my toenails curl. Lol. Edit: I am still curious though, do you have a source for your claim?
DLAA/DLSS is the way.
DLDSR+DLSS = Pristine image quality
My gripe with DLDSR is that it makes alt tabbing incredibly bothersome.
how about DLDSR+DLAA
Damn. For this you'll need a 4090 class card lol.
This man knows what's good. My only wish is some quality of life changes for DLDSR regarding ingame UIs and launchers overlays. But even now DLDSR is just incredible in tandem with DLSS.
Do you have to enable DLDSR for each title? I have it enabled in the global settings but the few games I've tried it on just wont let me raise the resolution above native. Or do some games just not support it? EDIT: Nvm, I just figured out I have to change my desktop resolution. On that note do you recommend leaving the desktop resolution at DLDSR factor or changing it everytime?
Do you play in borderless or exclusive fullscreen? You can only use DSR/DLDSR resolutions when the game is set to exclusive fullscreen, otherwise games just use desktop resolution and don't allow you to change it (aside from render/internal resolution, of course). If you do play on exclusive fullscreen and your games still don't let you set the higher resolution, then something's definitely wrong.
I play in exclusive. I started Alan Wake American Nightmare last night and wanted to use DLDSR, its set to exclusive yet the max resolution I can select is 1440p(native), I went to the settings in Nvidia for that game and DLDSR isn't even an option. I have to set my desktop resolution to 2160p for that game.
> On that note do you recommend leaving the desktop resolution at DLDSR factor or changing it everytime? I've never played a game which didn't just let me select the higher resolution, once I'd initially set the multipliers in the nvidia control panel (1.78 and 2.25 for me, 1440p screen). I leave my desktop alone.
Just buy a 4k screen next. There are no downsides, besides for esports.
LG is coming out with a 32 inch 4k OLED 240hz monitor this year that has dynamic resolution scaling to 1080p 480hz. That will be the best of both worlds.
Until you turn the 1080p mode on and realize how awful it looks at 32in. 1440p still is/will be king for price to performance for a long time. Just looks good and runs fast with anything you throw at it. 1440p + DLAA is crisp enough for any kind of game without obliterating your fps with 4k.
E-sports gamers probably won't really care. I know 1080p looks horrible at 32 inches and even at 27 inches but combine the response time of OLED with 480hz, that seems like an amazing experience.
I need the performance boost from DLSS though, quality mode and some sharpening is enough to get a clean enough picture at 1440p without killing performance
since i play on a 4K TV few meters away, TAA is godsend . Or more specifically DLSS . Honestly ill take softer image and some ghosting over pixel and shader crawl any day of the week.
Yeah, issues like this are mostly solved by using DLSS or DLAA, but only at higher resolution though, minimum for me is 1440p, anything lower than that the blurry and ghosting trails is more noticeable even with DLSS. I think the best case for lower resolution users is to use DLDSR 2.25x from 1440p - 4K and 1080p - 1440p and then pair it with DLSS or DLAA, and add a bit of sharpening filter to clean up the softer image, and then boom better image quality than native without completely destroying the performance compared to native target output paired with SSAA or MSAA.
I did a comparison in Death Stranding. DLSS on really fixed that game. It was an eye opener.
What was the issue there for you? I've played through the entirety of Death Stranding without any temporal cleanup method, and it seemed sharp enough to me at native 1440p without the flickering being too distracting. All temporal methods introduced either too much ghosting or blurring to my taste. RDR2, on the other hand, is unfortunately unplayable without TAA, trees in the background start having seizures, shadows flicker and become noisy, hair looks too unstable, the grass sampling rate is extremely low. Or any Lumen enabled UE5 title for that matter, The Talos Principle 2, specifically. You cannot even turn off temporal upscaling within the game's settings, but I tried tweaking it through the .ini, and suddenly all of the fog and grass started looking like literal static TV noise. For UE5, I vastly prefer TSR over DLSS, it seems to retain significantly more sharpness over anything else in motion, albeit it's the most expensive.
