NVidia 3D Vision

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by Witchdoctor

yea they did have emitter problems and some other issues with dead pixels

I was reading that they feel they have addressed the problem and have resolved it, I hope so

They also have profiles on their site as well for different games that IMO are pretty spot on ......... I looked hard at the Asus but the pixel pitch on a 1920x1080 is a bit big for my liking, have heard it is awsome at 3D effects though using the same 3D tech as the Ben Q,

Yep, both are 3dV2, meaning they're lightboost monitors. The bigger the screen, the better it is for 3d though. Personally I just went for a set up that wouldn't cost me an obscene amount and a screen that had 0 frames of input lag. If I see a good price on a 3d vision 2 set up later, I can still get about $300 for my monitor, emitter, and glasses as a set with ease on craigslist and actually make a profit and go for the upgrade then.

Additional Comment:

I've now come to the conclusion that Batman: AA is enough reason by itself to buy a 3d vision set up. Absolutely STUNNING in 3d vision. The bats literally pop out of the screen at you after fights, riddler trophies, etc. The world looks absolutely amazing and it gains a real sense of scale as you glide through the city.

Additional Comment:

And just when I thought I had seen what 3d vision was really capable of with batman, I gave Trine 2 a whirl...WOW. I am convinced that anyone who is skeptical of what 3d vision is capable of only needs to go as far as look at that one game and they will be sold on the technology.

[daredevil]

I've yet to play Trine 2 (have bought it though) but Trine was amazing in 3D, so if it's more of the same I can quite imagine it's amazing. I really must get around to playing that.

[Dil-tech]

It was enough by itself to get my buddy to order himself a 3d vision set up last night when I showed him it.

Additional Comment:

Just an update, gave skyrim a try (after installing the helix mod for 3d vision) and I must say it looks pretty **** sweet. Obviously I'll have to play it quite a bit more to really decide how much it really adds to the experience, but the eye candy factor is definitely there.

I really must say one thing also... I came into this expecting my poor GTX 480 to find itself royally out-classed and unplayable in a lot of titles. So far it's played every game I've chucked at it in 3d perfectly fine, although there's definitely some rough spots in the witcher 2. I have a strong feeling that if your card is slower than a 480 though that you're going to need a video card upgrade along with the 3d vision set up. I'll continue my initial testing of games as I find time, and will be doing a review on the technology in around a week, after I've had a chance to really put it through it's paces for an extended period of time.

[CybrSlydr]

Do you think just adding another card for SLI would work better than updating to a single current-gen card? Does 3D seem to work better with SLI or single cards is what I'm asking I guess. lol

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

Do you think just adding another card for SLI would work better than updating to a single current-gen card? Does 3D seem to work better with SLI or single cards is what I'm asking I guess. lol

3D scales amazingly well with multi-card (atleast it does on NVidia's 3d vision, tri-def (what amd uses) still doesn't support multi-gpu), because essentially every frame has to render twice, so both cards are doing practically identical work.

I'd definitely think twin 480's would beat a 680 with relative ease though. Of course, you're limited to 60fps max in 3d (since vsync is required to make it work, and 120hz divided by 2 is 60hz per eye). I'll say this much though, a 680 should do FINE by itself for 3d considering a 480 holds it's own beautifully.

Also, side note... For people who are worried about seeing a "flicker", you don't. It really makes me realize that people who look down so much on 3d really have never used it.

Additional Comment:

Watched the first 10 minutes of avatar to see how 3d movies work on it (hard to place more than a half hour at a time now that my woman's daughter is back home), and I must say it's rather impressive. Definitely going to watch it through tonight.

[Witchdoctor]

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

Do you think just adding another card for SLI would work better than updating to a single current-gen card? Does 3D seem to work better with SLI or single cards is what I'm asking I guess. lol

I am getting amazing results with 2x 580's

Everything is smooth as silk and I do not have to skimp on eye candy.

nVidia has done an amazing job this time around, I have to think AMD will follow suit on their next gen part as of now they seem to be a step behind in this tech.

