While sampling at a higher rate is expensive, isn't it the case that antialiasing is also very expensive? When I had an older PC, I remember being suggested to turn the antialiasing setting off for video games in order to make my FPS increase and the overall performance of the game be smoother, so I'm led to believe that antialiasing can be quite costly as well. I'm also curious to know what the difference in cost between antialiasing and increasing sampling rate is as well!
Staffi-geng
Good points! Yep, antialiasing can be expensive, since we’re doing more calculations, and giving the CPU (and GPU) more work. Hm, I think it might be difficult to make a general performance/time comparison between increasing sampling rate and antialiasing since there are a lot of different antialiasing techniques!
While sampling at a higher rate is expensive, isn't it the case that antialiasing is also very expensive? When I had an older PC, I remember being suggested to turn the antialiasing setting off for video games in order to make my FPS increase and the overall performance of the game be smoother, so I'm led to believe that antialiasing can be quite costly as well. I'm also curious to know what the difference in cost between antialiasing and increasing sampling rate is as well!
Good points! Yep, antialiasing can be expensive, since we’re doing more calculations, and giving the CPU (and GPU) more work. Hm, I think it might be difficult to make a general performance/time comparison between increasing sampling rate and antialiasing since there are a lot of different antialiasing techniques!