Discussion in 'NVIDIA' started by runevirage, Apr 21, 2010.
Assuming you've got your PC connected to the TV of course. Thanks.
It will only work with the 120hz monitor, not with the TV even if its connected to your comp with HDMI.
If you want a solution that works with TV or monitor, LCD OR CRT. then try ED3D glasses. its better than 3D vision which wont work with TV and ED is cheap too.
http://www.ultimate3dheaven.com/edwi3dglforp1.html works GREAT. but if you are using a NVIDIA card, then you cannot use the Free version driver from iz3d. it works GREAT
I've got 3D Vision and can tell you that it works with any 120Hz capable monitor, including CRTs. The 3D effect is very good, too.
I've had a quick look at that alternative system and it doesn't look too hot to me: you're tethered with a wire and the lenses themselves don't seem great. Best to check out a review, if you can. 3D Vision works with just about anything, including old games from the late 90s.
Hmmm.... see what you mean saikamaldoss. The OPs question is confusing refresh rate and TVs.
To runevirage, 3D Vision won't work with a TV, because the TV can only accept a 60Hz signal. However, any monitor that can accept a 120Hz signal will work.
EDIT: Hey why did you delete your second post saikamaldoss? You made a good point and I answered it. Now it just looks like I'm talking to myself.
3D Vision will work with 3D-Ready Televsions, but not just 120Hz TVs.
the part they're not saying is that 120Hz TV's tend to only have 60Hz inputs - they double the frames internally for a smoother image.
So a 120Hz TV is technically capable of running 3D vision, but you're gunna need a 120Hz input on it (which most wont have)
I agree, but I was reading that manufacturers are making 3D-Ready TVs that will work with the 3D Vision Kit.
All that's required is an input that will accept a 120Hz input. Nothing else matters to make it work.
BTW, with my CRT, I got it working at 144Hz with no problems. The effect was liquid smooth animation, zero flicker and great 3D.
Oh and the resolution had to be 800x600 and the picture was a bit blurry.
yup they have to be 3d ready, alot of tv's that are supposed to be 120mhz on the market aren't, the makers use a trick to double the refresh rate.
i did not my friend.. i think the ADMIN did for saying it wont work with TV lol.. his question and my answer was tat it wont work with TV and the ED have wireless glasses too and they support lots of different technology including 3D vision format. so if you buy ED, u can use them to work with 3D vision and also use it with free 3D movie viewers
it was clear in tech talks that Nvidia is going one way and the rest of the world is going the other way
so 3D vision is only for computers with Nvidia card and not for TV and the main reason is that the 3D Tv,s use passive 3D glasses and 3D vision is using Active glasses
its not trick.. its 2 layers of it with each 60hz
60hz x 2 is 120hz
60hz for left and 60hz for the other
And most are using passive glasses (polarized) just like using 2 projectors. 45/125im and some use active screen with passive glasses.
since you can only feed a 60Hz signal in, it makes no difference as far as 3D is concerned.
Kinda like how my TV supports 5.1 dolby digital when watching TV, but it doesnt support the same from its HDMI inputs
And the TV uses Visa 1997 3D port and it wont work with 3D vision.
I hope now its clear
I have those ED glasses, I've been using them for years and although they are by far the best 3D shutter glasses that I've owned (big fan of Stereo3D here), I can too tell you that Nvidia's glasses are far better. I'm never gonna buy them, since they cost an arm and a leg, but they are far better: much less ghosting, flickering, gamma loss, etc.
They are a good cheaper alternative though, don't get me wrong, as I said I'm using them and love it and with some games the experience is amazing. You can even reduce ghosting and flickering to almost non-existent with a lot of tunning. Regardless, give credit where credit is due: Nvidia's setup is much better (especially on default, before massive amounts of tunning), at a much higher cost.
ya you are correct. but you missed something big
ghosting, flickering is because of hz.. try you ED with a 120hz monitor and you will not have that problem and you feel 3D vision is better because you tried the 3d vision on a 120hz mon.. i tried both and if you tune ED.. ED wins and it works with everygame.. just that you need to add the game to the PROFILE
any way.. its again like ATI vs Nvidia.. simple as that when it comes to 3D
ED is like ATI. Cheap and best.. and the best part is that you can use the iz3D beta driver for DX10 and 11 support
HAHA No I used them on a CRT, I told you I've been gaming on S3D for years (maybe even since it was a new thing), how the hell can you assume I'm playing at 60hz? lol I still use a CRT for that reason alone. I even tried my ED glasses on 150 Hz and 3DVision still looks better. But I have not a lot of experience with 3D Vision anyway. Maybe the 5 games that I have seen for 3D Vsion on a booth were selected games that look much better than the average game, but those definately looked better than anything with my glasses. Average game review on MTBS3D.com also says 3D Vision is better, but yeah it also depends on the game.
And I agree, in a perf/price basis ED glasses do win, but pure quality IMO 3DVision or otherwise IZ3D monitor win hands down. Both super expensive, of course.
One thing to consider is that most S3D solutions, mainly shutter glasses, need a lot of tweaking to make them look good, a bad thing for the initiated. You have to love S3D or you are going to be dissapointed the first time you try them. It has happened to many of my friends, they would love it when they came home, but when I lend them my setup and they tried it at home, they didn't like it. The good thing about, both IZ3D monitor and 3DVision is that they work very well without any tweaking, probably because they work closely with game developers, but it's still better anyway.
Ah there you go so u have a CRT but what FPS do you get when u play on your PC ?? and Nv 3D vision on the booth should have had a powerful PC that can give more than 120FPS as well. coz on my ED i do notice that it flicks when the game FPS goes down below 60
So again its all about the hz and FPS so if you compare Apple to apple.. then ED will win. the only trouble is tweaking it..
but once you tune, u can have that settings backed up and can use it when ever you play
No. It's just that the syncing is so much better over the USB than over VGA dongle. Look, I've told you I've been this for years, don't pretend that you know more than I do or at least not with such well known arguments. I've discarded all of them. I'm not stupid, I'm not a child and you are acting as if I was one. I know how it works, thank you very much, I don't need anyone teching me.
EDIT: And SemiAccurate? Really? Don't tell me that Charlie Demerjian thinks that 3d Vision, something Nvidia made, is shit. No freaking way!
I don't believe so. You gotta buy those over priced 3D monitors and those 3D glasses.
Personally, I think those glasses make you look like a tool. Just my opinion...
That one reminds me: I normally defend CD, as he's pretty on the ball with his predictions and general analysis.
I remember him predicting that 3D Vision would be crap and flaming about it on The Inquirer a couple of years ago. Then he actually tried it out at a trade show and revised his opinion, saying he thought it was pretty good on a follow-up Inquirer article, which seemed fair and objective. However, he recently (as in within the last 3 or 4 months) posted an article on SemiAccurate, saying 3D Vision was crap and linked to that first article only, conveniently forgetting about the second one...
That looks like a case of obvious bias to me. What a douche. After this, I still think his reporting is generally accurate, but I read it with a good seasoning of salt now.
I'm sorry that I don't have links to these; it's all from memory.
lol ok man.. dont cry..
What do you want me to say ?? Nvidia is the best ??
ok ok... Nvidia is the best, GTX480 is the coolest and Avatar 3D is nothing in front of 3D vision
Happy now ???
Cool man.. Nvidia Rocks
He does that with everything or almost everything, that's why I don't believe anything he says. i.e probably the most obvious case was the 8800GTX (not having unified shaders, being DX9, 48 pixel shaders/8 vertex), but it has happened with Fermi too (although he was semi-accurate on some things). i.e Where's the article (or wathever) where he admits he was wrong about Fermi not having fixed function units? where the one about not having a tesselator?
Where the one where he admits he was wrong about Nvidia preventing Lucid Hydra from releasing/working? Etc, etc, etc. It's very easy to "be always right" if you only post links to the articles wwere you were "right". But I have memory, so he can not fool me.
lol. Like I said, give credit where credit is due. I told you that I don't have 3D Vision nor I will ever have (unless it comes down in price a lot) and that I do have ED shutter glasses and use them a lot. There's nothing I would like more than saying ED glasses are the best thing, but they're not. 3D Vision is better and IMO IZ3D monitor is even better (for S3D, sadly for the rest is meh, at best). So pack your opinions regarding me and tell your opinion on the subject.
EDIT: BTW. Why is it that every time that someone is talking about 3D Vision, PhysX or any particular feature, an Ati card owner has to finish saying something like "What do you want me to say ?? Nvidia is the best ??" Where did I mention Nvidia at all? Is Nvidia the best? IMO arguably not, but one particular product can certainly be. Stupid fanboys.
Your post was deleted because you reported your own post.
We assumed you wanted it gone.
i beleive the report said "blah blah blah" it was kind of vague.
Separate names with a comma.