i think there is something wrong with you Benetanegia.. i never said DLP is bad and i still say the same... Nvidia 3D vision is not Gr8 than ED for the Price you pay on top of ED,s
And you talk like a fan boy and you are one and its very clear in the way you defend yourself.
you just said
which clearly shows the fanboy in you. i don't give a sh*** about the company
"All i care is to get a good product for the hard earned money i pay"
if you check my history, i started using FX5200 and till 7900 i was with Nvidia and then bought my first ATI 4850 and now 5770. so i am not a fan of a company but ya the product.
I am not going to get anything out of supporting a company. but i want to help people decide what they can buy with their hard earned money.. and for your information... ED is not owned by ATI.. :shadedshu
i can support 3D vision when it comes to the looks of the glass.. but nothing els..
OK if you still don't believe. take one ED glass and one 3D vision glass. use 120hz LCD mon and use a Nvidia card and driver.
first use the 3D vision Glass with a game which supports it and try the same game on ED glasses. it also uses the same Nvidia driver and you will not see any difference.
me and my friend tried it. we felt booth are looking same. just the the Nv glasses where comfortable and the ED was not. but that can be fixed.
the reason for checking was to see what my friend got for paying 300$ and if it was good. i would have bought one for watching Movies. all i need is a 9600GT which i can pick. and the reason for buying a ATI card is, because of price vs performance. simple as that.
if you don't mind.. how old are you my friend ??
WTH are you talking about.
First of all, we are talking about 3D glasses, so that's why I say that Ati has no product, because
it actually does not have any product (you even tell me so in a weird twist of opinions). It's you and only you who is moving this conversation out from there and into graphics cards and into Ati vs. Nvidia and how Ati is the best and bla bla bla. Which clearly shows
who the fanboy is. I repeat, Ati has no product, since this is about 3D glasses, and 3D Glasses is what the OP wants. Exposing the fact that AMD/Ati sells no 3D glasses doesn't make me any fanboy, definately. Check your own.
Second, I couldn't care less about which cards you have owned, for the nth time, this is not about graphics cards, this is not about Nvidia or Ati, so just keep them out from here. Not to mention that naming the cards that you have owned from the "other company" already makes you a fanboy like 90% of the times (just random number...). It's a clear sign. There can't be any clearer one.
Third, once again you keep telling me to use the ED glasses with this and that and bla bla bla. You keep trying to tell me that if I see a difference is because I did something wrong. And again, for the nth time my response is: I did try everything to improve the experience on
my glasses, the ones that I currently own. Hence, why I told you that I'm not stupid, I have to have the best experience that my gear can give me, thank you very much. Yet, 3D Vision is better, and I only needed an hour to realize it, even when the monitor they were using was far worse than my own monitor and FYI, since it's so important for you, they were using a GTX260, not even the 216SP one (this was a Store, not E3/GDC/pick one). It's clear that I'm inherently saying they are better
IMO, since stereo3D experience can only be subjective (not two different people see the same thing). Then again I also mentioned that MTBS3D, a site completely dedicated to Stereo3D for a long time, also share my same opinion in most games than not, and that works out like some kind of objective/expert opinion that asses that 3DVision is better (at least to the same extent that Wizzard/pick a reviewer can tell us one card is better than other).
The fact that
for you (or for this friend of yours that so conveniently poped up in your last post...
) it's the same,
means absolutely nothing, just as does not the fact that I do see a great difference. That's why we give our opinion here, so that the OP can learn from the most of us the better. Ask gamers and the grand majority will tell you that there's no difference between 4xAA and 16-24-32xAA (hell there's many that would say there's very little difference between having it on or off, always talking about gamers, not enthusiasts),
but there is a difference and the fact of seeing it or not only relies in the own experience of the user. Some have a more relaxed requirements or discerning threshold, which means they are going to be willing to pay more for the greater quality or not, but that doesn't change the fact that there is an objective difference.
There are many examples of that:
- Antialiasing 4/8/16xAA. FYI IMO sometimes even 2xAA is enough. Still higher levels produce a significant better image and saying otherwise would be stupid.
- Anisotropic. Some people are not even able to notice if it's activated. For me even x16 falls short.
- MP3 versus "unconpressed", no difference? No difference my ass! And FYI I have all my music ripped to MP3 and I always play that. Again it depends on what you choose to be "enough".
- On board audio versus X-Fi/Xonar/Terratec/etc, etc, etc. Again, no difference? My ass.
- DivX/Xvid. Superb quality, I can't express with words how good I think these codecs are, but there is a big difference between them and raw content or say H264 content.
And last our example at hand:
- ED glasses versus 3D Vision/IZ3D monitor. The same? Check your eyes, it's time to visit your oculist. I mean does ED even include the option to run them through DVI now?? They sure didn't when I bought them and their site doesn't mention it at all. Not that I needed since I play on CRT.
Now like I said, ED glasses are probably the best thing you can get for the money. That this was my opinion is something I think was clear from the start, since that's
what I own. Can you find a better proof? I love Stereo3D and I own a pair of ED glasses, 3 pairs actually. But now, returning to the original point I was making, 3D Vision is much better (and kind off-topic, but IMO IZ3D monitor is even better). As a 3D enthusiast that has probably tried every solution out there I can't say anything but that. I can't say anything but the truth as seen from my perspective.
Finally, I don't know why do you want to know my age, but I'm 27 and I've been playing on PC since I was 6-7 or so (actually whenever the original PC version of Prince of Persia was released). And in case your also interested. I started with 3d pretty early, with Quake I think was the first game to include some kind of 3D (anaglyph, of course), although I have no idea about the state of 3d back then. Just telling how I perceived it.