NVidia 3D Vision Questions

[Arwin]

I'd be careful with unofficial hacks, I believe NVidia closed at least one of the EDID holes in the 3xx drivers, and they've been fairly active in closing loopholes.
Look at the posts on the NVidia forums, apparently the hack people were using to use the playstation monitor no longer work.
Also you will want to be on the latest drivers with 3D vision, because NVidia do add support for games.

I think it's more complicated to get active shutter displays to work. But yeah, never a guarantee that something like this will work forever of course. But I think Nvidia only considers 120hz that can do 60hz per eye at full resolution true competition anyway.

I think with 60hz passive tvs it may be much harder to figure out anything distinctive from the attached screen, but you never know. I'm running the latest beta drivers, btw.

 

[MfA]

And yes, Microsoft is late to the party, though I understand it's happening now, standardised 3D support in DirectX. So yeah, very late, but at least it looks like it's coming ... eventually.

Except it's windows 8 only, intentionally crippling the adoption.

 

[Jedi2016]

I'm running the latest beta drivers, btw.

Same here, latest beta drivers and passive display, still grinnin'.

Working my way through Arkham Asylum right now (way late to the party, I know), it's awesome in 3D, can't wait to see what Arkham City looks like.

Oh, and Just Cause 2 in 3D? There's no other way to play this one, plain and simple. If you've only played it in 2D, you're missing out.

 

[V3]

Why is 3D Vision and 3DTV Play different ?

I was going to pick up a pair of GTX680 for 3D Vision to be used for HMZ-T2 but it seems you can only use 3DTV Play with it. By reading this thread, 3DTV Play give inferior result. Is there a way I can use 3D Vision with HMZ-T2 ?

I'm really confuse why 3D Vision and 3DTV Play give different result. I mean 3D is 3D right ? How come NV made the 3D Vision superior to 3DTV play ? And why does 3D Vision only supports limited display options ? Is their glasses special or something ?

Also what's AMD solution ? any better ?

 

[Davros]

I mean 3D is 3D right ?

No there are many different ways of doing it

I doubt its better on the amd side their pov is "we'll leave it up to someone else to implement 3d"
my guess is 3dtv play is a post process effect that overrides the tv's own 3d processing

amd solutions do work on nv cards so you can try them

 

[V3]

No there are many different ways of doing it

I mean at output stage, it's just sending two image right ?

Has NV gives detail on 3D Vision versus 3DTV Play ?

 

[Davros]

Again i'm guessing but i think 3dvision has access to the zbuffer (aka depth information) while 3dtv play being a post process effect doesnt
a bit like how msaa is better than mlaa

edit: some info on how 3dtv play works
http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/20/a-first-hand-look-at-nvidia-3dtv-play-and-powerdvd-3d/

ps: amd hd3d supports the HMZ-T1 i'm guessing the T2 isnt on the list just because the list is old

 

[ERP]

Both 3Dvision and 3DTVPlay do the same thing.
They modify the shaders to shift the images left/right based on Z and submit the scene twice, once for each eye.

The problem with this is it can't work for certain shaders that work in screen space.

Both also support what amounts to quad buffering where the application deals with submitting everything twice, and adjusting the viewpoint.

The only difference is one supports monitors, surround and dual link DVI with NVidias glasses and the other supports TV's over HDMI.

It's more an artificial distinction than anything else.

 

[Jedi2016]

It's more an artificial distinction than anything else.

It's a "lesser" version for people that don't shell out the money for NVidia's hardware. That's why they dropped native interleaved support, when they realized they could make more money by limiting the "real" 3D functionality to their own branded product line.

 

[Arwin]

Both 3Dvision and 3DTVPlay do the same thing.
They modify the shaders to shift the images left/right based on Z and submit the scene twice, once for each eye.

The problem with this is it can't work for certain shaders that work in screen space.

Both also support what amounts to quad buffering where the application deals with submitting everything twice, and adjusting the viewpoint.

The only difference is one supports monitors, surround and dual link DVI with NVidias glasses and the other supports TV's over HDMI.

It's more an artificial distinction than anything else.

In my experience, 3D Vision works with everything, while 3D TV Play only works for playback of multimedia (and when I tried it previously that was even limited to 720p maximum)

 

[V3]

It's a "lesser" version for people that don't shell out the money for NVidia's hardware. That's why they dropped native interleaved support, when they realized they could make more money by limiting the "real" 3D functionality to their own branded product line.

So the 3D Vision version has better shader compare to 3DTV Play ? Is there a driver hack to switch the shader ?

If not, are NV plannng a more expensive 3DTV Play Pro or something similar that give the 3DTV version the same 3D fidelity as 3D Vision ?

I get why they gimped the 3DTV Play for more money, but at least give the 3DTV users the option to pay them more for the non-gimped version. Oh well, I guess I'll just put the money for a pair of GTX680 towards PS4 or something.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Both 3Dvision and 3DTVPlay do the same thing.
They modify the shaders to shift the images left/right based on Z and submit the scene twice, once for each eye.