I have no problem recommending this to anyone who is interested in playing in 3D ..... Simply adds to the excitement and the experience and makes great games even better

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by Witchdoctor

I am getting amazing results with 2x 580's

Everything is smooth as silk and I do not have to skimp on eye candy.

nVidia has done an amazing job this time around, I have to think AMD will follow suit on their next gen part as of now they seem to be a step behind in this tech.

I have no problem recommending this to anyone who is interested in playing in 3D ..... Simply adds to the excitement and the experience and makes great games even better

Twin 580's probably keep the frame-rate pinged in at a steady 60 I'm assuming.

Same reason I'm eyeing a second 480. Although part of me is tempted to sell my current 480 for around $200 (since it does have the artic xtreme plus on it, which is like $80 by itself) and spend the $200 I would've spent on a second 480 and snag a 670 since I'm assuming adding a second 480 to my current rig might be insanely harsh on my TPQ-850(although these power supplies are known to handle over 100w more than they're rated for). Decisions, decisions... It's sad that reviews NEVER include 3d vision results.

[Witchdoctor]

Yea it pretty much pins everything I throw at it

While the 2x 480 would destroy anything in there path I have to say a second 480 on an 850 will be asking a bit too much. I would run them but I have to think the TPQ would be not long for the world and if lucky would not take anything with it. Not to mention the heat generated by two of those nuclear power plants will be insane.

Your thought at looking at a 670 is a great idea, Price performance to the 680 seems like the 680 has no love but obviously not a 20% increase in performance only price. I like the 670 Galaxy OC version the best. just love the open slots under the power train. However there are many nice choices ..... Personally unless I am building an ITX, I like a full size custom PCB that only a few vendors are offering, Just used one in a new build for a friend, it pwns BF3 and that was basically what he had asked for also got a 94 hundred and change in 3D Mark 2011. Hindsight being 20/20 I should have popped it on my 3D monitor to see how it would do, unfortunately I did not

good luck, eith way I think you have win but may need more Power to run 2x 480's , especially with an overclocked CPU and GPU's

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by Witchdoctor

Yea it pretty much pins everything I throw at it

While the 2x 480 would destroy anything in there path I have to say a second 480 on an 850 will be asking a bit too much. I would run them but I have to think the TPQ would be not long for the world and if lucky would not take anything with it. Not to mention the heat generated by two of those nuclear power plants will be insane.

Your thought at looking at a 670 is a great idea, Price performance to the 680 seems like the 680 has no love but obviously not a 20% increase in performance only price. I like the 670 Galaxy OC version the best. just love the open slots under the power train. However there are many nice choices ..... Personally unless I am building an ITX, I like a full size custom PCB that only a few vendors are offering, Just used one in a new build for a friend, it pwns BF3 and that was basically what he had asked for also got a 94 hundred and change in 3D Mark 2011. Hindsight being 20/20 I should have popped it on my 3D monitor to see how it would do, unfortunately I did not

good luck, eith way I think you have win but may need more Power to run 2x 480's , especially with an overclocked CPU and GPU's

The Antec TPQ 850 isn't like other power supplies... It's power rating is at 50C, and it NEVER gets anywhere close to that. For the longest time, it was actually THE power supply to get according to jonnyguru, and people have pulled 950w (and probably beyond) out of it at normal operating temperatures since the thing naturally runs cool as can be. The unit is basically an enhance 1000w unit with some changes to actually increase performance and lower temperatures, but rated for much higher temperatures (which seriously, the unit doesn't come anywhere close to 40 or 50C, more like 25-35).

I'm eyeing the 670 because it'd cost me out of pocket around the same amount as going sli on the 480's. Actually the 480's would cost me more if I did have to buy a new power-supply, and like I said my card should still fetch a pretty penny thanks to the beefed up cooler.