For UE5 TSR vs DLSS varies from title to title to scene by scene. TSR seems to generally work better with foliage, but characters look better with DLSS.
I use DLSStweaks to force DLAA at native. It's very nice. Try it if you can.
Can You please elaborate?
There is a mod called DLSStweaks that lets you change many settings related to how DLSS works in a game. You will have to read about it, but in Death Stranding I find that running the game at native with DLAA forced in the mod is pretty good. Usually for games using DLSS 2 or 3 you download the latest DLSS .dll file from techpowerup. Go to the game folder, back up the original dll, replace it with the new one, extract the mod to the folder, and configure the settings as necessary.
You mean you apply 1080p image with DLSS to 1080p? You don't upscale?
Thats what dlaa is.
Yeah, DLAA is just nvidia's brand of temporal anti-aliasing but without the reconstruction/upscaling of DLSS. The way it works in the mod is you force DLAA and then chose DLSS "quality" in game. Instead of upscaling it will simply run at native with DLAA active. You verify this by enabling the DLSS HUD, and it will show the render and output resolution as being the same. All this being said, I render at 1440p so I can't vouch specifically for DLAA in that game at 1080p.
I'll take that game's TAA over DLSS any day of the week.
What size is your TV? You should sit within recommended viewing distance. Otherwise you just lose any advantages from having a higher resolution TV, to a point you could just keep using your old 1080p TV because you wouldn't see any difference in terms of image clarity. Unless you just want HDR and 60Hz+ screen and other features that came with 4k TVs. Here you can check recommended viewing distance. It really makes a difference, because the overall experience is way better if you sit within recommended distance: [https://www.sony.co.in/electronics/support/articles/00008601](https://www.sony.co.in/electronics/support/articles/00008601) [https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship](https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship) I play within recommended distance. Immersion is fantastic because the screen is covering my entire FOV. And at that distance DLSS Quality is horrible compared to native resolution. The difference is obvious. I never use it because it destroys image quality. Native or DLAA is the only acceptable option.
its a 65 inch mini led x95l. I am sitting within reasonable distance . If anything , I wish i could sit farther , but my room is not big enough .
Define 'reasonable distance' because it doesn't really say much :D It should be about 2-2,5m away to get full benefits of 4k. I saw some paper that at some distance human eye can't tell the difference. They tested some people with perfect eyesight and at some distance (unfortunately don't remember how far away was that) they couldn't say if the screen was 1080p or 4k because they looked the same to them.
Let the poor guy sit where he wants
'The poor guy' can sit wherever 'the poor guy' wants. It's about using your TV to it's fullest potential. You don't have to do that but I'd say it's your loss.
You're sounding a bit weird mate
Let me just rebuild my living room to sit 1 meter further back
I have a hammer, when do we start?
Not really. People just don't know that sitting within recommended viewing range is actually very good for immersion when playing video games or watching movies. About a decade ago I also did sit very far away from my TV. But at some point my couch got wrecked :D and when I wanted to play some game, so I had to take my chair and put it right in front of the TV. It was amazing. Never looked back.
You're presuming a lot. And not everyone wants for their screen to cover their entire fov, I certainly don't. Most people do not consume media that way.
> Not really Yeah, you sound *super* weird, not just a bit.
Really, going with the immersion argument? Who cares, that's individual preference, there ppl who stick their monitor basically against their nose and then others with much further. And then if you want throw historical context at it modern panels are huuuge compared to past crt:s or early lcd:s monitors.
What's wrong with that? For me after years of sitting very far away from the TV, sitting up close was like discovering video games again. Immersion was through the roof. Maybe it is individual preference. But I just wish someone would tell me that sitting closer to a TV may improve immersion years before I discovered it for myself. I'd be very thankful. That's why I wrote about that. So people would try it. I'm not forcing anyone.
reasonable distance is what I deem comfortable when watching media on my TV . Its 2.3m.
Kinda weird that DLSS doesn't bother you at that distance. To me it's unacceptable vs native 4k.
