NVIDIA 3D Vision Poll

How do you feel about NVIDIA 3D Vision?

  • I will wear wireless 3D shutter glasses while playing games on my PC.

    Votes: 37 8.6%

  • I will NOT wear wireless 3D shutter glasses while playing games on my PC.

    Votes: 123 28.7%

  • I currently wear wireless 3D shutter glasses while playing games on my PC.

    Votes: 15 3.5%

  • I would consider the possibility of wearing wireless 3D shutter glasses for playing games on my PC.

    Votes: 149 34.7%

  • I would NOT consider the possibility of using wireless 3D shutter glasses 4 playing games on my PC.

    Votes: 86 20.0%

  • None of the above statements apply to me.

    Votes: 19 4.4%
  • Total voters
    429
I had Elsa Revelator shutter glasses about 10 years ago. Wasn't impressed and stopped using them within a couple of weeks once the novelty wore off.

I haven't tried or seen the nvidia solution but shutter glasses are shutter glasses no? It's not going to be wildly different from the shutter glasses of 10 years ago is it? LCD's going on and off to cover each eye whilst two different images alternate?

I thought the depth of field produced an eerie effect into my CRT like watching a puppet show that was more disturbing than immersive. All the models in game appeared like cardboard cut-outs. The image was darker as it's essentially like wearing dark sunglasses whilst gaming, not good. It also gave me eye strain quite quickly. I wasn't a fan.
 
distant said:
If you saw Avatar the movie in stereoscopic 3D (S-3D), then you can have a feel for what S-3D gaming can be: amplify that immersion feeling 10X and that's the start of how immersive a S-3D game can be. What's amazing is that ALL directx8 and later games are more or less can be played in S-3D using 3DVision.

But that's not all, ATI and IZ3D have teamed up and are coming out with their own shutter solution in addition to polarized/LCD monitor from iZ3D. Try it out fellows, you owe it to yourself to get this 3rd dimension in your gaming. Don't just get stuck to the old flat 2.5D. Multiple monitors immersion factor, honestly, is a big joke compared to that of S-3D in games, and you don't need to believe me, just go see Avatar the movie in S-3D to get a feel of what it can be.
Click to expand...

This is viral marketing fail right here folks. I honestly can't tell which brand this freshly made account is trying to push. I'd guess at IZ3D.
 
Finkus said:
This is viral marketing fail right here folks. I honestly can't tell which brand this freshly made account is trying to push. I'd guess at IZ3D.
Click to expand...

"But that's not all..."

Thing reads like a typical infomercial script :D
 
To start with, I've had the oportunity to spend some time with Nvidia's current 3D vision on some demo systems and laptops at an Infernalan. Roughly 45 mins to an hours worth. Additionally, way back in the days of first generation Geforces, I had Asus 6600 and 6800 (Geforce 1 SDR and Geforce 1 DDR) graphics cards that included shutter glasses. Those of you basing your judgements on historical experience need to drop your bias and give these a try. Many of the problems of ghosted or doubled 2d static textures, such as crosshairs, scores, ammo count, spedometer, etc, have been corrected. At the time, most monitors were only able to run 120hz at a lower resolution, which was a compromise I was not willing to make. However, this is no longer the case. The depth added to the games I tested seemed to be both a pleasant and immersive improvement. I wear glasses, and found the 3D vision glasses fit comfortably on top.

Conversly, I have not yet had an opportunity to try out ATI's Eyefinity. However, I am 100% sold on the concept, and until Nvidia's recent announcement, had planned on upgrading to a 5000 series card and going that route.

I do not see this debate as a red versus green issue, as both companies are offering atleast 3 monitor surround view solutions (of course Nvidia's is not yet out to the public). However, I do recognise the fact that ATI's implimentation of 3D Vision may be a ways down the road, so one is left with a choice of which brand for which features.

I want to spend my money on a surround view setup consisting of atleast 3 24" LCD's.

I want to spend my money on a 3D display technology.

If Nvidia fails to deliver in the impending weeks as promised, I may still purchase a Radeon card and wait for 3D to mature, but at this point in time, I see a trio of Acer or Asus 120 Hz LCD's and a couple green cards in my box.
 
CrazyRob said:
To start with, I've had the oportunity to spend some time with Nvidia's current 3D vision on some demo systems and laptops at an Infernalan. Roughly 45 mins to an hours worth. Additionally, way back in the days of first generation Geforces, I had Asus 6600 and 6800 (Geforce 1 SDR and Geforce 1 DDR) graphics cards that included shutter glasses. Those of you basing your judgements on historical experience need to drop your bias and give these a try. Many of the problems of ghosted or doubled 2d static textures, such as crosshairs, scores, ammo count, spedometer, etc, have been corrected. At the time, most monitors were only able to run 120hz at a lower resolution, which was a compromise I was not willing to make. However, this is no longer the case. The depth added to the games I tested seemed to be both a pleasant and immersive improvement. I wear glasses, and found the 3D vision glasses fit comfortably on top.

Conversly, I have not yet had an opportunity to try out ATI's Eyefinity. However, I am 100% sold on the concept, and until Nvidia's recent announcement, had planned on upgrading to a 5000 series card and going that route.

I do not see this debate as a red versus green issue, as both companies are offering atleast 3 monitor surround view solutions (of course Nvidia's is not yet out to the public). However, I do recognise the fact that ATI's implimentation of 3D Vision may be a ways down the road, so one is left with a choice of which brand for which features.

I want to spend my money on a surround view setup consisting of atleast 3 24" LCD's.

I want to spend my money on a 3D display technology.

If Nvidia fails to deliver in the impending weeks as promised, I may still purchase a Radeon card and wait for 3D to mature, but at this point in time, I see a trio of Acer or Asus 120 Hz LCD's and a couple green cards in my box.
Click to expand...

You're right in that it's not a red vs green issue any more as both companies are rolling out multi monitor and 3D over the next few months.

I don't know that triple wide and 3D is going to be a simultaneous thing unless you're planning on playing old games. 120fps is a lot to ask at 5760x1080 and beyond.

I haven't looked into 120Hz displays but are they all TN panels? Most people would suggest IPS for triple wide resolutions as you're viewing the extreme periphery at quite an angle.

Perhaps a central TN 120Hz display for 3D, flanked by two IPS panels for triple wide and taking an either/or approach to both modes, is going to be realistic at this point? It will certainly be an interesting next 6 months for PC gaming that that can only be a good thing.
 
I haven't tried the Nvidia 3Dvision, but I did try out the IZ3D over at Microcenter. Personally I do not like having to wear glasses and after about 5 minutes I had a headache, so if the Nvidia solution is anything like it, I know i will not want it. I have played with the eyefinity setup when Hardforum hosted it here in Dallas and see that as a more viable option, however until we start seeing thinner to seemless monitors at a much reduced priced I cannot see my justifying ATI's solution either. What's interesting is that there were quite a few announcments about 3D TV made this past week with ESPN talking about 3D TV and DirecTV talking about it, but it still means wearing glasses and buying a new TV. I give it about 5 years and we will see more 3D products that are more affordable, but by then we will be talking about some new tech that won't require wearing glasses. I remember about a year ago a company showed off a 22" TV that was actually two LCD panels one behind the other that produced a 3D image without glasses, you would think that would be the way TV makers would go since LCD prices have come down quite a bit and it doesn't require any special software or glasses to enjoy.
 
Skakruk said:
I don't give a rat's arse about NVIDIA 3D Vision, apart from the fact that it's encouraging the production of 120Hz monitors. I would never sacrafice the benefits of a 120Hz refresh rate for 3D effects.
Click to expand...

I have the nvidia glasses and I have to agree with you. I find myself enjoying the refresh rate more than the 3d vision. It's cool and all, but butter smooth fps > eye candy

I'm looking forward to 3D blurays though. They'll probably get a lot more use
 
Finkus said:
I don't know that triple wide and 3D is going to be a simultaneous thing unless you're planning on playing old games. 120fps is a lot to ask at 5760x1080 and beyond.
Click to expand...

NVIDIA showed 3D Vision Surround at CES on dual gtx 285's. 3D Vision Surround = 3x1 panels running 120hz with stereoscopic 3D. It's not out yet, just like the YouTube 3D app, but it will be soon.

Finkus said:
I haven't looked into 120Hz displays but are they all TN panels? Most people would suggest IPS for triple wide resolutions as you're viewing the extreme periphery at quite an angle.
Click to expand...

My 2233rz, a specialty panel from Samsung sold with 3D Vision kits, has excellent horizontal viewing angles.

utnorris said:
I haven't tried the Nvidia 3Dvision, but I did try out the IZ3D over at Microcenter. Personally I do not like having to wear glasses and after about 5 minutes I had a headache, so if the Nvidia solution is anything like it, I know i will not want it.
Click to expand...

IZ3D is not much like 3D Vision. That fake color polarized crap is nothing like the polarized glasses used for the kick ass Avatar movie and would make a sailor motion sick. 3D Vision is certainly superior to IZ3D. Some people still get motion sick... but some people get motion sick from Doom. This is completely subjective. I wish you the best of luck.

Finkus said:
This is viral marketing fail right here folks. I honestly can't tell which brand this freshly made account is trying to push. I'd guess at IZ3D.
Click to expand...

OH EM GEE! A PERSON WITH GRAMMAR IS POSTING SUPPORTING OPINIONS ABOUT A PRODUCT! IT'S A PLANT!

I hope you're 12 or on drugs. I can't imagine what else would make you so irrational or paranoid.
 
Id give it a shot if dropped in my lap
but i dont think i would pay for it my self
 
I prefer not to have the glasses, but I would not be totally against it. I want the monitors with the built in 3d. Or perhaps a cover for monitors to turn it into 3d...somehow.:p
 
Wearing glasses over my current glasses was one of the most annoying experiences in my life when I saw Avatar in theaters. Not only that I could not care less about 3D especially after watching it in theaters. Don't get me wrong it was well done but for me It has no wow factor once or ever and I would much rather see resolutions and aspect ratios up'd than 3D.
 
I think it was something that did not interfere with my glasses and the current ones do, I might consider wearing them. Then again I'm happy with the new monitors.
 
since i also wear glasses, it will be a pain in the ass to wear 3D glasses on top of those (just like watching the Avatar movie was a pain in the ass with the glasses-on-glasses thing).
 
I would not wear 3D glasses to play games mainly because of the expense.
 
I would love to try out 3D Vision, but I doubt I'd be up to buying it. There might be a time in the future where I'd be more willing to buy into 3D, but not for a long time. There aren't enough 120hz monitors on the market and I am FAR more interested in the benefits of multiscreen gaming right now. If I live anywhere near a place where I could try out the glasses (nearest place is like 3 hours away, no thank you) I'd go check it out and make a more informed opinion, but as it stands I'm not going to spend $500-$600 on a single monitor 3D set up when I can easily spend that money on three new monitors and get something that isn't likely to give me a headache after playing.
 
I wear glasses already, even if I did not, I would not be interested in any 3d tech that requires the wearing of glasses.
If they made a set of flip downs, it might be acceptable for others that wear glasses at least.
 
I'm really looking forward to getting myself a Nvidia 3D vision setup this year, hopefully before summer.

A lot of it depends on how well these new 3d capable monitors are reviewed (or if better ones are being planned) for me. The idea of wearing glasses does not bother me, as I wear them for distances anyway. What I'm most concerned about is compatibility and support, of which Nvidia's 3D vision seems to have the best of (yes I know it isn't perfect either).
 
I have been using 3D Vision for several months now. Simply one of my best purchases ever. Not every game is perfect for it, but the ones that do, are stunning.
Everyone I showed my 3D projector setup and let them play some CodMW2 on it, left me jaw-dropped.

It is good, that 3D now gets supported by Sony and the other big players, so it will make its way movies, games and even consoles very soon.

Wearing glasses is not uncomfortable at all and there is hardly an technological alternative to that for the next coming years.
 
I want a 120hz monitor for the smoothness in online fps games. 3D vision is more icing on the cake for me - I have tried it and I liked it. Will I play my fps in 3D? - tbh I am competitive and 120 hz gives the edge when aiming so might take that instead. But for other *off line* games such as batman, or dragon age I'd use it, perhaps even for some online fps (e.g. l4d co-op - aiming is pretty easy, it's all about tactics really so might use 3D there for fun instead of 120hz).

Being as I want the 120hz monitor asap anyway and I'll buy the faster graphics card at some point for DX11 the true cost to me is a set of glasses. They aren't that expensive so why not.

Triple monitor looks cool too, but for me it doesn't work properly. I can clearly see the lack of bezel support, lack of angle (of side monitors) support, lack of hud (in centre) support, lack of windows dual screen mode support (one 10 foot taskbar is not appealing) in the videos and they would annoy the life out of me. Combine that with the space requirements (have wife so this will be a challenge) and the huge costs: three identical 24 inch 120hz monitors and two top end graphics cards and a new monster PSU and it's not going to happen right now.

Hence I answered "I will wear shutter glasses" - just a matter of time till I get them.
 
I will not consider 3D as long as it demands any kind of extra gear to put over the eyes.

It must be at least 25-30 years ago since I first saw a 3D hologram, without any "extras". Could have been the Philips museum/center in Eindhoven (Netherlands) in the '70s or early '80s. Gettin' old, memory is a bit spotty.:eek:

Give me that and I'll empty my wallet.

I cannot believe we are still talking about using strange contraptions to be able to experience 3D. Until we get a real, natural 3D, I'll settle for 2D. And I hope a multimonitor-standard will emerge, even if it means that nVidia will commit mental seppuku to make it happen.
 
My 2 cents: I enjoy the 3D effect, I don't experience negative side-effects, and I wouldn't mind wearing the glasses on top of my day-to-day glasses.

I don't own a monitor that can do 120Hz nor do I own NVIDIA hardware, otherwise I'd have already purchased the glasses. 3D capability will be a significant factor when deciding on my next hardware purchases. I would like to see more quality 120Hz monitors, because it would be difficult to settle for a small bland display while viewing 2D content.

For me, 3D is less a matter of if but rather when... unless 3D proves to be a fad and goes out of fashion (again) before I purchase 3D-capable hardware.
 
I've played with 3d vision at a store demo and found it was a nifty effect. However, the need to buy a special, very overpriced, tiny monitor blows it for me. Until I could get a 32" TV monitor that supported it without paying a premium, I wouldn't consider it worthwhile.
 
Nvidia needs to get it out there more. I have yet to to try 3D Vision because I haven't had the opportunity, and I live in Los Angeles. I wear glasses already, but I still want to try 3D Vision. I would only consider it if I already had a compatible 120hz monitor, which I don't, but maybe in the future when 120hz monitors are the norm and prices come down.
 
I got 3D vision bundle kit from NCIX with a GTX 260 card over the holidays for 550 CDN.

After using it for a couple of weeks it's easy to say I LOVE IT. And when 3d Surround comes out, I will try that out, though I hate bezels.

I find it funny that with a technology like eyefinity, everyone is so abrupt to state that you have to try it out before judging it, though mutli-monitor apps have been around for a decade (I have used CAD for over 6 years). And so just to see what the hype was about, I got to try Eyefinity out, and it really struck me as amazing for driving games, but really sucked for any of the FPS I played and even RTS games. What was cool for racing is the peripheral vision.

I find that for 3D Vision some FPS are better without, but for some games I switch from my 30" to the 22" to play in 3D instead. Games like RE5, Batman, Far Cry 2, WoW, are just soo cool in 3D. And I think anyone living in this day and age can say that 3D is coming in all around us. The PS3 is going to campaign it heavily along with Bravia TV's and after Avatar was made (another game to play in 3D too), people are 3D crazy.

But I cannot be remiss if I stated that I love my 30" monitor, and choosing between 3 24" 1920X1080 3D monitors and 3 30" monitors (though damn expensive), would be a tough choice. I for one won't get either unless I'm able to play on highest settings at a great frame rate.
 
Personally, I will only game (for my personal rig) on at least one 40" to 60" screen which means I will have to wait a bit to upgrade to 3d Surround (until we know which vendors 3d-enabled larger LCDs will be support by Nvidia). I played L4D2 in 3d the entire weekend at PDXLAN - was a blast in 3d.
 
Thank you, Kyle, for this poll. My hat goes off to you.

I have been gaming in Stereo-3D for years with wired shutterglasses on my 24" CRT.

I would have loved to used Nvidia's 3D Vision, but the ridiculous retail price of $200 is just not worth it for me since I have been buying several wired glasses off Ebay for around $10 a pair. It's still working with my 8800GTX (after "hacking" the drivers to force Oblivion AntiAliasing compatibility mode in conjuction with 2x1 SSAA mode using nHancer, a wonderful Nvidia tweaking program) in Windows XP only. www.mtbs3d.com has information on how to do this hack, which is strictly for G80 cards, not for G92 or GT200.

I do not mind using shutterglasses since they do not give me headaches, but there is the ghosting problem.

1) As long as the response time is quick enough (and I mean, FAST enough, like under 2ms), there will be ghosting as the page-flipping instantly switches from left eye to right eye to left eye. The monitor will have to completely transition from the left-eye oriented frame to the right-eye oriented frame fast enough so that your right eye does not notice the "fading refresh" of the older frame at all. Although CRT monitors have virtually no response time when it comes to firing phosphors (b2w) or going from a shade of grey to a similar shade of grey (g2g), there is some amount of time it takes for a phosphor to cool off from white to completely black. For LCD monitors.. the response time simply needs to be less than 2ms as the maximum. (Also, I wonder if there is any "response time" with the LCD shutter glasses themselves.)