The problem with this is it can't work for certain shaders that work in screen space.

Both also support what amounts to quad buffering where the application deals with submitting everything twice, and adjusting the viewpoint.

The only difference is one supports monitors, surround and dual link DVI with NVidias glasses and the other supports TV's over HDMI.

It's more an artificial distinction than anything else.

There's got to be more difference than that. Aside from the vastly better 3d effect with 3d vision (which one could make an argument is a subjective point of view) the framerate of 3dvision is half that of 3dtv play at the same resolution and settings.

 

[pjbliverpool]

In my experience, 3D Vision works with everything, while 3D TV Play only works for playback of multimedia (and when I tried it previously that was even limited to 720p maximum)

It does work with games too but it's limited to either 720p @60fps or 1080p at 30fps - thats assuming you have the option to select the refresh rate from within the game, otherwise your stuck with selecting 720p to enable it.

 

[Davros]

There's got to be more difference than that. Aside from the vastly better 3d effect with 3d vision (which one could make an argument is a subjective point of view) the framerate of 3dvision is half that of 3dtv play at the same resolution and settings.

I halves the framerate with active shutter glasses because its sending a frame per eye on passive tv's the picture for both eyes is in the same frame so it should be the same framerate but half the res (because odd lines are for one eye and even for the other )

 

[Jedi2016]

It halves the framerate with active shutter glasses because its sending a frame per eye on passive tv's the picture for both eyes is in the same frame so it should be the same framerate but half the res (because odd lines are for one eye and even for the other )

It doesn't work that way, though. The system is rendering two full frames, even for interleaved displays, and simply discarding half of the image when it sends it to the monitor. That's why the framerate is cut in half, because the system is still having to render the scene twice. I've taken screengrabs in 3D, and they're saved as two full 1080p frames.

I can still get 60fps out of games in 3D, but only if my system is capable of otherwise rendering the game at 120fps in 2D (Unreal 3 games, for example). And for some reason Crysis 2 also doesn't lose much in the change, but they claim to be running some kind of custom algorithm for 3D, which would explain why I can't make the effect in that game as deep as I do in all the others I play.

The fact that 3DTV Play doesn't lose frames is interesting.. that makes me think they may be simply cheating the effect, giving it a faux-3D "conversion" pass like your TV can do on 2D content to give it the appearance of 3D (usually horribly). That would also explain why 3D Vision is so much better, since it's actual 3D instead of just reprojection.

 

[snarfbot]

crysis 2 3d is kinda faked, it uses the z buffer to separate objects based on distance, crops them and then shifts them slightly to simulate 3d, the gaps remaining are filled in by copying nearby pixels. kinda like the stamp tool in ps.

anyway these artifacts can be seen in a still image, but are difficult to spot in motion, it does limit the amount of separation that you can use in practice though. which is why it doesnt have as much pop out or depth in comparison to real 3d games.

also everything looks flat, like cardboard cut outs in front of a painting or something.

the benefit ofc is that there is no performance hit, necessary for consoles but not so much for pc.

 

[Jedi2016]

Reprojection, then, that's what I figured. Sad, considering the platform. Maybe we'll get lucky with C3 and they'll support actual native 3D.

 

[Arwin]

It doesn't work that way, though. The system is rendering two full frames, even for interleaved displays, and simply discarding half of the image when it sends it to the monitor. That's why the framerate is cut in half, because the system is still having to render the scene twice. I've taken screengrabs in 3D, and they're saved as two full 1080p frames.

I can still get 60fps out of games in 3D, but only if my system is capable of otherwise rendering the game at 120fps in 2D (Unreal 3 games, for example). And for some reason Crysis 2 also doesn't lose much in the change, but they claim to be running some kind of custom algorithm for 3D, which would explain why I can't make the effect in that game as deep as I do in all the others I play.

The fact that 3DTV Play doesn't lose frames is interesting.. that makes me think they may be simply cheating the effect, giving it a faux-3D "conversion" pass like your TV can do on 2D content to give it the appearance of 3D (usually horribly). That would also explain why 3D Vision is so much better, since it's actual 3D instead of just reprojection.

True, but on the other hand passive still gives an update to each eye at the original framerate at half resolution, whereas active gives each eye half the original framerate at full resolution.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I halves the framerate with active shutter glasses because its sending a frame per eye on passive tv's the picture for both eyes is in the same frame so it should be the same framerate but half the res (because odd lines are for one eye and even for the other )

True but it wouldn't apply in this case as my TV's active too. What Jedi says above sounds about right, the 3d of 3dtv play while certainly better than my tv's built in 2d - 3d conversion feels more akin to that than to the "real" 3d of 3d vision.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Reprojection, then, that's what I figured. Sad, considering the platform. Maybe we'll get lucky with C3 and they'll support actual native 3D.

I dunno, I found it quite refreshing to play at full framerate in 3d with 3d vision. While the 3d effect was certainly different it was also pretty good imo and I doubt my pc could maintain 30fps in many situations in that game with everything maxed out in real 3d. Im kinda hoping they go with the same method for c3!