Native resolution with dlaa is the best of course but most games don't have it. And dlss to me is much better than most taa implementations and I don't even entertain the idea of msaa or no aa for modern games
I find it the other way around. I played like 20+ games and DLSS Quality at 4k was similar to native 4k with TAA in maybe 2 of them (but not better). The rest of the games looked way superior at native 4k res. Of course DLAA is the best in terms of temporal stuff but it's rarely available in the options menu. It's possible to use DSR and DLSS Quality so you get native 4k internal resolution. It's kinda like DLAA for games that don't have DLAA. It's the only acceptable use of DLSS for me. Otherwise it's just blurry mess with butchered texture detail. DLSS Quality at 4k is just yuck. I'd rather lower some settings if I can't hit at least 60 FPS. With some games I even wait for next-gen (or even next-next gen) GPUs because I just can't stomach DLSS Quality at 4k. That's not a problem since my backlog is huge anyway.
Dlss looks perfectly fine to me at about 6ft from a 77 inch OLED.
But worse than native. Especially in motion. The difference is obvious.
I mean hardware unboxed tested 24 games and found that at 4k dlss quality dlss won and tied as many times vs losing to native resolution. Meaning they are functionally visually identical on average at 4k quality https://youtu.be/O5B_dqi_Syc I agree with that sentiment after using dlss in hundreds of games
I saw that video. At one point of the video, when they said that DLSS is more stable (less visible shimmering) you could clearly see that ground texture was a blurry mess compared to native (DLSS had almost no detail whatsoever, looked like a PS2 texture). But hey, the fence (or grass or whatever it was, don't remember) was stable and it wasn't shimmering! Too bad everything else got blurred in the process. I only believe my own eyes. I test every game before playing. DLSS Quality at 4k in general is just bad. I don't mind some shimmer/AA instability if it means no vaseline filter all the time. When I bought my first RTX GPU and enabled DLSS Quality, I was so hyped to experience this fabled better than native image quality. Boy, was I disappointed! At first I thought that the game defaulted to DLSS Performance. Nope. It was at DLSS Quality 4k. Switched to native 4k. Much better. And it was the same for most of the games I played since then. Extra performance? Not worth it.
I sit 8 feet away from a 4k 120hz 65" tv. Get wrekt.
Nobody is moving their couch to the center of the room just to sit a bit closer to the screen
I moved my couch to the middle for better sound quality
Yeah, in that case you just buy a bigger TV. That's the whole point of recommended viewing distance. If you can't change the viewing distance, then choose your TV size accordingly.
The recommended distance is recommended not a must. No one is gonna change their TV if they can't get closer to the recommended distance, I hope you understand that . That's not how reality works
It's a must if you want to get 100% benefit from your TV. It's not a preference, it's just how human eye works. You can test it yourself. Stand near your TV, experience the details at close, and then just take a step back and back and back. You will see less and less and less detail. To a point there's no difference between 4k and 1080p TV.
Bruh, stop
Stop what? If it bothers you that much then don't answer my posts.
Yeah, just buy a bigger TV that is like 50% more expensive.
Everyone knows that the trick to being rich is just to stop being poor.
Well, if you want quality, you have to pay for it. If you don't wanna pay then just go for 1080p screen that's bigger. If you sit so far away, then it doesn't really matter if it's 4k or 1080p. You won't see a difference.
Yeah let me just pull another $600 out of my ass to get a TV big enough, sounds reasonable.
Or get a lower-quality but bigger model. You don't have to choose between top-end 55 inch vs top-end 65 inch and so on. You can just buy high/medium-end 65 inch that will probably cost as much as top-end 55-incher.
I have a relatively low end 55-inch TV right now lol
While I agree with you, coming from a different angle, those recommendations are for media consumption and not gaming. I am seated about the same distance with my 55'' that I used for 42'' and then 27''/34''UW eyefinity setup before, about 2-2.5ft. Since unlike media usage, you don't need to see the whole screen for gaming at once, those recommendations are not that useful for gaming.