We also need 1920x1200 120Hz LCD monitors, not just the 1680x1050 ones we have today. At least 1920x1080 should be possible @ 120Hz using dual-link DVI connectors.

It also "sucks" that Nvidia is not supporting Windows XP with those 3D Vision glasses.

I think that the sweet price spot should be no more than $99, and Nvidia would be selling much more of these. Perhaps NV is also waiting for the 120Hz LCD market to finally take off, and then start selling those glasses at realistic prices, not at niche prices aimed for the niche market.
 
Last edited:
Can someone elighten me and explain or point me in the direction so i can read for myself why 120hz monitors are required (or highly desirable) for 3d Vision?
 
I love 3D vision I just wish there were 40" and up LCDs that supported it. I tried the dlp and didn't like it and I don't have the space for a projector.

Don't knock it until you try it or if you're just apprehensive about the cost. I pay $500 or so every year or two for a new video card so I'm not going to worry about the 3d kit that will provide years of entertainment at a whole new level of immersion.
 
RamonGTP said:
Can someone elighten me and explain or point me in the direction so i can read for myself why 120hz monitors are required (or highly desirable) for 3d Vision?
Click to expand...

At least 100Hz is needed to make an immersive 3D experience. It's so that each eye is fooled fast enough with seeing each side of the stereostopic image into seeing a 3D image with believable depth upon which your eyes can easily focus. By the way, the depth could actually range from jumping out of the monitor to within a foot from your eyes, all the way to several meters away, or even miles away!

When I use 3D, it makes my 24" monitor from 3 feet away feel like 50" wide from the same distance, because of the immersion into it. I do not know how to explain it. Maybe because the monitor is being brought out, if the convergence is properly adjusted, along with true 3D depth.

I usually use either 1280x800 @ 140Hz (70 refreshes per eye) or 1440x900 @ 120Hz (60 refreshes per eye). Both look great. Compared to 1440x900 in 2D, I would say that it's actually more like 1440x900x10000 in 3D. One of the best newer games to play in 3D is Left 4 Dead. Friggin' awesome! My younger brother absolutely loved playing Painkiller and Far Cry in 3D on my PC.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the explination. I understand what 3D does, i wasn't confused about that, just the refresh rate and why it's needed.
 
RamonGTP said:
Thanks for the explination. I understand what 3D does, i wasn't confused about that, just the refresh rate and why it's needed.
Click to expand...

No problem. I have tried 3D with only 85Hz and even 60Hz by mistake. At 60Hz, I could still barely see the 3D image--my eyes could still focus at the 3D depth, but it was the flicker that was unbearable. The shutter glasses were shutting each eye at only 30 refreshes per second (only 30Hz spankings per eye, making me cry so hard for so long).
 
Since I also wear glasses, I wouldn't want to wear something else on top of them.
 
Another reason I won't do 3d is because IPS panels are not fast enough to do 120hz and after having a tn panel for a while I will not go back mainly because of the viewing angles. I shift positions in my chair so much that I can not tolerate the bad viewing angles of most panels.
 
Sure I'll consider them once I can get cheap 120 Hz display and $20 3d glasses.

At $600 for bundle all i can say is LOL.

Especially when I'm not certain I can play in it for long after my eyes started to hurt during Beowulf 3d watching in iMax.
 
Right now I'm waiting it out, namely because I'm sure those 120Hz displays will cost $8,8764.54 here in Canada (that damn Dell with the DP is listed on Dell.ca for over $800 wtf!) but also to see what sort of stuff the 'others' are going to do with 3D on your TV. It's probably technically not probable but it would be nice to say use the Nvidia glasses on your 120Hz Sony in the living room or whatever they are doing for TVs at your computer desk.

Also I am skepticle how comfortable these things would be after an hour or two since I also wear glasses. Somebody said it was alright earlier in the thread but as far as faces go YMMV? :D
 
I am one of the 11 that currently wear the glasses when I am in the 3D mood.
The caveat is that I got my entire 3D Vision kit for free from Nvidia because I reviewed it.
 
$600 for some glasses and one LCD?
It better be at least 24" IPS panel.

Would IPS,TN, PVA even matter when wearing the glasses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top