Originally Posted by
SKYMTL
One question: why is an optimization being called a "cheat"?
As long as the effect is invisible to the end user and has a positive impact on performance, I personally don't give two hoots if it increases framerates by two percent or two hundred percent. I tried to allude to the same thing when talking about the substitution of FP16 render targets since while it has a positive impact upon performance, a person actually PLAYING a game (instead of staring at comparison screens) will likely NEVER see the difference. Me, I see a slight difference in some isolated cases but that's just because I play some games like DoW 2 ALOT so I can see the minor differences with ATI's implementation in that game.
The same thing goes (IMO) for anything above 8xMSAA. Other than old Myst-style point and move style games, 99% of todays apps involve paying attention to a moving picture; not glorified screenshots. So, why would someone even stop to care about a few jagged lines on a fence 200 feet away? On the other hand, if higher IQ modes can be enabled through the use of higher end hardware, I'm all for that as well. ;)
Naturally, decreasing overall image quality for higher scores in reviews isn't "ethical" but I booted Crysis on both ATI and NVIDIA hardware over the weekend and couldn't see any difference. Yes, the ATI cards do have an odd issue where some edges shimmer a bit but between the 9.12 drivers and the newest 10.3a, I saw no differences in either performance or overall IQ.