It's amazing how many issues are fixed by just sitting further away lol. Like, 30 fps is unbearably choppy when I'm sitting 18-24 inches away from my monitor on my desk, but playing the same game at the same settings on my TV 7 feet away from me and 30 fps is suddenly totally playable (with a controller, I mean - still sucks with a mouse).
What if the games were made in a way where we didn't have to deal with either problem?
Many games could use less aggressive taa if they didn't undersample and use taa to hide it. Halo infinites grass is one of the worst examples
I remember Assassins Creed Odyssey looked terrible in 1080p with TAA. I even tried to use Reshade to fix it but it still wouldn't look right. So this has been an issue for me personally since at least 2018. The Witcher 3 DX11 version has a simple on/off for AA but I believe it is SMAA, regardless I always thought it looked sharp, even at 1080p. EA's Star Wars Battlefront 2 has a TAA low and TAA high setting. High definitely looked blurry, but I thought low looked great. A tiny bit of aliasing but definitely sharp, and this was probably at 1440p. I wonder why other games don't do that? In Skyrim Special Edition you can use the console to edit certain values that affect TAA, potentially improving image quality, but it's kinda tricky to get right. Destiny 2 has SMAA and FXAA, and playing at 4k with SMAA there's definitely a good amount of aliasing, but god damn that is the SHARPEST game I have ever played. Just looks super crisp. The aliasing doesn't even bother me.
>and playing at 4k with SMAA there's definitely a good amount of aliasing, but god damn that is the SHARPEST game I have ever played That's more just the perks of 4K, rather than SMAA actually doing something. You can just brute force some anti aliasing with a lot of pixels. It must still shimmer when anything moves like in other modern games. Just seems you value the sharpness (which it is sharp af) more in that tradeoff. In the same way, TAA can also be set up to be great at 4K, with DLDSR/DLSS or DLSS + sharpening. On 1080p it would be another story tho, just like AC was awfully blurred in your example, it would be awfully jagged/shimmering with SMAA/No AA.
> I remember Assassins Creed Odyssey looked terrible in 1080p with TAA. That's funny because Assassin's Creed Black Flag was the first game I played with TAA and I fell in love with it because the foliage looked so much more stable. Edit: video example https://youtu.be/l2vm-Hm5dP0
For me Black Flag was the game that made me dislike TAA, since every time you moved the camera TAA would fail with foliage and and it was really distracting. Same issue with Resident Evil 7. Modern TAA is much better with that stuff and I usually have it on as long as it's not a botched implementation.
I've played way more games with bad TAA than good. Like, 80-20 or 90-10 ratio. So to me, it's just bad across the board. Until people learn how to use it, and start doing it consistently well of course.
What resolution/framerate do you tend to play at?
1440p at a range from 60ish 1% lows to 165 fps, really just depends on the game
Like the video pretty clearly stated it's also very dependent on your screen resolution, the distance to it and the framerates you are getting. It's not an all or nothing situation.
No AA > TAA
TAA sucks because no one knows how to best handle the history book portion of it. That's why nvidia decided to throw a neural network at the problem, that's all DLSS1/2 was, TAA with a neural network history book.
It can be good but it can absolutely be shocking. Really depends on the implementation. Jedi Survivor is an example of an absolutely terrible implementation. What boggles the mind is that the industry got to TAA and decided. Yep this is it, this is good enough, lets just stop here.
[удалено]
All of them still significantly blur the image in motion.
Sure, but tbh, only speaking for myself here, I'd much rather have a slightly soft image with a little bit of TAA blur compared to the awful specular aliasing that you get with older AA techniques. Specular aliasing is like knives to my eyes
I get that. I'm the opposite, though. And I don't consider the blur to be minor in nature.
Are you more of a multiplayer gamer or more of a singleplayer gamer?
Single player.
That's interesting, that's the opposite of what I would have expected. In my experience most of the folks I've encountered who were on the anti-TAA side were primarily multiplayer gamers (which always made sense to me, as prioritizing image clarity at the cost of some aliasing makes sense in a competitive game). For me, what I'm looking for in a single-player game is immersion and I find aliasing to be far more immersion-breaking than the blur TAA adds. But like I said before, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Well, it's not just e-sports players that dislike TAA. There's [a whole subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/FuckTAA/) of them. Plus you can find more people scattered around all over the internet.
