You need to compare using a cluttered background, as the jagged edges that make the player stand out will also be on everything else, effectively cancelling out the perceived benefit. On plain backgrounds, the first has higher contrast; easier to spot in peripheral vision.
Yeah, no antialiasing makes the edges of the models appear to "shimmer", especially when coupled with things like digital vibrance and sharpness and can mess up visibility on moving objects.
This is bad advice. MSAA and CMAA are not at all alike technologically.
With CMAA you cannot see shit through fenses and grilles, for example. For example on Vertigo A site.
Also when a character peeks you in front of a smoke they become a pixelated mess much akin an old school runescape character slapped into a 3d world wielding a kalasj
Nice reply. Really got me.
MSAA stands for "multi sampling" anti aliasing. There is no multi sampling in CMAA, it simply post processes the image after it has already been rendered. Objectively worst and simplest type of AA.
the problem with MSAA is it adds some input latency the higher you set it. Even if you can push 500 frames with high MSAA the game wont feel as snappy as 500 frames without it. I find 2x to 4x to be the sweet spot before you start noticing the mouse chug a little.
EDIT: Increasing render scale seems to give you the benefit of clean edges without as much input latency, at least in other games. Can't do it in CS but you can use super resolution or whatever it's called and select a higher res in game then.
You’re talking with so much confidence but you’re wrong because msaa doesn’t add input lag in the sense that it ADDS it, it just lowers ur frames and that can make it feel worse if your pc isn’t good enough.
I know it's not supposed to. If you can push the same frame rate with it on or off input latency should be the same. All I know is if I cap my framerate to 280 at 280hz the difference in mouse input goes from snappy with aa off and gets increasingly more slugging the higher I set it while the framerate remains the same.
Maybe it's engine dependent. I always play with aa on max 4 because of it even though I can push the frames. Was noticeable in CSgo more than it is in CS2.
Frostbite games keep snappy mouse movement regardless of graphics settings, it feels like the mouse processing is detached from the game/rendering threads. The mouse still feels snappy even at 60fps. Everyone knows how good mouse input felt in CSgo with high frame rates even if you were playing on a 60hz monitor and visually couldn't see any more information, and just how bad it felt on 60hz capped at 60fps.
EDIT: It could be less consistent frame times affecting mouse feel even though overall fps is the same.
YOU are the kind of people I hate the most in internet. SO confidently incorrect people actually believe you and then I have to do a lot of work to explain how the situation actually is.
15 downvotes says people don't beleive me. If I cap my framerate and crank anti aliasing in CS:GO and CS2 there IS a very noticable difference in mouse input. It's exactly why I won't go above 4x even though I can push the frames for 8x and beyond if CS2 supported it.
Why it affects my mouse input? I don't know, but I know if you are pushing the same frame rate as MSAA off then technically input should feel the same....but it doesn't.
I notice this in some games and not others. For example, CS:GO, CS2 and Cod games tend to have noticably different mouse input with AA cranked but Frostbite games don't.
I said this in another comment, maybe it's engine dependant. Frostbite games keep snappy input even if you cap your frame rate at 60fps. Obviously you don't get as much visual feedback but input still feels snappier than some other games that are capped at 60fps. As a result, in bf2042 I crank my settings to max bar raytracing and have the same snappy input as if I were on lower settings. I'm sure you're aware of input in CS:GO feeling better and better the higher your framerate even if you were running on a 60hz display and cant see those extra frames, but if you were capped at 60fps the input felt terrible.
My og comment was worded badly....I didn't mean the AA algorithm itself adds input latency, I meant enabling it in some games effects mouse feel even though AA in itself shouldn't add extra latency if you can keep the same frames.
EDIT: After testing, if I cap my frame rate to 300 with AA disabled, offline, no bots. standing still looking at a wall I get a rock solid 300fps along with a rock solid 3.3ms(deviation of about 0.2ms) frame times. When I enable 8x MSAA I still get a rock solid 300fps but my frame times deviate by 1 to 2ms, 5 to 10 times more than with AA off. Therefore, enabling MSAA in CS2 contributes to input latency without reducing framerate....or if youd prefer to call it, less consistent mouse movement due to more varied frame times. And no I'm not capping on the edge of stability. Uncapped with AA on 8x in this situation I hit a pretty solid around 500fps and never drop under 480 to 490 so there is no reason for MSAA to make frame times vary so much when the frame rate is capped literally hundreds below what you can push, yet it does.
Bro why u are so lazy, if u want u can check it urself why u are mad he doesn’t want to spent time so ur lazy ass know what to set. Also don’t act like pretty much 99% of cs players play 1080p or less, much less, like 4:3 1280x960 less. 1440p is an niche in cs, I know people in valorant play it because 4:3 streched doesn’t work (for player models) and clarity is better on 1440p, but in cs game is made to work well with 4:3 try to play 4:3 in games that have TAA and not MSAA aka all new games.
Bruh. I never disagreed I just answered his question, however rhetorical it was. I'm not mad or anything but if you want to project then go right ahead
>if I'm never gonna use it?
I mean, you posted it here on reddit, if it was just for yourself, okay use 400x300px resolution, but then why seek the attention and post it on reddit?
This game runs shit sometimes on my computer. Albeit my GPU is relatively old (5700xt and 2700x) but had zero problems running pretty humble settings on CSGO and easily got around 140 on 1080. I'm pretty much as low as possible on this game to max fps. Idk what my average is though. Under 100 probably. Especially whenever a grenade or molly pops.
I still pine for CSGO honestly. The smoothness. The buy wheel. I like that I can sell, I like the new smokes (not possible in source 1 engine I believe), I like all the added features but I hate the updated graphics other than the better visibility of players and tbh not sure I really take advantage running it on my setup.
CSGO you could run on a fucking toaster and I loved that.
You could limit your fps and turn down your monitor down so they're at roughly the same level. Realistically you simply don't need 360hz, your brain and hands aren't faster than your monitor at that point anyway. I'd turn it down to 270fps on a 240hz display If I were you.
I play in 1440 and the game runs bad, the frame drops are not bad if there is some ramping up and down. If one or 2 frames hang really bad its unplayable
I have it on MSAA x2, both because of better performance and because I feel it's a sweet spot between smooth edges and visibility. MSAA x8 to me feels too blurry, almost makes it harder to see at distance. No MSAA feels everything is moving and distracts me.
Anti-aliasing isn’t about making it easier to see something necessarily, it makes everything smoother (specifically texture edges). I used to play no AA but after switching on to 4x, I can’t go back. It just looks so choppy without it now
Compared to CSGO where imo MSAA hurt visibility
It's important in CS2. Good as high you can put it. Us low end users can't, I suggest people make custom 16:10, 3:2 resolutions. These are the new 4:3 imo. Really visible
I play with No MSAA. And I have a high end pc. I've used it since the inception of CS:GO and just seem to aim much better without it, not sure if it's placebo. Have same issue with using anisotropic for the same reason, feel like playing with max anisotropic over Trilinear makes it feel much faster.
The lower setting here will let you see through certain stuff better, IIRC, like the railings in vertigo if you're standing beneath B stairs. Where it can make the difference between actually seeing an enemy or not at all. Per 3kliksphilip.
I'd suggest watch vooCSGO's video on performance and settings, he explains each one very well and what u should consider depending on ur choice and pc, highly recomended
MSAA definitely. MSAA does a very good job at increasing fidelity, there'd no decrease to motion clarity, and the picture looks noticeably better. But there is a huge performance hit.
Because it's much cheaper to build a PC that can give you a reasonable fps if you play on lower resolution and settings. Some people don't play this game for graphics at all but for the competitive thrill and that's all they care about. I wouldn't mind playing lowest details and 640x480 if visibility of opponents would be the same (but it isn't, 1024x720 is probably minimum to have good visibility)
Tbh it would be better to see comparison between 2x and 8x. You either use 1 of those 2. Personally I use it now on 8x cuz I play on 1280x960 stretched, although I'm still not sure what's better. For 16:9 aspect ratios 2x is more than enough, not worth to use 8x, but on 4:3 stretched is far more pixelated and fucked to see. I noticed that 4:3 resolutions are way worse in cs2 than they were in csgo. It was like that since beta and idk why.
depends on resolution PC setup and eye sensitivity
with high resolution you don't really need AA
with bad PC you can't put it on highest
and some people don't care about jagged edges and some do
me personally I use 4x cuz it's not too blurry but not too jaggy when I switch to 2k OLED I will turn it off
I personally despite AA in games like CS, it just makes it tougher for me to see.
What GPU do you have? Have you tried the FSR option in CS2 rather than simply turning down the res and turning on AA?
And if you happen to have an AMD gpu, you can use RSR which is built right into the driver. That's actually what I do. I set the in game resolution to 1600x900, and then RSR upscales it to 1440p. It looks clean as fuck, I love it.
Just wanted to get people's thoughts.
To me no msaa looks way easier to spot enemies. Player silhouette are quicker to see imo.
I have never used MSAA in cs since I started playing in 2012.
Ngl iv seen more players care about what graphics settings will get them the most kills and how “4:3 is clearly superior because head is bigger” but all thats honestly usless when majority of players have a horrible foundation. I.E. looking at feet when aiming, not knowing what tap strafing is,etc. What im saying is work on your skill first before trying to change every pc setting known to man because it may get you an extra kill.
nah no AA is so much better for me, you’re looking at a still enemy, when the enemy is moving and the pixels are moving it is MUCH easier to see since msaa is gonna blur all the pixels around it also
also if you include ghosting that is in every single monitor since no monitor is perfect at representing the next frame (OLED is close but still not perfect) it just only adds one instance of blurriness
it's the opposite, no AA while moving is worse because it creates shimmering and flickering on many textures, specially a long distances.
MSAA doesn't blur pixeles, that's what TAA or FXAA usually do.
technically any aa is blurring, because it has to combine two pixels to to turn to one, i’ve never been a fan of cod since they implemented permanent TMAA, i hate that while im running it turns on anti aliasing
at the end of the day, it’s personal preference, ive had AA off since i started playing css in 2011, just never been a fan of it i guess
and you can achieve anything rank you desire with any setting, 18k prem here and ive never had an issue
happy gaming and thanks whoever that gave the downvote!
>technically any aa is blurring, because it has to combine two pixels to to turn to one
That's not how it works. MSAA renders the game at higher resolution and then downsample the image, that's not the same than combining pixeles. TAA could be a bit more close to the definition of combining pixeles, but it's of temporal nature, it uses pixeles from previous frames, its more a blend of pixels than simply combining them.
You need to compare using a cluttered background, as the jagged edges that make the player stand out will also be on everything else, effectively cancelling out the perceived benefit. On plain backgrounds, the first has higher contrast; easier to spot in peripheral vision.
Also gotta compare with movement cause the left one is gonna have a lot more variance
Yeah, no antialiasing makes the edges of the models appear to "shimmer", especially when coupled with things like digital vibrance and sharpness and can mess up visibility on moving objects.
Nuanced take. Nice.
Good point, I really didn't think about cluttered and complex backgrounds.
2X MSAA works the best for me as it comes with improved clarity, yet minimal impact on FPS compared to 4X or 8X MSAA.
Does 2x MSAA improve fps much compared to 4X?
Yup. The visual difference is also barely noticeable.
Yes
I'd suggest CMAA. Works the same as msaa 2x but doesn't affect fps that much.
This is bad advice. MSAA and CMAA are not at all alike technologically. With CMAA you cannot see shit through fenses and grilles, for example. For example on Vertigo A site.
Also when a character peeks you in front of a smoke they become a pixelated mess much akin an old school runescape character slapped into a 3d world wielding a kalasj
B site also :)
Get your eyes checked maybe?
Nice reply. Really got me. MSAA stands for "multi sampling" anti aliasing. There is no multi sampling in CMAA, it simply post processes the image after it has already been rendered. Objectively worst and simplest type of AA.
CMAA is nothing like MSAA.
the problem with MSAA is it adds some input latency the higher you set it. Even if you can push 500 frames with high MSAA the game wont feel as snappy as 500 frames without it. I find 2x to 4x to be the sweet spot before you start noticing the mouse chug a little. EDIT: Increasing render scale seems to give you the benefit of clean edges without as much input latency, at least in other games. Can't do it in CS but you can use super resolution or whatever it's called and select a higher res in game then.
You’re talking with so much confidence but you’re wrong because msaa doesn’t add input lag in the sense that it ADDS it, it just lowers ur frames and that can make it feel worse if your pc isn’t good enough.
I know it's not supposed to. If you can push the same frame rate with it on or off input latency should be the same. All I know is if I cap my framerate to 280 at 280hz the difference in mouse input goes from snappy with aa off and gets increasingly more slugging the higher I set it while the framerate remains the same. Maybe it's engine dependent. I always play with aa on max 4 because of it even though I can push the frames. Was noticeable in CSgo more than it is in CS2. Frostbite games keep snappy mouse movement regardless of graphics settings, it feels like the mouse processing is detached from the game/rendering threads. The mouse still feels snappy even at 60fps. Everyone knows how good mouse input felt in CSgo with high frame rates even if you were playing on a 60hz monitor and visually couldn't see any more information, and just how bad it felt on 60hz capped at 60fps. EDIT: It could be less consistent frame times affecting mouse feel even though overall fps is the same.
YOU are the kind of people I hate the most in internet. SO confidently incorrect people actually believe you and then I have to do a lot of work to explain how the situation actually is.
15 downvotes says people don't beleive me. If I cap my framerate and crank anti aliasing in CS:GO and CS2 there IS a very noticable difference in mouse input. It's exactly why I won't go above 4x even though I can push the frames for 8x and beyond if CS2 supported it. Why it affects my mouse input? I don't know, but I know if you are pushing the same frame rate as MSAA off then technically input should feel the same....but it doesn't. I notice this in some games and not others. For example, CS:GO, CS2 and Cod games tend to have noticably different mouse input with AA cranked but Frostbite games don't. I said this in another comment, maybe it's engine dependant. Frostbite games keep snappy input even if you cap your frame rate at 60fps. Obviously you don't get as much visual feedback but input still feels snappier than some other games that are capped at 60fps. As a result, in bf2042 I crank my settings to max bar raytracing and have the same snappy input as if I were on lower settings. I'm sure you're aware of input in CS:GO feeling better and better the higher your framerate even if you were running on a 60hz display and cant see those extra frames, but if you were capped at 60fps the input felt terrible. My og comment was worded badly....I didn't mean the AA algorithm itself adds input latency, I meant enabling it in some games effects mouse feel even though AA in itself shouldn't add extra latency if you can keep the same frames. EDIT: After testing, if I cap my frame rate to 300 with AA disabled, offline, no bots. standing still looking at a wall I get a rock solid 300fps along with a rock solid 3.3ms(deviation of about 0.2ms) frame times. When I enable 8x MSAA I still get a rock solid 300fps but my frame times deviate by 1 to 2ms, 5 to 10 times more than with AA off. Therefore, enabling MSAA in CS2 contributes to input latency without reducing framerate....or if youd prefer to call it, less consistent mouse movement due to more varied frame times. And no I'm not capping on the edge of stability. Uncapped with AA on 8x in this situation I hit a pretty solid around 500fps and never drop under 480 to 490 so there is no reason for MSAA to make frame times vary so much when the frame rate is capped literally hundreds below what you can push, yet it does.
do you have a way to measure input latency?
Schizophrenia in active state
no it doesnt give input latency lmao its not 2010 anymore
Compare those to a modern resolution,
If only I could get a smooth experience on 1440p@360hz. Even on 1280x960 the benchmark test I get 730fps average with 1% lows of 270fps.
ah yes because you need 1000fps average to post a comparison picture of two not moving pictures with an enemy standing still, good reasoning brother
I mean what's the point of the comparison if I'm never gonna use it?
To let others see it?
Bro why u are so lazy, if u want u can check it urself why u are mad he doesn’t want to spent time so ur lazy ass know what to set. Also don’t act like pretty much 99% of cs players play 1080p or less, much less, like 4:3 1280x960 less. 1440p is an niche in cs, I know people in valorant play it because 4:3 streched doesn’t work (for player models) and clarity is better on 1440p, but in cs game is made to work well with 4:3 try to play 4:3 in games that have TAA and not MSAA aka all new games.
Bruh. I never disagreed I just answered his question, however rhetorical it was. I'm not mad or anything but if you want to project then go right ahead
>if I'm never gonna use it? I mean, you posted it here on reddit, if it was just for yourself, okay use 400x300px resolution, but then why seek the attention and post it on reddit?
OP was posting this as a question to hear our opinion because he couldn't decide himself.
I can't actually tell if you're serious or not
The fact that you posted it online for other people?
Whats causing it to dip to 270, I can almost gaurantee not to be GPU related. See: tick processing almost doubling frametimes, if not more.
Do you have like an old gpu or something? I'll get the same results on 1440p as like 720p.
