Good new 3D Vision article

[Rollo]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...3d-vision.html

I agree with this review- it's worked very well for me, and when something ghosts or renders wrong (e.g. in Bioshock a couple nights ago the fire didn't render on corpses, only the embers that fly off the burning corpse) the rest of the experience outweighs the issue.

Not perfect, but better than anything else out there by far.

Once you start gaming in real 3d, everything else is sort of pointless and dissatisfying.

[MaxBlade]

Thanks Rollo..

Maybe you know this but if you have a game that 3D is off or messed up. Try renaming the *.exe Before 1.06 drivers Fear2 was awful I just renamed it to crysis.exe and 3d was perfect.

[XDanger]

"On the other hand, those of you who have their old tube-based CRT monitors stored away are about to be very, very happy. That’s right; any CRT which has a DVI connector and supports a 120Hz refresh rate is completely compatible."

Hmmmm... Yeah because loads of CRT's have those dont they.

[CaptNKILL]

Originally Posted by XDanger

"On the other hand, those of you who have their old tube-based CRT monitors stored away are about to be very, very happy. That’s right; any CRT which has a DVI connector and supports a 120Hz refresh rate is completely compatible."

Hmmmm... Yeah because loads of CRT's have those dont they.

Yeah, that's kinda lame.

I've never seen a CRT that had a DVI connector.

Mine doesn't, and it would have been $900 brand new in 2005.

This one is probably one of the best CRTs you can get and it doesn't have DVI either:

http://www.superwarehouse.com/Sony_G...W900/ps/105660

[XDanger]

Even ones that do I doubt will carry the digital signal so basically have a converter built in.

Maybe they can make a special d-sub cable for it?

also

Originally Posted by CaptNKILL

This is the best monitor you can get and it doesn't have DVI either:

http://www.superwarehouse.com/Sony_G...W900/ps/105660

fixe.

[Rollo]

On CRTs: You should buy the LCD panel. I've used shutter glasses with CRTs, and it sucks. It's like drinking some really cheap alcohol added wine like the winos drink- guaranteed headache. I would pay $400 not to game on a CRT with it's refresh rate halved.

On 3d Vision: Tomorrow marks 3 full months into it and I'm still at the conclusion it's the only thing that matters at all in computer gaming.

ATi vs NVIDIA? No. 4X AA vs 8X AA? No. PhysX vs Non? Closer, but No.

I just played an hour of UT2004 in the "Invasion" game, on the "Morpheus" level.
First, being attacked by swarms of 3d dragonflys, bats, and those hopping things would be enough.

When the guys that shoot rockets, flying things that lob fireballs, and skaarj launching fireballs show up, it's worth the $600 for this game, this level alone.

I don't think I can do justice to what it feels like to have spreads of rockets flying toward and by you in 3d while fireballs lazily criss cross through the sky. You feel like you're an action figure in the midst of a real battle, not just watching one take place in front of you.

That is the key: the bugs bump into you, the rockets fly past you, the fireballs seem to have spatial pacement throughout a 3 dimensional environment, you float through the zero grav environment seemingly covering distance, launching your own energy bolts.

It is just amazing, and this is on a 5 year old game. I am convinced that this is where the industry needs to head, we've had enough of the same old same old.

[LordJuanlo]

I tried 3D 4 or 5 years ago with eDimensional glasses, when it worked it was awesome, I remember Battlefield 1942, but it was in a CRT and got headaches after long play sessions.

I'd like to go 3D again when DX11 cards arrive, time will tell if I will get the ATI card with the incoming 26" 1080p iz3d monitor, or maybe I will go back to nVidia with one of those 120hz LCD, I will decide after both cards are released.

I have a couple of questions for people like Rollo that is already using nVidia 3D technology:

- Is there any FullHD monitor supported by nVidia?. It looks like all are 22" 1680x1050. 1920x1200 (or 1080) is extremely important for me.
- When not using 3D mode, if you want to play a game and enable vsync, do you need 120 frames per second?. Just like with a 60hz LCD you need 60fps for enabling vsync and have a smooth gaming experience.
- Is framerate cut in half when using 3D mode, so your graphics system should deliver 120fps to get a 60hz experience?.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by LordJuanlo

I tried 3D 4 or 5 years ago with eDimensional glasses, when it worked it was awesome, I remember Battlefield 1942, but it was in a CRT and got headaches after long play sessions.

I'd like to go 3D again when DX11 cards arrive, time will tell if I will get the ATI card with the incoming 26" 1080p iz3d monitor, or maybe I will go back to nVidia with one of those 120hz LCD, I will decide after both cards are released.

I have a couple of questions for people like Rollo that is already using nVidia 3D technology:

- Is there any FullHD monitor supported by nVidia?. It looks like all are 22" 1680x1050. 1920x1200 (or 1080) is extremely important for me.
- When not using 3D mode, if you want to play a game and enable vsync, do you need 120 frames per second?. Just like with a 60hz LCD you need 60fps for enabling vsync and have a smooth gaming experience.
- Is framerate cut in half when using 3D mode, so your graphics system should deliver 120fps to get a 60hz experience?.

1. At this time, there are only tvs at 1080.

2. I've never gamed without 3D on the 120Hz monitor, I don't game in 2d anymore. However, I don't see why vsynch would be needed in drivers for 120Hz monitors. The point of vsynch is to reduce tearing caused by the framerate exceeding the refresh rate. Exceeding 120fps is not a large concern- in general if you are exceeding 120fps a person would be better off to turn on some AA to reduce their framerate than vsynch. I would guess that vsynch would fall back to 60fps if 120fps could not be maintained, like old school vsynch falls back to 30fps.

I would think if you are a vsynch user these monitors would be very welcome.

3. Frame rate isn't quite cut in half, but the framerate hit is large as the image is being rendered twice.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...sion/page5.asp

4. I'm not a fan of the iz3d solutions personally because: 1. they don't work with multi GPU 2. they require iz3d game profiles, and those require a lot of tweaking, for each game 3. reviews haven't been kind to iz3d on depth of effect or ghosting.

[LordJuanlo]

Originally Posted by Rollo

1. At this time, there are only tvs at 1080.

Bad news for me, I hope there will be 120 hz Full HD monitors by end of year, I don't have space on my desktop for a TV.

Originally Posted by Rollo

I would guess that vsynch would fall back to 60fps if 120fps could not be maintained, like old school vsynch falls back to 30fps.

That's exactly what I would like to know, if the game let you choose refresh rate, no problem at all. But if it doesn't there should be a way to force 60 hz from control panel. For those very rare times I wouldn't be playing in 3D

Originally Posted by Rollo

3. Frame rate isn't quite cut in half, but the framerate hit is large as the image is being rendered twice.

I'm playing Left 4 Dead vsynched at 60fps, so I guess I would need constant 120 fps to enjoy the game like I do know, but in 3D. In Left 4 Dead that would be no problem, I play with 8xAA at 1920x1200 (vsync and triple buffer enabled), but it could be harder to achieve in other games.

Originally Posted by Rollo

4. I'm not a fan of the iz3d solutions personally because: 1. they don't work with multi GPU 2. they require iz3d game profiles, and those require a lot of tweaking, for each game 3. reviews haven't been kind to iz3d on depth of effect or ghosting.

They have released updated glasses that seem to get rid of most problems (if not all), and they will be supporting MultiGPU in their next 2.0 driver (at least they will support ATI CrossFireX, not sure about SLI). Anyway I won't upgrade until DX11 cards arrive, so I have time to check their evolution.

I haven't yet upgraded to 3D because 1080p is mandatory for me, and today neither iz3d nor nVidia provide a Full HD solution (I can't put a TV on my desktop). iz3d is already working on a 26" 1080p monitor, and I hope nVidia 3D partners will have similar solutions soon.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by LordJuanlo

Bad news for me, I hope there will be 120 hz Full HD monitors by end of year, I don't have space on my desktop for a TV.