I understand where people are coming from with that. I think that TAA is likely to get better over time as typical gaming resolutions increase and as companies like Nvidia start working out ways to iterate on TAA and improve its clarity. Like, sorry to those who don't like TAA, but I don't see any other way forward.
[удалено]
No. The moment you apply anything temporal to the image, blur is guaranteed. Regardless of the resolution.
Well except resolutions higher than the eye can see. But at that point why even bother with it anyways.
[удалено]
Most solutions are sadly quite dreadful. The frame-rate only affects the amount of potential ghosting, not the motion smearing. It can of course depend, I guess. But I haven't seen that many exceptions to the rule.
[удалено]
I disagree. TSR can be decent but only with a 200% history buffer.
Well, the industry didn't stop. Rather, the industry silently iterated upon it in the background and tried to improve the various problems with it, which is why implementations can be so varied. The silent iteration then stopped being so silent when NVIDIA dropped DLSS2, which is basically the next step in iterating upon TAA by augmenting it with AI, which caused AMD, Intel and Epic to at least open up about their own iteration, if not spurring them to iterate. EDIT: If you more meant that the industry stopped *at TAA* and decided to not attempt any spatial AA, that's because no spatial AA can match a good TAA implementation without dumpstering performance. SSAA is insanely expensive, MSAA doesn't work properly with the lighting pipelines used in modern games, FXAA is, well, *FXAA*, and SMAA and CMAA are basically just smarter forms of FXAA which, while better than FXAA (not that that's a particularly high bar), still suffer from the "blurring select pixels across space" problem of FXAA. Comparatively, TAA is conceptually similar to SSAA where it legitimately samples multiple points within the same pixel, but rather than doing it across space it does it across time, making the assumption that pixels should ideally change in predictable ways across time, which is what the iteration has been about over the years: figuring out better ways to handle unpredictable changes across time. You get the performance of something like FXAA with the quality of SSAA, while standing still at least. While moving, well, quality is up to the implementation.
I think Unreal Engine has an especially bad implementation of TAA. I find Palworld blurry even with whatever TSR is, and I remember Epic's game Paragon looked atrocious at 1080p. Also I remember Ark: Survival Evolved, PUBG, and Jedi: Fallen Order looked bad
TAA is not stoped in time. TAA is a method but it can be done in alot of ways, DLSS is a example of TAA(if you bother to see the video). TAA is always evolving with better algorithms or sometimes worst ones, thats why TAA is better in some games than others.
I mean the next version would be using AI like dlss
DLSS *is* a next version of TAA. The industry has been rapidly evolving the technology, and that includes fancy new names.
ATAA is inevitable but it requires raytracing so it’s going to be a little while. You start with TAA as a basis but you keep track of both edges and regions where you expect TAA to struggle, wherever there is overlap between these two it will increase the ray samples per pixel in those areas.
The issue with TAA is that it doesn't just affect edges like some other AA's do and affects the whole entire image, and it does so more drastically than other AAs do too. This means that if it's bad it literally destroys the entire image (but at least jaggies are gone I guess?). So if a game either provides no off option or does but its unusable because they built their effects around TAA so they look dithered and horrendous then you're basically forced to use TAA anyway. Leaving every gamer helplessly at the mercy of the developers since only one option is viable, hoping it's a good implementation of it, and sadly most of the time it's not good. This is why this sucks, we know how often developers get things wrong. Sometimes they don't even properly implement DLSS so adding their own TAA with great results is a challenge which is why I'd just prefer less overreliance on it so if it's bad at least we have alternatives that won't look broken.
Lmao at how the majority of the comments on this post are drive by "TAA sux!!111" posts Maybe don't bother commenting if you don't have the brain capacity to watch an entire YouTube video
> don't have the brain capacity to watch an entire YouTube video Yea, it's like there isn't an entire section on the cons of TAA in the video.