Additional Comment:

Well guys, now that I've been playing around with the 3d vision tech for a full week, I figure it's time I keep up to my word and give you guys my review on the technology itself. I'll be giving full synopses on the games individually over the coming weeks as well--this is just covering the tech and what it really does for the user.

The first true step towards a third dimension since...well...polygons

Let's face facts here everyone. Since the first usage of polygons for gaming space, all we've really seen is the effort to make those polygons look prettier and less like, well, polygons. We've seen them throw more detailed textures at the problem, we've seen them dramatically increase lighting and shadow ability (well, except valve, they're still in the 90's in terms of that effect), and we now see more polygons in each individual character than we did in most early 3d games as a whole. The thing is, we were still just looking at a flat picture that lacked depth, and no increase in polygons was going to change that.

The 3d vision platform does just that, it actually gives you the illusion of depth, and it does an AMAZING job of it when set up properly. You can actually gauge how far an enemy is away from you in Call of Duty, see just how vast the city is in Batman, actually feel like you're flying in wow, watch bullets seemingly shoot out of the screen at you in Gears of War, and truly feel surrounded in Dead Rising 2. Even a task as simple as driving a stolen car in GTA becomes something that has to be felt to understand--there's really no way to describe it with words or pictures, it has to be seen to be believed.

I see a lot of people claim that 3d just looks like a pop up book on the screen--I can only assume these people have only watched horrible 2d to 3d remakes. When you take something that's 2d and has no depth and make elements of it 3d, you're only making 2d objects stand out from the 2d crowd. When you take something that the art-work has depth and give it the ability to use that depth, it's a whole new ball-game.

Another thing I see rarely touched on by reviewers is quite possibly the most important aspect in the software end of the technology: convergence. NVidia dropped the ball here, you have to physically unlock the hotkey to use the effect, no visual slider to verify what percentage you're using, and pretty much no mention of it while setting up 3d vision for the first time. When you DO take advantage of it, that's when 3d vision really shines. Basically, what it does is sets what the distance is for the fore-ground, and combined with depth creates the playing field. Objects that move closer than this mark practically pop out of the screen you you! It takes some getting use to, but it's absolutely amazing when you get your games tweaked just right. Afterwards, simply hitting ctrl+f7 will save your settings for the game you're in.

As for the glasses themselves, they're surprisingly comfortable, and rather stylish too compared to some of the competition. The 3d vision 2 glasses are a bit more "techy" but the 3dV1 glasses definitely have a "cool" factor to the look. They're light, but not feather light, and once you get adjusted to them you won't have too much of a problem during long gaming sessions wielding them.

So what's the catch?

Now, all the good doesn't come without a few draw-backs. Yes, there IS going to be a performance hit, and a rather sizable one at that. The thing is, if you're already presently on a 60hz screen and have some decent graphics horsepower, it's not nearly as bad as you might expect. With my GTX 480 every single game I've thrown at the set-up has been easily playable; from games as easy to render as Dead Rising 2 all the way to the witcher 2. Considering this generation we can have that kind of power in the $200-$300 range (The upcoming GTX 660 may end up the sweet spot for that) it won't be too terribly hard to handle powering games in stereoscopic 3d.

The other draw-back is what has been labeled "cross-talk". For those who are un-sure of what cross-talk actually is, it's a faint outline of what one eye sees on what the other eye sees and occurs because lcds are still not quite fast enough to handle this tech. This WILL occur on any 3d technology that uses LCD screens presently, be it passive or active glasses, I can tell you first hand though that DLP's do NOT have this out-come--but, 3d DLP TV's come with a level of input lag unfortunately, and also lack the ability for a true 1080p@120hz to pull off using 3dvision at high resolutions.

How bad is cross-talk? That depends on the user. It's not something that you'll notice in the heat of battle, but if you're standing in a heavily lit bright area you'll see faint out-lines. The higher you set the depth, the worse it gets. One could go for a 3d projector and completely negate that aspect (there are a few lag free ones) if you're content with 720p (1080p@120hz ready projectors cost more than some new cars do). Is it something that completely ruins the game you're playing? No. After awhile you won't even notice it, and apparently 3d vision 2 set ups drastically reduce the problem. I can't speak for sure on this, as I only have a 3dV1 monitor.

Next on the agenda, I'd like to put one thing to rest: the "eye-strain". This only occurs while you are initially getting adjusted to the technology. The mistake people make is, they instantly dive right into cranking the depth, if you don't ease yourself into it, your eyes have a hard time adjusting, which causes your eyes to feel fatigued or even head-aches. Just start out the first few times at 15% and work your way up and you'll be fine.

The last issue is only an issue to those who really don't know their way by heart around their keyboard. Using a 3d vision 1 set up, you will NOT be able to read your keys. You can hold down the power button on the glasses to make the lenses open to do so if required, but beyond that it will not happen. I don't see this being a problem for anyone who's been gaming for a long time (and I heavily doubt ANYONE would spend this kind of money who just started gaming), but those who haven't may be put off by this. 3d vision 2 monitors apparently solve this problem, but I don't have access to one to test it myself.

Is it worth the price of admission?

This is the biggest concern I see...the price. Yes, 3d vision is not exactly a cheap realm to buy into. I mean, for the 24" Asus 3dV1 you're looking at paying $359, more than double what most 24" screens sell for. Of course, the screen is also 120hz, comes with the 3d vision kit (glasses and emitter, $149 normally by itself), and has absolutely no input lag (most 3d vision monitors are this way). Suddenly the pricing makes a bit more sense, doesn't it?

Just to put things in perspective, in 2005 I got a Dell FPW2005, which at the time was considered the best 20" widescreen around. That screen at the time costed $530. Now look at how much people pay for high end video cards to make their games look prettier... That's for an investment that loses 50+% of it's value over the course of a year. 3D vision monitors have kept most of their initial buy in value without question, because even if you're not interested in the 3d aspect, 120hz makes a MASSIVE difference for both gaming and windows use.

You can also look at the 3d vision set up AS an investment, because you can continue to use it years down the line. As long as you have an NVidia card, your monitor will still work in 3d. So while that $500-$600 high end card may see a few years use for most of us, that $359 kit could still be in use MUCH further. Even if for some reason you decide to use an AMD card, you can simply set up tri-def and continue to play in 3d.

Finally, the kit does something the cards themselves have been trying to do for years and years. Makes your games TRULY 3d. If that isn't worth at least a look, I really don't know what is. I can honestly tell you though, if I had the choice between buying a 680 at full price, or a used 480 for $150 and a 3d vision kit (which would end up around the same cost), the 480/3dV kit would give you a LOT better bang for your buck.

In closing I can't call 3d vision perfect, although it's biggest flaw is not one of it's own doing but rather a limitation in current technologies holding it back. It is, however, the most complete 3d package available for ANY platform (be it movies or games), with better support than anyone else is offering, and a community who are doing great work in modding the games that don't work properly in the first place. Sure, it's more expensive than standard monitors, but once you look at it as more than a simple screen, you come to realize that it's a worth-while investment that you can use for years to come.

Personally, I give the tech a 9 out of 10, taking away 1 point for cross-talk. Everything else for the most part isn't enough to even bother complaining about.

[CybrSlydr]

Great write-up. Now I want 3D. lol

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

Great write-up. Now I want 3D. lol

Thanks... I'll be continuing my testing on individual games, and editing that post as I discover any other quirks.

As for wanting 3d, watch ebay. You can get used set ups for around the $250 mark as people are upgrading to 3d vision 2 and letting their 3d1 kits go for a pretty solid price.

[CybrSlydr]

I'm afraid I don't recall... What's the difference between one and two and if you don't have it, would it be better to just go straight to two?

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

I'm afraid I don't recall... What's the difference between one and two and if you don't have it, would it be better to just go straight to two?

3d vision 2 monitors use lightboost, which gives an over-all better brightness (since 3d vision cuts brightness by about 50%) when in 3d. If you're in a controlled lighting environment (no windows, pitch black like my set up) it's not too big of a deal.

3d vision 2 glasses can be used with a 3d vision 1 kit and vice versa, but 3d vision 2 glass lenses are about 20% bigger. Both work the same with light boost, but 3d vision 2 glasses have one down-side... The edge around the lenses is reflective, which has caused MAJOR annoyances for some people. A lot of people use the original glasses with the V2 set ups for that reason.

Finally, apparently 3d vision 2 monitors have less of a cross-talk issue than v1. I can't speak on it for sure though.

Thing is though, 3d vision 2 monitors are a LOT more expensive presently. The cheapest is the Ben-Q 24", which will still run you around $400 without the glasses. Once you buy the emitter and glasses you're close to the Asus 27" pricing which is pretty much THE 3d monitor to own, but it's not cheap at around $600-$700, yet comes with everything you need.

I cannot speak personally on if lightboost technology is worth the extra cost as I don't have both kits. What I can say is that you can get a 3DV1 monitor with everything for less than you pay for just the monitor when it comes to 3dV2. What would probably be the best option would be to go to a store that has it set up (like say, microcenter) and check it out there so you can decide if it's worth the price difference. If you have the disposable income to pay the difference, you may as well do so though...At minimum, the 3dV2 monitors ARE better quality.

What I advise doing, go on over to 3dvision-blog.com and research on the various monitors. Find out what fits your needs, and go from there. I went the route I did because I paid under $180 for the monitor and like $60 for the 3d vision kit, and having never used the tech I thought it'd make an awesome way to stick my foot in the water to make sure it isn't too cold for my liking.

Additional Comment:

Also, in case anyone is wondering, going from 3.6 to 4.2 ghz on my i7 930 makes no difference in terms of gaming. It DEFINITELY puts all the grunt on the gpu. This isn't too much of a surprise, considering the gpu is essentially rendering each frame twice from a slightly different angle, as such the only extra work for the cpu is deciding where each eye is. I see no reason to drop the clock speed lower, but if people are interested I'd be willing to try running it stock to see what happens I guess.

On a side note, I found my old copy of UT2k4. Should be interesting to see how 3dV works with older titles.

Additional Comment:

Lil tip for anyone thinking about making the 3d plunge...

Microcenter has the 22" Viewsonic 3d vision 1 monitors for $157. Mind you, you'd still need a 3d vision kit, but it'd make for an inexpensive way to give things a try and see how you like it. Only major downside is that it's only 1680x1050.

I'll keep this thread updated any time I hear of a good deal on 3d vision equipment.

Additional Comment:

Well... finally got around to trying out metro 2033. I must say, games that were made with 3d vision in mind look absolutely astounding! Metro 2033 is a showcase for the technology, but it WILL bring your gpu to its knees without even considering apologizing for the beating it'll give it. Probably going to have to lower a few settings for it.

Additional Comment:

Decided to fire up hard reset on this set up and wow...just wow... If you have 3d vision already and haven't tried this one out, do so at your earliest convenience. Totally worth it!

[SCOLANATOR]

Nice review Dil-tech. I'm really interested in 3D but unsure on which monitor to get.
I really like the 27" Asus VG278H, 3D Vision 2, 120Hz, built in transmitter, but I'm a little worried as to what a 1080x1920 resolution will look like when stretched to 27".
So do you think it's worth taking the risk? Wishing Asus would bring out an update for it so it runs at 2560x1440 :-/.
~scol

[Dil-tech]

Originally Posted by SCOLANATOR

Nice review Dil-tech. I'm really interested in 3D but unsure on which monitor to get.
I really like the 27" Asus VG278H, 3D Vision 2, 120Hz, built in transmitter, but I'm a little worried as to what a 1080x1920 resolution will look like when stretched to 27".
So do you think it's worth taking the risk? Wishing Asus would bring out an update for it so it runs at 2560x1440 :-/.
~scol

That Asus is widely considered the best 3d monitor on the market. With 3d, the bigger the screen the more pronounced the effect. Sadly, 3d tv's lag and won't accept 1080p@120hz via hdmi as of yet, so the 27" asus is the top pick.

As for 2560x1440, you'd probably need three 680's to keep games playable, considering your card has to render two frames per frame seen by you in 3d mode. That's the reason why NVidia hasn't updated to higher resolution monitors just yet, it just takes too much power to even consider it yet.

[The_Nephilim]

Hi-Dil Tech You summed up for what I beleive is the coolest tech today 3D..I been an advid 3D gamer since 2001 and currently sport a triple screen DLP Projector setup..

I must say you hit the nail on the head with your Review and your Previous posts. It has to be SEEN and on a Preoperly Setup system to get an idea what it REALLY is like to Game in 3D..

To me just a natural progression in gaming as we SEE IRL in 3D so WHy Not Our Games and movies??

I will tell you one thing I would NOT change my setup for anything and will fight tooth and nail to keep 3D in MY Gaming.. No matter the cost it to me is just worth it..
I would suggest going Triplescreen and 3D WOW you will NOT believe it, too Cool is deifnetly what it is..

Here are some screenies of My Setup and the Simulator in the Pics is Falcon 4 BMS 4.32. A mod done by Benchmark Modders.. F4 in 3D and triple screen is the ****!!



By the_nephilim at 2011-09-17






By the_nephilim at 2011-09-17







By the_nephilim at 2011-09-17

[Dil-tech]

Thanks, and nice set up man! Projectors are the only way I'd do triple screens. The bezel situation makes my eyes cry any other way.

How does the sli'ed 480's hold up under that kind of pressure, or are you limited to 720p per projector in 3d?

[The_Nephilim]

well the SLi'd 480 works ok. I run at 3072x768 and most games work NP..I just bought Witcher 2 and it is a killer..

I dont like the way the game plays but it sure does look good. Currently I am Single screen as I wait to get some new bulbs one blew and the other is dying..

But I am thinking Witcher 2 in triplescreen & 3D is gonna kill my 480's..

I am currently trying to get some Certified 3D Projectors right now I am working on a mod to get these projectors working and am limited to 75Hz and as you know that means my FPS in most games are set at 37.5FPS..

So Witcher 2 in 3D at 1024x768 was just getting 37.5 but with the 3D off I was getting around 50 on One down From Ultra settings..

I would like to get some 120Hz Projectors but money is tight right now. but If I do that and want to continue playing witcher 2 I may need a vid card upgrade along with these older Projectors upgraded....

[Dil-tech]

The Witcher 2 is DEFINITELY worth the playthru. Best action RPG in quite some time, it really is amazing as you get further in.

I do have to ask how you managed to get 3d to get along with playing on that set up though... If you made it work with something uncapable of 120hz then it may be possible to do the same with lcd monitors not at 120hz. Yeah, performance will suck on a 60-75hz, but it could be quite helpful for the rest of the guys here.

[DC]

Originally Posted by Dil-tech

The Witcher 2 is DEFINITELY worth the playthru. Best action RPG in quite some time, it really is amazing as you get further in.

I do have to ask how you managed to get 3d to get along with playing on that set up though... If you made it work with something uncapable of 120hz then it may be possible to do the same with lcd monitors not at 120hz. Yeah, performance will suck on a 60-75hz, but it could be quite helpful for the rest of the guys here.

Just picked that up on the Steam sale today for $15 give or take a $, so I'm pretty excited to play it given the praise I've read.