That's exactly what I would like to know, if the game let you choose refresh rate, no problem at all. But if it doesn't there should be a way to force 60 hz from control panel. For those very rare times I wouldn't be playing in 3D



I'm playing Left 4 Dead vsynched at 60fps, so I guess I would need constant 120 fps to enjoy the game like I do know, but in 3D. In Left 4 Dead that would be no problem, I play with 8xAA at 1920x1200 (vsync and triple buffer enabled), but it could be harder to achieve in other games.



They have released updated glasses that seem to get rid of most problems (if not all), and they will be supporting MultiGPU in their next 2.0 driver (at least they will support ATI CrossFireX, not sure about SLI). Anyway I won't upgrade until DX11 cards arrive, so I have time to check their evolution.

I haven't yet upgraded to 3D because 1080p is mandatory for me, and today neither iz3d nor nVidia provide a Full HD solution (I can't put a TV on my desktop). iz3d is already working on a 26" 1080p monitor, and I hope nVidia 3D partners will have similar solutions soon.

LordJuanlo:

You say these things because you're applying old standards that in my opinion no longer apply.

The minimal resolution difference you speak of to me sounds like "Rollo, I'd update to your 50" plasma, if only it had as accurate of stereo sound as my good old 19" CRT!".

Things like a little extra resolution, a little more AA, vsych and triple buffering are literally the last thing on your mind when when you've gamed in true 3d on a game it works well with.

The difference is like the difference between looking at the Playmate of the Year in the magazine, or looking at her on your couch. It's that different.

Until this, playing video games was like watching a cartoon on your tv. Now, it's like being in the tv in a war of 3d action figures.

When you see the fire balls, plasma balls, rockets, bats, and bugs all flying around you and you can perceive the difference in how high and far away they are it gives you immersion unlike anything in what we used to call "3d" gaming.

You really need to see what Left4Dead looks like in 3d- you would throw away your old monitor.

I've had a Dell 3007WFP-HC sitting unused next to my 22" Samsung for 3 full months now, and most people consider that "as good as it gets" for gaming. (way, way, way better than any 1080 resolutions) Why does it sit when all I have to do is switch it to primary?

Because gaming in true 3d redefines what you think of as "good" in computer gaming.

I've told NVIDIA several times that this eclipses anything else they've ever done, by far.

I know I sound like I get a commission for every one sold, but I am that high on this tech that I don't really care about the old school way of gaming anymore. If NVIDIA makes this, you should buy it. If ATi puts out a comparable solution tomorrow, you should buy that if you prefer them.

The main point I'm trying to make is everyone on this board has got to be as tired as I am of "With new render mode X, wet things reflect 10% more light and shadows are 20% more rounded!".

This is the first BIG difference I've seen in computer gaming since 3dfx introduced what I used to call "3d" and now call "pseudo 3d". Head to a Frys and check it out if you don't believe me.

[newparad1gm]

Originally Posted by Rollo

LordJuanlo:

You say these things because you're applying old standards that in my opinion no longer apply.

The minimal resolution difference you speak of to me sounds like "Rollo, I'd update to your 50" plasma, if only it had as accurate of stereo sound as my good old 19" CRT!".

Things like a little extra resolution, a little more AA, vsych and triple buffering are literally the last thing on your mind when when you've gamed in true 3d on a game it works well with.

The difference is like the difference between looking at the Playmate of the Year in the magazine, or looking at her on your couch. It's that different.

Until this, playing video games was like watching a cartoon on your tv. Now, it's like being in the tv in a war of 3d action figures.

When you see the fire balls, plasma balls, rockets, bats, and bugs all flying around you and you can perceive the difference in how high and far away they are it gives you immersion unlike anything in what we used to call "3d" gaming.

You really need to see what Left4Dead looks like in 3d- you would throw away your old monitor.