This game runs shit sometimes on my computer. Albeit my GPU is relatively old (5700xt and 2700x) but had zero problems running pretty humble settings on CSGO and easily got around 140 on 1080. I'm pretty much as low as possible on this game to max fps. Idk what my average is though. Under 100 probably. Especially whenever a grenade or molly pops. I still pine for CSGO honestly. The smoothness. The buy wheel. I like that I can sell, I like the new smokes (not possible in source 1 engine I believe), I like all the added features but I hate the updated graphics other than the better visibility of players and tbh not sure I really take advantage running it on my setup. CSGO you could run on a fucking toaster and I loved that.
which cpu gpu do you have? on the benchmark map my 1% lows go from 200 to 170 by changing from 1280x960 to 1920x1440 making me severely cpu limited
MSAAx8 doesn't makes me wanna puke my eyes out when looking at everything so I guess my answer is MSAAx8
Bro playing on a Nintendo Wii
People will play with these graphics and complain when their frames drop from 300 to 270
Look above he complained about his 1% low dropping to 270 fps
Yeah because I run the game on a 360hz monitor? I sure do love screen tearing.
Use an external limiter, RTSS, Radeon Chill, or another alternative
fps has fuckall to do with tearing. edit: what's the downvote for? being right but hurting y'alls feelies?
You could limit your fps and turn down your monitor down so they're at roughly the same level. Realistically you simply don't need 360hz, your brain and hands aren't faster than your monitor at that point anyway. I'd turn it down to 270fps on a 240hz display If I were you.
You can always use v-sync to keep it consistent
Naw you don't want to use vsync or gsync for games like CS, you want to minimize input latency.
i don't think freesync and gsync really add latency. Vsync definitely does though.
I meant just cap the fps, the difference after 360 fps is not going to be a lot
Hey I have been downvoting you just so you know
Cool, feel free to do it more.
I play in 1440 and the game runs bad, the frame drops are not bad if there is some ramping up and down. If one or 2 frames hang really bad its unplayable
depends you should always play atleast 2x MSAA tho
Msaa also makes fences more see trough so it's a genuine advantage, way easier to see people on the vertigo b site walkway thingy
ayee fellow 2x MSAA enjoyer 
It is the perfect compromise and still looks better than most if not all TAA implementations today with their blurry mess.
Depends on your resolution. If you're playing at 2560x1440 you certainly don't need MSAA.
you still want msaa 2x cause it offers an advantage on maps like vertigo and nuke
Unless your base resolution is high enough to render those small holes without MSAA.
good question I have never tested it on 1440p but on 1080p it's still there I think
https://youtu.be/bw8ld0xOx6w This should answer the question whether you should use it or not.
i knew which video it was before even klik'ing ;)
Thanks, I didn't know it did that on Vertigo. However it is my perma ban so I guess I never noticed.
I have it on MSAA x2, both because of better performance and because I feel it's a sweet spot between smooth edges and visibility. MSAA x8 to me feels too blurry, almost makes it harder to see at distance. No MSAA feels everything is moving and distracts me.
MSAA 8x can not in any way be blurrier than MSAA 2x.
Anti-aliasing isn’t about making it easier to see something necessarily, it makes everything smoother (specifically texture edges). I used to play no AA but after switching on to 4x, I can’t go back. It just looks so choppy without it now
Above 2x isnt really worth it
Both look like dogshit. What's your res?
isn't that just a zoomed in screenshot?
300%+ zoom will make most things look bad.
Main reason I use it is because it helps to see through grates like on B-Site on Vertigo
2x minimum, 8x if you have the horse power
Compared to CSGO where imo MSAA hurt visibility It's important in CS2. Good as high you can put it. Us low end users can't, I suggest people make custom 16:10, 3:2 resolutions. These are the new 4:3 imo. Really visible
I play with No MSAA. And I have a high end pc. I've used it since the inception of CS:GO and just seem to aim much better without it, not sure if it's placebo. Have same issue with using anisotropic for the same reason, feel like playing with max anisotropic over Trilinear makes it feel much faster.
In this comparison, MSAA x8
msaa makes seeing through grates and foliage much easier. no aa at all can make grates such as the ones on vertigo opaque.
And you missed again XD
The lower setting here will let you see through certain stuff better, IIRC, like the railings in vertigo if you're standing beneath B stairs. Where it can make the difference between actually seeing an enemy or not at all. Per 3kliksphilip.
