Correct, the post-process portion of SMAA is basically Jimenez MLAA (iirc) with better edge-detection and some additional tweaks so it can handle anti-aliased edges better.
SMAA injector wins that by miles lol
Thats some type of morphological antialiasing right?
I must be having some underlying performance problem. I'm running the game on the rig in my sig with a gtx 680@1200/3300 and it's struggling in the 30-40fps range at highest setting and just 1920x1080. Just looking at that early benchmark graph a gtx 680 was barely dropping below 60fps minimum. I'm running the latest release drivers but none of the beta drivers seemed to mention GW2.
Looks like toms has a review just for GW2
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/guild-wars-2-performance-benchmark,3268.html
CPU tasks certainly still seem to be the bottleneck, although the performance overall has been excellent (*mostly* sustaining a vSync'd 60fps at 2560x1440 with maximum settings - just render sampling down from Supersampling to Native) on a 2600k@4.9 & 680 Lightning.
Have seen CPU usage jump up to a balanced threading of 70%+ when in certain areas of the game (often brought on by changing direction quickly), however there does appear to often be one thread being pinned up around 75% in populated areas (usually results in lower GPU utilisation and a framerate drop).
I don't know why people think that when a quad core shows %50 usage but the task manager shows each core being used that the game is actually quad core capable.
It isn't quad core capable until it can use all 100% of a quad core CPU. Windows moves processes around to different cores which makes games appear to use all four cores.
The way to force a game to be CPU limited is by disabling Vsync and lowering all the graphics settings to the minimum while running the game windowed with a low resolution with task manager open beside it.
Was getting 10-20 FPS with my 2x 5770 in xfire. When I disabled it I went up to 30-50.
Using 12.8 catalyst and latest CAP file. /shrug
12.8 CAP1 will be out soon. It has the GW2 profile in it.
Looks like:
a Phenom II @4.0ghz = ~55+ fps
a i5-2500k@4.0 ghz = ~69 fps
A phenom II @4.0ghz should be faster than a bulldozer@4.0ghz.
So this isnt a game where a phenom II will get crushed compaired to a Intel CPU.
A 20%+ fps differnce though is still noticeable.
Time to get your CPU overclocked if it isnt already lol, seems like it likes high clock speeds.
Highest ingame graphic options:
Toms also finds More Cores/Threads seem to help performance, even upto 8+.
Also, the results for the 670 and 7970 are practically identical, which doesn't match up to real world performance in other games, normally would make you suspect a CPU bottleneck, but his CPU tests show no bottleneck...|
CPU tasks certainly still seem to be the bottleneck, although the performance overall has been excellent (*mostly* sustaining a vSync'd 60fps at 2560x1440 with maximum settings - just render sampling down from Supersampling to Native) on a 2600k@4.9 & 680 Lightning.
Have seen CPU usage jump up to a balanced threading of 70%+ when in certain areas of the game (often brought on by changing direction quickly), however there does appear to often be one thread being pinned up around 75% in populated areas (usually results in lower GPU utilisation and a framerate drop).
Could be one of those titles that thread-hopping causes performance drop. May see a better picture by disabling HT and whatever the equivalent of BD.
Something is wrong with Tom's results as they just don't make sense. Never put much stock in any of their reviews though.
The 670 is barely faster than the 580 there, 14% or so faster. Also, the results for the 670 and 7970 are practically identical, which doesn't match up to real world performance in other games, normally would make you suspect a CPU bottleneck, but his CPU tests show no bottleneck...
There is something useful at Tom's though --> Quad-core Intel i5 is the sweet spot for this game CPU wise, dual core i3 / Pentiums will outperform an FX8150.