[Request] Higher quality commander textures

Makes sense, 3D is something completely different when it comes to performance. I'm just going for nice and constant 60fps.

Witcher 3 might indeed be a good reason to finally upgrade the gpu, that game looks and sounds pretty great.

How about making a seperate texture tab on PAMM, since this spams the UI section a lot

@raevn
@Mereth
The separate commander mods are on PAMM, the big mod has been removed, and the one mod to rule them all is up but with an issue. The issue being that it requires so many mods that it breaks free of the formatting,being uninstallable as a result:


@remy561
It spams the ui tab, but they are grouped in every category except downloads, popularity and random. Plus the icons are so pretty you're going to want to stare at them I'm sure

>4 GB cards are dual GPU, and the memory isn't one big pool, it is two pools one per GPU. this means you gotta divide by 2,

Not really true. The last real consumer dual GPU from Nvidia was the Nvidia GTX 690 (which only had 4gb, or 2x2gb). None of the 700 or 900 series are dual GPUs, and there are a couple that have 6gb options with the upcoming still single GPU GTX 980 ti possibly having 8gb. Technically there's the GTX Titan Z, but that's 2x GTX Titan Blacks which already has 6gb. Even AMD has the Radeon R9 290X which has a 8gb version, though the Radeon R9 295X2 is also 8gb and dual GPU.

I bought a 760 like 4 months before these new fully-capable DX12 cards are being rolled out...
**** I'm stupid

ok, fair enough, from what i had seen the top ends were at 4 for single GPU, but seems i was wrong there. are the 700 or 900 6 or 5 or 8?

@theseeker2 You can NEVER get ahead of computer hardware. When I got my 770 Classified, it was top of the line. Two months later, price dropped and I upgraded to a 780, a few months later and GTX 900 rolled out and I'm behind again. Similar story with my Ivy Bridge.


Maybe PAMM should try to add in a spoiler like thing for required mods of they go over a certain character count.

you can be future proof for a few years... I bought a 4850 in 2011 and I only got rid of it in late-2013
I had a 7850 until 4 months ago, and replaced it with a 760, which is now just about obsolete.

I wouldn't be willing to call that obselete any time in the next year to two. That's a fine mid-high range card and you won't be needing to replace it soon unless you want higher quality. I have a 6770 and a 7770 and won't ever replace them because I'm fine with games running on low with them. Even with my 780, it won't be outdated too soon. it helps that GTX 900 are mostly improvement cards rather than full on upgrades. A 970 isn't better than my 780 and a 980 isn't massively ahead either.

In the end, I guess it depends on what performance you're looking to maintain.

Eh, double post, sorry.

@bgolus How about adding a resolution selection in the settings? Right now, the closest we have is sampling size which isn't very precise. Running the game using DSR (Nvidia's fancy make game look better technology) I could set it to 2715x1527 and it basically anti aliases the entire picture, which is cool and could help with some of this stuff, though I don't know if it really would help. If you do end up adding in support for DSR, please add in UI size so that I can still read the UI without a microscope.

Same here, but with a 770 two months before they arrived... But not that it matters though, the 970 is 80 euros more expensive and mine currently handles everything without problems. I am interested to see how my card chops through the Witcher 3 though.

NVidia's DSR (Dynamic Super Resolution) is Nvidia's made up term for supersampling, which is exactly the same thing as what the resolution scaling settings we have does, except our's is smart about only applying the the 3d game rendering and not the entire UI. The 150% supersampling on a 1920x1080 makes the game run at 2880x1620.

Which is retarded because you can only display 1920 by 1080 on a 1080p display, so there's not really any practical benefit.

Doesn't supersampling improve sub-pixel details like lines and stuff that would otherwise get aliased into oblivion?

Yep the image quality of supersampling is damn good

Just try it, you'll certainly see a difference. You could also compare a youtube 1080p vs 4k vid, the image quality is much sharper

Super sampling (aka render at a higher resolution than displayed) is also called OGSSAA, or Ordered Grid Super Sampled Anti Aliasing. It's also the original form of anti-aliasing. The various forms of AA that have come since that like MSAA (Multi-Sample Anti Aliasing) and FXAA (Fast Approximate Anti Aliasing) are all attempts at replicating the baseline quality of OGSSAA with reduced memory or processing requirements (aka, make it faster).

A case of 'an old idea made new'

There's literally no difference, except the performance will be worse. If I watch a 4k video on youtube on my 1080p screen, any benefit I see is due to youtube's compression mechanics.