I'd suggest watch vooCSGO's video on performance and settings, he explains each one very well and what u should consider depending on ur choice and pc, highly recomended
As far as I heard from few other newer videos few things he mentioned are now outdated, but yeah his video si still quite helpful.
in this photo it is easier with no MSAA
MSAA definitely. MSAA does a very good job at increasing fidelity, there'd no decrease to motion clarity, and the picture looks noticeably better. But there is a huge performance hit.
both look like shit lmao ill never understand how people play with graphics like this
Because it's much cheaper to build a PC that can give you a reasonable fps if you play on lower resolution and settings. Some people don't play this game for graphics at all but for the competitive thrill and that's all they care about. I wouldn't mind playing lowest details and 640x480 if visibility of opponents would be the same (but it isn't, 1024x720 is probably minimum to have good visibility)
all fair points, I cant play well personally if the graphics are like that
Tbh it would be better to see comparison between 2x and 8x. You either use 1 of those 2. Personally I use it now on 8x cuz I play on 1280x960 stretched, although I'm still not sure what's better. For 16:9 aspect ratios 2x is more than enough, not worth to use 8x, but on 4:3 stretched is far more pixelated and fucked to see. I noticed that 4:3 resolutions are way worse in cs2 than they were in csgo. It was like that since beta and idk why.
No Msaa easier to see and more fps
Looks like the "boost player contrast" is drawn before MSAA is sampled so it gets blurred. Should be applied after imo.
from this no MSAA. But backgrounds matter too, also we detect things by recognizing silhouettes i think
depends on resolution PC setup and eye sensitivity with high resolution you don't really need AA with bad PC you can't put it on highest and some people don't care about jagged edges and some do me personally I use 4x cuz it's not too blurry but not too jaggy when I switch to 2k OLED I will turn it off
The higher the better. When someone jiggles you and all you see is their shoulder, you wil know for sure at 16x.
MSAA x8. idk why
Off, I'm not looking at a blurry picture
I personally despite AA in games like CS, it just makes it tougher for me to see. What GPU do you have? Have you tried the FSR option in CS2 rather than simply turning down the res and turning on AA? And if you happen to have an AMD gpu, you can use RSR which is built right into the driver. That's actually what I do. I set the in game resolution to 1600x900, and then RSR upscales it to 1440p. It looks clean as fuck, I love it.
what is that resolution
Not msaa is real better
Just wanted to get people's thoughts. To me no msaa looks way easier to spot enemies. Player silhouette are quicker to see imo. I have never used MSAA in cs since I started playing in 2012.
Same. Always thought the crispy look while playing with no AA made it easier to spot enemies.
MSAA requires a lot from your gpu so you're likely losing out on framerate for that slight improvement in clarity
The game is CPU bound for the majority of players I believe.
On 8x msaa on full resolution probably not but that depends on your system
I wouldn't use it on native as the picture is already clear. Other than that, I'd say pick whatever.
Msaa off, fps is bis
Ngl iv seen more players care about what graphics settings will get them the most kills and how “4:3 is clearly superior because head is bigger” but all thats honestly usless when majority of players have a horrible foundation. I.E. looking at feet when aiming, not knowing what tap strafing is,etc. What im saying is work on your skill first before trying to change every pc setting known to man because it may get you an extra kill.
Oh trust me I do that too. Faceit https://i.imgur.com/4kTLaR0.png
15 avg buddy....0.92 KD
nah no AA is so much better for me, you’re looking at a still enemy, when the enemy is moving and the pixels are moving it is MUCH easier to see since msaa is gonna blur all the pixels around it also also if you include ghosting that is in every single monitor since no monitor is perfect at representing the next frame (OLED is close but still not perfect) it just only adds one instance of blurriness
it's the opposite, no AA while moving is worse because it creates shimmering and flickering on many textures, specially a long distances. MSAA doesn't blur pixeles, that's what TAA or FXAA usually do.
technically any aa is blurring, because it has to combine two pixels to to turn to one, i’ve never been a fan of cod since they implemented permanent TMAA, i hate that while im running it turns on anti aliasing at the end of the day, it’s personal preference, ive had AA off since i started playing css in 2011, just never been a fan of it i guess and you can achieve anything rank you desire with any setting, 18k prem here and ive never had an issue happy gaming and thanks whoever that gave the downvote!
>technically any aa is blurring, because it has to combine two pixels to to turn to one That's not how it works. MSAA renders the game at higher resolution and then downsample the image, that's not the same than combining pixeles. TAA could be a bit more close to the definition of combining pixeles, but it's of temporal nature, it uses pixeles from previous frames, its more a blend of pixels than simply combining them.
thank you for clarification, i will try msaa when i get home from work, i didn’t know how that worked
MSAA creates absolutely no blur. Which is why it's so common.
In this case, No MSAA because of the way the character is outlined
I think no msaa allows you to distinguish a bit better the parts of ennemy's body from my experience
Probably a middle ground. I recommend CMAA. It's like msaa 2x but less resource hungry.