Oct 4, 2011 #1 P ptrout Limp Gawd Joined Jul 15, 2002 Messages 222 Stupid question but I got a toxic 6950 and tested dirt 3 in 3D. The benchmark gave me 45 fps average. 1080p preset high, 4xMLAA Is that 45 effective ie its really equivalent to ~90 fps in non 3D ? or does it mean effectively its 22.5 fps in 3D ?
Stupid question but I got a toxic 6950 and tested dirt 3 in 3D. The benchmark gave me 45 fps average. 1080p preset high, 4xMLAA Is that 45 effective ie its really equivalent to ~90 fps in non 3D ? or does it mean effectively its 22.5 fps in 3D ?
Oct 4, 2011 #2 S samuelmorris Supreme [H]ardness Joined Dec 20, 2010 Messages 5,506 From the benches I've seen, 45fps in 3D is actually 45fps, i.e. it's drawing 90fps total, 45 on each side.
From the benches I've seen, 45fps in 3D is actually 45fps, i.e. it's drawing 90fps total, 45 on each side.
Oct 4, 2011 #3 P ptrout Limp Gawd Joined Jul 15, 2002 Messages 222 Thank you. That's pretty good then. I thought 3d would be a gimmicky, but I don't think I can ever go back to non 3D in games like fallout3 and dirt3
Thank you. That's pretty good then. I thought 3d would be a gimmicky, but I don't think I can ever go back to non 3D in games like fallout3 and dirt3
Oct 4, 2011 #4 S samuelmorris Supreme [H]ardness Joined Dec 20, 2010 Messages 5,506 If you can get the performance to do it, then it's worth it in some games. Not all games work that well with it though, which is why I'm not particularly interested (that plus you can't do 3D at 2560x1600 yet)
If you can get the performance to do it, then it's worth it in some games. Not all games work that well with it though, which is why I'm not particularly interested (that plus you can't do 3D at 2560x1600 yet)