The Witcher 2 and Uber Sampling. Am I missing enything?

Is it just me that can't really see the difference?
Link
Anyone has any other insights?

Uber-sampling cannot be captured in screenshots. It looks absolutely amazing in motion compared to no uber-sampling. Sadly very few computers this gen can handle uber-sampling, maxed out, play at 1080p without lag.GhoX

This, it's like complaining that Nvidia 3D vision does nothing when you're showing screenshots that can't show the 3D effect.

I tried uber sampling with my GTX 580 , while i did manage to get an almost playable fps (20-30fps ) i can honestly say i didn't notice a big difference . you can tell there are no jaggies that's for sure . but i play the game at 1080p and my monitor is 1080p native , and with AA enabled there weren't many jaggies there in the first place so to me uber sampling is kind of pointless. maybe when we have stronger hardware and are able to run the game at 60+ fps with uber sampling on then we'll notice it but right now it only is a performance hitter for me .

Meh. All ubersampling is is rendering at a much higher resolution than what your screen has and then scaling it down. Iantheone

[QUOTE="Iantheone"]Meh. All ubersampling is is rendering at a much higher resolution than what your screen has and then scaling it down. -CheeseEater-

Is that all it is, supersampling AA?

I thought it was a temporal AA technique and another pass at the textures... but you could be right.

anyone do a comparison with AF turned to max and no uber smapling? If it looks the same minus jaggies then it probbaly is just super sampling.

Which explains why my two GTX580's have issues running it at 2650x1440 - Just not enough video buffer on my cards (1.5 Gigs). Super sampling my rig would be like rendering 5 1080p screens!

Is it just me that can't really see the difference?
Link
Anyone has any other insights?

f22rf