Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nvidia GTX 470 should have better quality

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 7, 2011 2:51:12 AM

I have an EVGA Nvidia GTX 470 video card. The issue I am having is the quality in game should be alot better than it currently is. I have greatly reduced the amount of jaggies in game from when I first installed the drivers but There are lower quality cards getting less to no jaggies than mine.

At the moment a friends GTX 260 has less jaggies than my 470. A GTX 460 has better quality than my GTX 470 and we have the exact same Nvidia control panel settings.

What could be going on here? We both now are only using the nvidia control panel. I have the newest driver from Nvidia's website at the moment too.

Am I missing something?

Thanks

More about : nvidia gtx 470 quality

a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2011 3:08:12 AM

make sure you are using the same in-game settings, and that your monitors have the same resolution.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 4:15:55 AM

We are using the same in game settings but I have a 15 inch monitor and he has a 23 inch. Could that really make that much of a difference. Like in screen shots? his vehicle is way more high poly than mine and he has way less jaggies.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2011 8:20:02 AM

Have you overclocked the card?
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 9:21:48 AM

OC'd or not, the GTX470 should outperform the GTX460. Even when you OC the GTX460, it should hit the performance level of the GTX470, not pass it (or by much.) I suspect there is a CPU issue, or we need a lot more info on the monitors. If you are using an old 15" CRT at 1024x768 and he is using a new 23" 1920x1080 LCD, that's your issue.
m
0
l
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 9:27:04 AM

4745454b said:
OC'd or not, the GTX470 should outperform the GTX460. Even when you OC the GTX460, it should hit the performance level of the GTX470, not pass it (or by much.) I suspect there is a CPU issue, or we need a lot more info on the monitors. If you are using an old 15" CRT at 1024x768 and he is using a new 23" 1920x1080 LCD, that's your issue.


i honestly believe that's the problem.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 9:32:27 AM

That is what I was thinking. It may be my monitor. He has a LG 23" with using HDMI.

I have a 15 inch Sony Flatscreen using a DVI to VGA converted from my GPU to the monitor. It is pretty old, maybe a 2002-2004? at 1024x768. And his card is not overclocked.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 9:34:23 AM

Try setting Vsync off. It often blocks frame rates because of your monitor's refresh rate. Other than that if you are referring to quality then try tweaking your monitor. If none of the above is working then try reinstalling the game and delete any configuration settings in the game directory. Make sure you have the latest drivers installed. It might even be your monitor if he is gaming at 1920 X 1080 and you are gaming at lower resolutions
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 9:44:06 AM

Try with his monitor. See if it still looks as bad. If you're running a GTX470, I see no reason for you to still use such an old monitor. UPGRADE!
m
0
l
a c 173 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 11:51:00 AM

15" monitor is obviously the issue. low res = more jaggies.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2011 2:47:21 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
15" monitor is obviously the issue. low res = more jaggies.

If he's using the maximum supported resolution of the monitor, then it should not be an issue. For example, if his 15" monitor has a maximum resolution of 1024x768, it will not be jaggy. Only if you run it at lower resolutions will it be jaggy.
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 4:26:05 PM

^_____ ??? How do you figure?
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 7:58:11 PM

I am running the maximum resolution. Trying it with my friends monitor is not possible as he lives out of state.

Should I try with a 22" LCD flatscreen TV? A friend that lives close has one of those. I do not have an HDMI cable though so I will need use VGA again. Could that be part of the problem?
m
0
l
a c 126 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 8:05:54 PM

1024 x 768 = 786432 Vs 1920 x 1080 = 2073600, Your friends image is made up of over double the amount of Pixels, More pixels = better picture quality.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 8:17:46 PM

Just to see. Would hooking the system up via VGA to a new 22" flatscreen TV make a difference. A near by friend has one of those.
m
0
l
a c 126 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 7, 2011 9:02:20 PM

HD TV?

It might have a max resolution 1366 x 768...