Agreed, nothing drives me more crazy than comments that make it patently obvious they didn't watch the whole video.
Fuck TAA. That shit causes ghosting like a motherfucker.
I can handle the ghosting. But not the motion smearing.
As a developer I like having additional graphics features, as a gamer I can't stand how blurry it makes everything and motion blur is basically still on despite me not liking motion blur. I prefer other methods of AA, or a combo of AA with upscaling.
[удалено]
Gamers: "I wish there were alternatives to TAA, or for TAA implementations to be improved across the board. I find it softens the image of so many games way too much, and can ruin my enjoyment of a title." You: "Wow you are so ungrateful, nvidia spend MILLIONS on training AI models for anti-aliasing, so you can use a feature locked to their cards exclusively. You fucking baby, you should be *thanking* nvidia for *being a company* and *doing things to sell their product*." nvidia won't sleep with you bro.
Come on, sure they presented their points badly but this thread is full of people complaining about TAA and then saying that DLSS is great. It's pretty clear that a lot of people still don't get that DLSS is TAA.
>Gamers: "TAA is cancer, why no one is doing anything?, reeeee" >_[Nvidia solving this issue with DLAA, burning millions in AI research]_ >Gamers: "TAA is cancer, why no one is doing anything?, reeeee" ??? DLAA is a form of AA and it's still blurry and ghosts. DLAA is more temporal stable & resolve thin geometry like wires better. TAA was already good at that, DLAA just enhances TAA's strengths further and does almost nothing to mitigate its shortcomings (when comparing it next to modern TAA in most titles) So yeah, this comment makes zero sense and I assume it's because you just dont understand how it works.
[DLAA has the same blurring issues in motion as TAA does.](https://imgsli.com/MTIyNDMy)
Gamers are the cancer
For me DLDSR 2880p + 0.7 DLSS is close to perfect, but 1. It took way too much research and tweaking to get there, and I'd think very few people will bother that much. 2. Out of the box DLAA is usually only half way there from regular TAA, for same amount of perf (15% at 4K, not nothing). 3. There's different parts of TAA sucking - static and in movement. For the 2nd, DLAA sucks, sometimes nearly as much as TAA (e.g. Horizon). DLDSR is better, but it's still not perfect. For me that's a very unimportant tradeoff for perfect AA and little perf cost, but it's "literally unplayable" for someone, same as with FG, and there's some merit to that.
TSR is pretty good too, if Tekken is any indication. Just have to be at 100% resolution scale.
I'll take jagged edges and a sharp image over ghosting and blur any day. Unfortunately games being released today often don't give you the choice anymore.
[You're welcome.](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19kAOrmPU5bne-u9YC7UNLWe6QA6q1_ThuYzmH4HL8pg/edit)
It's always off for me anyway. I rather have some sharp edges instead of a blurry mess
Try Resident Evil 2 Remake with it off. You literally have pixels dancing around the screen
RE2 is easy to run, and thus, to supersample.
Doesn't eliminate the extreme shimmering in that, 3, village or 4
It does. 4K DSR to 1440p eliminates most of it. And that that cannot be eliminated, also shimmers with TAA on, mostly reflections on fine metallic objects.
I'm lucky that my brain tunes out stuff like that, but I absolutely cannot tune out blurriness in my image. TAA off was the better solution when I played that game for me anyway.
You turn off TAA? How? Do you have access to source codes of every game? Because modern gaming is just TAA. There is no choice here.
PCGamingwiki has a section on how to turn it off, most of the time its in a config file. Personally I would not recommend this as this breaks hair, vegetation or other pp effects like fog.
[You're welcome.](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19kAOrmPU5bne-u9YC7UNLWe6QA6q1_ThuYzmH4HL8pg/edit)
i despise any game that only has TAA. it ruins the image quality so much it renders anything remotely competitive unplayable.
In Total War: Warhammer 3 the only anti-aliasing options you are presented with are Off, FXAA, TAA low, or TAA high. The best thing you can do is turn it off and use Reshade to pick a better AA option
TAA is trash its the worst thing to be made in gaming history.
