Nvidia 3D Vision Vs. AMD HD3D: 18 Games, Evaluated

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
The results are worthless because Toms hasnt tried AMD's preferred 3D method. AMD's preferred method of AMD HD3D is frame sequencial where the screen renders 2 complete 1080p frames. The only way to test that is on the Samsung SA750/950 monitors using displayport or dual link DVI.

Toms has tested AMD's second rate(fallback) 3D method of side by side using HDMI on a big ol' TV. A completely different method.

Its like saying we're gonna test Nvidia vs AMD DX11 image quality, but we dont have a AMD DX11 card so we're gonna use a DX9 9600pro. It makes no sense.
 
Cleeve proves ONCE AGAIN he's the god of everything video card. Thank god for people like you willing to figure out all this stuff for us so we can go in knowing we're making a good decision.
 


No, that's incorrect. The visual output is identical over HDMI or DisplayPort at 1080p.

We're not measuring frame rate performance in this article. If we were, you'd have a point. But we're not. :)

The follow-up article is coming in October, and for that we'll be using a DisplayPort monitor with the Radeons. Then we will measure performance.
 
just give me an Eyefinity HD Radeon card with 'certified' hacked physX drivers and run it with a nVidia card for physX.
I don't care much about 3D but do like Eyefinity and/or Surround 2(D).
 
Yeah, 3D is overhyped, just like color TV, and HD TV was just hype. Na-sayers are nay-says, simply because they don't have it. Once you game in 3D, you won't go back. It's truely amazing.
 
Great article. Just from the titles listed, I'd go with the AMD setup.

Before reading this article I assumed nVidia's 3D vision would be far superior to anything AMD could do. Looks like they've done some work in this area, well done I say.
 


I can say that because the output is identical, and this article examines stereoscopic output.
Try hooking your graphics card up with DVI, and then HDMI at 1080p. There is no difference in quality.

We're not comparing refresh or frame rates in this article, just how games look: visual anomalies based on the game. That does not change based on DisplayPort or HDMI.

For the record, both AMD and Nvidia were consulted for this article, and AMD has no problems with using HDMI for a visual quality comparison.


 
I couldn't help but notice that you guys hadn't mentioned to response times for either displays used for examples. Why is that?
 
If anything, I loved the fact the TriDef driver distorted the iron sights in shooters!

It seriously felt like you were really shooting a gun. You could change your focus to the front of the iron sights and have a blurry target, or focus on the target and have blurry iron sights.

If you've ever shot a rifle you will notice this is truer to reality.
 
I couldn't help but notice that you guys hadn't mentioned to response times for either displays used for examples. Why is that?
Click to expand...

We weren't really focused on display performance this go-round. I'll probably go a little more into that type of thing this month in the follow-up article.
 
THE INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE IS WRONG!

HDMI 1.4a is fully capable of 1080p at 60 fps.

Do your homework and check the spec before you submit your articles.
 
[citation][nom]krencey[/nom]THE INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE IS WRONG!HDMI 1.4a is fully capable of 1080p at 60 fps.Do your homework and check the spec before you submit your articles.[/citation]

*sigh*

It is *not* wrong.

This article is about 3D stereoscopic gaming, not regular 2D viewing.

60 FPS for each eye in stereoscopic 3D requires 120 Hz, and HDMI 1.4a can *NOT* handle 120 Hz/1080p for this application.

Do your homework before you submit a post. 😉
 
[citation][nom]adamoz[/nom]now time for eyefinity vs 3d surround review and comparison on strengths and weaknesses![/citation]
I think you might mean eyefinity vs 2d surround. 3d surround is 3d vision across 3 monitors.
 
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]I think you might mean eyefinity vs 2d surround. 3d surround is 3d vision across 3 monitors.[/citation]

Eyefinity is also capable of 3D across multiple monitors.
 