I've had a Dell 3007WFP-HC sitting unused next to my 22" Samsung for 3 full months now, and most people consider that "as good as it gets" for gaming. (way, way, way better than any 1080 resolutions) Why does it sit when all I have to do is switch it to primary?

Because gaming in true 3d redefines what you think of as "good" in computer gaming.

I've told NVIDIA several times that this eclipses anything else they've ever done, by far.

I know I sound like I get a commission for every one sold, but I am that high on this tech that I don't really care about the old school way of gaming anymore. If NVIDIA makes this, you should buy it. If ATi puts out a comparable solution tomorrow, you should buy that if you prefer them.

The main point I'm trying to make is everyone on this board has got to be as tired as I am of "With new render mode X, wet things reflect 10% more light and shadows are 20% more rounded!".

This is the first BIG difference I've seen in computer gaming since 3dfx introduced what I used to call "3d" and now call "pseudo 3d". Head to a Frys and check it out if you don't believe me.

If you really want 1080p or above in 3D on your desktop, you can wait for iZ3D to release their 24/26" monitor and use the iZ3D solution instead of NVIDIA's. I'm using NVIDIA 3DVision myself, but since I am only running on a single GTX 280, the 1680x1050 is plenty, especially with the performance hit incurred from running in 3D. Although with 3D vision, I've noticed that aliasing is not as noticeable (probably due to the fact that each eye sees a different image so the jaggies get blended in your mind), so I am running my games at 2x or 4xAA now in 3D instead of 8x and above. The difference really is night and day, and although the ghosting can get irritating (its noticeable on bright surfaces, and for games like Mirror's Edge, where liberal use of HDR is applied, its especially bad), for most games its not present or not noticeable to the point of interfering with the entire 3D experience. It has breathed new life into older games as well, and I'm trying out my whole library now to see which ones work well in 3D and are worth a playthrough again.

[LordJuanlo]

I know for gaming it won't be night a day difference between 1920x1200 and 1680x1050, however I need 1080p for video. And 22 inches... thanks, but no.

I'm really impatient to try 3D in Left 4 Dead, this game owns and must be spectacular in 3D (it's one of the most praised games at iz3d forums), but I think it will be worth the wait, by the end of the year iz3d (and probably nVidia) will offer FullHD solutions, and then I will make the jump.

3D is awesome, but I'm used to 1920x1200 in 24", going to 1680x1050 in 22" would be a step downwards when I'm not gaming.

BTW new press release from iz3d today:

iZ3D Inc., designer, developer and pioneer of advanced stereoscopic 3D visualization systems, has created new linear polarized glasses for use with the popular iZ3D stereoscopic 3D monitors. The glasses are currently in beta testing are designed for use with the upcoming iZ3D Version 2.0/ DirectX®10 Driver. The company will be showcasing the new glasses on a system running the Version 2.0 driver at the Game Developer Conference in San Francisco, CA March 23-27, 2009 in Booth 6020.

“Customer feedback is very important to iZ3D. We have been forging new ground for stereoscopic 3D displays and drivers for the wide variety of gamers, movie buffs and graphic artists that appreciate the 3D experience. Through this feedback we became concerned with a small percentage of people who saw two variations of color through our partially elliptical polarized glasses,” said Thomas Striegler, CEO iZ3D Inc. “We began to research other types of polarization and were impressed with the many advantages that linear polarization provided to the entire S-3D visual experience.”

The new polarized glasses consist of multiple optical layers instead of one polarized layer. This eliminates color differences some people experience from each eye. The multiple layers create a pure linear polarization that enhances the overall stereoscopic 3D visual experience for everyone. Because of the enhanced imagery, the glasses also provide easier user adjustments to the 3D environment to provide better into and out-of stereoscopic 3D screen effects and ultimately the enjoyment of longer game play.

My next monitor must be Full HD and 26" (about the maximum I can put in my reduced desktop), can't wait to see what iz3D and nVidia can offer me in the coming months.

BTW DarthBeavis those rigs you build are insane LOL