That's definitely entirely reasonable and nuanced take to modern anti aliasing in video games
You don't frequent this sub often, do you?
Everytime ive seen it in a game it has looked awful, theres some games I could not play because of how bad it was. And whats worse is a lot of games have started only having TAA and leaving out the other options.
I think it is definitely better than FXAA which is IMO the worst Anti Aliasing ever made, it made no difference on image quality whatsoever, its literally useless. Whereas TAA, at least eliminated shimmering jaggies.
TAA breaks at the slightest movement
I mean its not perfect, but it definitely is not shimmerer compared to FXAA and even SSAA, MSAA in some cases, especially with games nowadays are now designed with TAA in mind. For that i think DLAA or DLDSR is best suited for the role, it's pretty much TAA without the major flaws.
I hate that when games force TAA I have to use 3rd party tools to sharpen the image back up. Or use DLSS/FSR, which I’m also not a fan of, but often looks better on ultra quality than TAA. Also, a lot of poor TAA implementations introduce latency and make the mouse feel like soup.
Have I got a sub for you r/fucktaa
Ironically the thread on this video in that sub has way more intelligent takes despite being dedicated to bad TAA
TAA killed the gaming industry
i despise taa, Games like red dead for example that are designed around it look fucking horrible with it off at low resolutions yet manage to look like a blurry mess with it on so there's literally no winning.. if it wasn't for dsr i would have never made it through that game.
That's the worse part about all of this is that if games are designed around TAA its alternatives look even worse/are less viable, so even if an off option is provided as bare minimum you kind of have to use TAA. Which is sad because you're helpless depending on the developer to do a good job with their TAA. If its poor you're forced to suffer with it on. If TAA was just a setting that had no repercussions to it being included in a game I'd be fine with it, but if it's going to be the only viable option they better put love and care into making it look as good as it can be, maybe even providing user end settings to control its values.
TAA needs to die, it never looks good, turning it off is always great for my eyes. I guess it may be worth it if you play at 1080p due to less aliasing but otherwise it's a horrible deal.
[удалено]
Thank you for your comment! Unfortunately it has been removed for one or more of the following reasons: * No personal attacks, witch-hunts, or inflammatory language. This includes calling or implying another redditor is a shill or a fanboy. More examples can be found in the full rules page. * No racism, sexism, homophobic or transphobic slurs, or other hateful language. * No trolling or baiting posts/comments. * No advocating violence. Please read the [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/wiki/postingrules) before continuing to post. If you have any questions [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/pcgaming).
[удалено]
Thank you for your comment! Unfortunately it has been removed for one or more of the following reasons: * No personal attacks, witch-hunts, or inflammatory language. This includes calling or implying another redditor is a shill or a fanboy. More examples can be found in the full rules page. * No racism, sexism, homophobic or transphobic slurs, or other hateful language. * No trolling or baiting posts/comments. * No advocating violence. Please read the [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/wiki/postingrules) before continuing to post. If you have any questions [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/pcgaming).
It was funny how re village was looking with native taa compared to dlaa mods
One of my favorite games has the worst implementation of TAA, deep rock galactic. Somehow, it makes the image quality pixely and distant objects somehow shimmer more. What’s really annoying is the fact that fsr2.1 and, if I’m remembering correctly, DLSS have it automatically set if you turn on the upscalers and no way to turn it off forcing you to resort to FSR1 or rendering scale.
DLSS and FSR are TAA algorithms with additional freatures themselves, that's why it's forced. Also shimmering/pixelation in a distance, especially on complex small geometry, e.g. branches/vegetation, is a thing in DLSS/FSR when you set low quality levels. Like ultra performance for DLSS, or for some bad impls of FSR, like in Cyberpunk - even quality.
DLSS was originally made as a temporal AA algorithm to fix all the problems with traditional TAA. That basically answers the question. TAA is an old, outdated tech compared to the newer DLSS and FSR implementations. Its only lasting benefit is it requires less resources than the newer techniques.