Having a Passive LG 3D monitor (D2342P) I have gotten to play around with HD3D using my single 5870. I fully agree that since Crossfire is not available yet, getting the fastest single GPU is important if you want to go the ATI route (And I am waiting so ever patiently for the next generation of GPU's). I also tested a SLI setup of Nvidia 480's with a 4.5Ghz 2600K with the TriDef Driver and the results were absolutely stunning. Crysis 2, Metro 2033, etc, all ran fantastic and looked breathtaking at 60+ FPS 3D. So amazingly, Nvidia actually opens up the door to having 3 methods of trying 3D, (Native N3D, TriDef, iz3d) but if AMD's HD3D grabs a bit more native use and the new hopefully 7000/600 series of cards have a good performance boost and gain Crossfire ability, then the game will be a consumers choice for sure.

A few other games that are fantastic in 3D is World of Tanks, LoL, TF2, and HL2. I have messed with it in EVE Online and if you can manually set the focus, it looks fantastic in either Space, or the Captains Quarters, but not both at the same time on manual. On Auto the focus gets confused and flips out depending on how far you are from your focal point, what you are focusing on, and whatever other factors it looks for. This causes you to potentially end up with a massive headache as the 3D effect gets adjusted to extreme levels quickly as the driver tries to figure things out. It's getting better, but you have been warned.
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Eyefinity is also capable of 3D across multiple monitors.[/citation]
Wouldn't you call that eyefinity hd3d or something of the sort? I'm not even sure I know the terminology for it. Maybe you can help me with that.

I also would have to question the value in it on an AMD system due to performance issues. 3 screens worth of 3D would require a lot of power, and AMD's crossfire doesn't work on 3D. Not to mention that ghosting/crosstalk is an issue on the sides of most if not all 3D glasses kits. I guess a review might confirm all those doubts.
 
So far the best games that I have played using the Nvidia solution with a DLP 3D ready television have been: Flatout- Ultimate Carnage, which is amazingly fun and very immersive when using the in-car view while smashing into scenery and other vehicles. Another great game is flight simulator X, it doesn't take much to imagine how amazing it is to sit in the cockpit of an airplane looking at a 3D instrument panel and then using the hat switch to look out the window to see a fully 3D world quickly getting smaller as you are taking off. And lastly, any of the half-life 2 titles are equally amazing in 3D, however, my computer is a bit sluggish with this title even with an i-7 930 and a gtx 460. I have limited time for gaming so I have not played many titles in Stereo 3D but from my experience, it is totally worth it. Also, I briefly played a few chapters of the new Alice in Wonderland game and the 3D effect paired with the stunning imagery were outstanding.
 
Oh yeah, there are plenty of games that look great in 3d. Assassins Creed Brotherhood is simply breath taking in motion. In fact, any 3rd person game simply looks great in 3d.

And as one of the people who is using their 3dtv to try this out, it's unfortunately true but HDMI can only do 1080p@24fps in 3d mode.
 
[citation][nom]bak0n[/nom]Anyone else get a headache when viewing 3d?[/citation]
It's probably a form of simulator sickness and no, I don't, but I can get motion sickness with low framerates, which might be an issue with latency in the input.

That said, there are a few things that might be causing it. If you'd used it at 24hz, that can cause latency issues and flickering. 60Hz is much better. It may also be because you are not used to it. I had to play in small doses at first before my mind got used to 3D. Now I get sick when I play without 3D. Low FPS can also cause issues, and 3D requires a lot more power, so without top of the line equipment, you may run into this issue a lot.
 
This is so disheartening. Here I was scoping out the Samsung 27" 120hz monitor thinking I could run 3D ok with my CF 5850s... and only now do I find out you can't CF and use 3D. So stupid!

On top of that I'm rather dissapointed with the way most of the games looked. I mean half of them it looks like cardboard cutouts, especially the failed Crysis 2 on AMD. My whole upgrade plan was to wait for the next gen of die-shrunk GPUs and then go with a 3D setup, but now I'm not so sure. I guess the good news is I don't need to bother saving a few grand as my current setup pushes out enough frames for me.

Anyway, great article nonetheless. I'll have to give it a more thorough reading later though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom