Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by luchak 5304 days ago
I thought it was a little odd that he says the proper way to solve the problem is to have a higher-res screen, just before he says that we can't do super-sampling because it's too expensive.
1 comments

High-res screen: expensive[money]

Super-sampling: expensive[cpu]

A high-res screen isn't just expensive money-wise -- at the resolutions you need to avoid AA techniques, you're rendering at the same resolution you'd be rendering at for AA techniques. So it's more expensive in terms of money and in CPU/GPU time.
But wouldn't normal sampling on a high-res screen be just as expensive[cpu] as super-sampling on a normal-res screen?