You'll want to test on a monitor/TV that is full HD+

And yes VGA is capable of HD+ resolutions.
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 8, 2011 1:01:55 AM

Sigh.

15"? 23"? 22"? This doesn't tell us squat. I see we still live in the land of bigger is better. I remember a number of years ago my friend with a truck took me to walmart so I get buy a new TV. (CRT, as LCDs were still much to expensive.) As we were looking I was deciding between a couple of different 27" TV. I was busy comparing jacks when he pointed out the TV he would get, an RCA 32". I laughed and said not a chance in #$%#!. He asked why, and I replied that all the 27"s I was looking at had a flat screen, while his was bowed like a fish bowl. It also had a single coax jack in the back, not a single composite or component (or even Svideo.) jack. Size != everything.

I agree that if its 22" then its probably 1366x768, not much different then your monitor. It might look better due to newer technology, but I wouldn't bet on it. As long as it doesn't hurt to try it you've got nothing to lose, but I doubt it will look much different.
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 2:45:38 AM

I tried it today and it didnt look much difference. I will be buying a new monitor and hopefully that will fix the issue im having.

Thanks guys
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
July 11, 2011 5:44:38 AM

4745454b said:
^_____ ??? How do you figure?

I have a small monitor, 17" Samsung SyncMaster 773s, which supports a maximum resolution of 1280x1024, and its currently set at 1152x864.

If I run a game at 800x600, it definitely looks jaggy. However if I increase the resolution, the jaggies start disappearing pretty quick. With older games, say Hitman 2, there is a bit of jaggies at 1280x1024 without AA, but with newer games, say Crysis, there are minor jaggies at 1024x768, and at 1152x864 and above, they disappear almost completely, without enabling AA.

What i mean to say is this: you have a 24" monitor with a native resolution of full HD, and you play at 720p on it - there will definitely be jaggies, however use that same resolution on a 19" and you'll find that there is not much aliasing as in the case of the 24" monitor.

I'm sure you know this :) 
m
0
l
a c 176 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 11, 2011 6:25:13 AM

That's a bit clearer and makes some sense. Your first post seemed to say that if you run it at your monitors largest res, you won't have jaggies.

Quote:
What i mean to say is this: you have a 24" monitor with a native resolution of full HD, and you play at 720p on it - there will definitely be jaggies, however use that same resolution on a 19" and you'll find that there is not much aliasing as in the case of the 24" monitor.


Not sure how much of this I agree with either. There are several things that come into play. First, 1080 (Full HD) monitors are down to 21.5". If you're using a 24" in, it might be an older one. Second, there is a pretty big pixel per inch difference between 21.5 and 24". The image should look better on the 21.5 just for that reason alone. Third, because there aren't any 1080 19" monitors, you don't have to go down as much to reach 720. So in your example if your looking at a 1080 24" monitor and scale it down to 720, it looks worse then your 1440x900(or 800) 19" monitor because the pixels are farther apart, and it had to scale down farther then the 19" did.

In case you don't believe me, here are the search results for 19 or 19.1" 1080 monitors.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=P...

You are correct. The larger the screen res the less AA you need. But it's certainly possible to get jaggies at 1024x768. You said so yourself.

Quote:
With older games, say Hitman 2, there is a bit of jaggies at 1280x1024 without AA, but with newer games, say Crysis, there are minor jaggies at 1024x768
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
July 11, 2011 3:55:30 PM

I'm talking in a general sense. I know that you can have 21.5" displays with fullHD, and I definitely agree that more pixels/inch=better.

THE OP is getting a new monitor, so lets see how things go for him.
m
0
l
July 15, 2011 4:12:19 AM

Well, I just purchased a 23" Asus monitor with HDMI support so I should be set now? Also got a 6' Mini HDMI to HDMI cord.


Thanks for all your help. I will let you know how it works out.


EDIT:

My monitor is sweet and it did greatly improve the graphics quality. A GTX 460 still has a clearer image than mine though. I may just have to fine tune things again but, I still dont have the quality like my friend does.
m
0
l
!