3D Vision performance hit
Everyone says 3D Vision halves your frame rate, that's what I see all over the internet when anyone asks.

Well I decided to test for myself using fraps.

Serious Same 3 - Went from 63 fps to 60/61 fps
Skyrim (heavily modded) - Again the same. Went from 51 fps to 48 fps
Alan Wake - same again. Doesn't use SLI so went from 41 fps to 38 fps
Prototype - Slightly larger drop. 89 fps to 75 fps

All 4 games I just tried were fully maxed out @ 1680x1050
I booted into each game, loaded normally then pressed the button on the emitter to turn on/off 3D Vision and ran around in game.
I have an i7 @ 4Ghz, 6GB ram and 2 470's in SLI

So, I am aware when 3D Vision came out it was a huge performance hit but I wasn't aware it had been ironed out like this. Did anyone else realise this?

Edit - Using 290.53 drivers
Everyone says 3D Vision halves your frame rate, that's what I see all over the internet when anyone asks.



Well I decided to test for myself using fraps.



Serious Same 3 - Went from 63 fps to 60/61 fps

Skyrim (heavily modded) - Again the same. Went from 51 fps to 48 fps

Alan Wake - same again. Doesn't use SLI so went from 41 fps to 38 fps

Prototype - Slightly larger drop. 89 fps to 75 fps



All 4 games I just tried were fully maxed out @ 1680x1050

I booted into each game, loaded normally then pressed the button on the emitter to turn on/off 3D Vision and ran around in game.

I have an i7 @ 4Ghz, 6GB ram and 2 470's in SLI



So, I am aware when 3D Vision came out it was a huge performance hit but I wasn't aware it had been ironed out like this. Did anyone else realise this?



Edit - Using 290.53 drivers

#1
Posted 02/19/2012 12:01 PM   
I don't think performance has been 'ironed out', as it is still being forced to render twice as many frames as normal.

However, there are many variables that can affect this.

For example, I received a fairly small Skyrim fps hit, because it is a CPU limited game that does not use more than 2 cores. So, my non-3D framerate was already being limited by that, and simply telling the GPU to render twice as many frames while the CPU doesn't have to do many extra calculations since AI, etc doesn't need to change between left-right eye frames meant that 3D fps is pretty much the same as 2D fps.

So some of the factors that may lead to 3D performance being almost as good as 2D performance:

- CPU bottleneck, as game elements such as physics and AI will update at the same tick rate no matter of 2D or 3D.
- Vsync (in 2D is the game locked to 60hz anyway?)
- 3D rendering method (eg: Crysis 2 uses a different system that is extremely performance-efficient as it does not render everything twice, but calculates 3D separation for objects instead. This is uncommon however.)
- Individual game rendering systems (eg: a game engine may know to only render shadows once as they are unaffected by camera angle)
- Load-in (many performance issues in open-world games are often caused by streaming the world between hard drive, ram, GPU, etc and the performance hitches are it waiting for the new assets to be ready. Frame-rendering speed is not causing issue here, as it's having the wait on the memory to catch up)

So basically, in a lot of cases it's actually not that 3D performance has been improved, it's that 2D performance was limited in the first place! /omg.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':omg:' />
I don't think performance has been 'ironed out', as it is still being forced to render twice as many frames as normal.



However, there are many variables that can affect this.



For example, I received a fairly small Skyrim fps hit, because it is a CPU limited game that does not use more than 2 cores. So, my non-3D framerate was already being limited by that, and simply telling the GPU to render twice as many frames while the CPU doesn't have to do many extra calculations since AI, etc doesn't need to change between left-right eye frames meant that 3D fps is pretty much the same as 2D fps.



So some of the factors that may lead to 3D performance being almost as good as 2D performance:



- CPU bottleneck, as game elements such as physics and AI will update at the same tick rate no matter of 2D or 3D.

- Vsync (in 2D is the game locked to 60hz anyway?)

- 3D rendering method (eg: Crysis 2 uses a different system that is extremely performance-efficient as it does not render everything twice, but calculates 3D separation for objects instead. This is uncommon however.)

- Individual game rendering systems (eg: a game engine may know to only render shadows once as they are unaffected by camera angle)

- Load-in (many performance issues in open-world games are often caused by streaming the world between hard drive, ram, GPU, etc and the performance hitches are it waiting for the new assets to be ready. Frame-rendering speed is not causing issue here, as it's having the wait on the memory to catch up)



So basically, in a lot of cases it's actually not that 3D performance has been improved, it's that 2D performance was limited in the first place! /omg.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':omg:' />

#2
Posted 02/19/2012 12:27 PM   
I see what you are saying however I don't use v-sync and find it odd that a random selection would show the same thing.
Alan Wake for example is known to be heavy on the GPU yet it has the same result.
I see what you are saying however I don't use v-sync and find it odd that a random selection would show the same thing.

Alan Wake for example is known to be heavy on the GPU yet it has the same result.

#3
Posted 02/19/2012 12:37 PM   
the reason is that turning off the emitter doesn't disable 3d vision.
you have to either disable it in ncp or via the "disable 3d vision" shortcut in the start menu.
the reason is that turning off the emitter doesn't disable 3d vision.

you have to either disable it in ncp or via the "disable 3d vision" shortcut in the start menu.

NVIDIA TITAN X (Pascal), Intel Core i7-6900K, Win 10 Pro,
ASUS ROG Rampage V Edition 10, G.Skill RipJaws V 4x 8GB DDR4-3200 CL14-14-14-34,
ASUS ROG Swift PG258Q, ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q, Acer Predator XB280HK, BenQ W710ST

#4
Posted 02/19/2012 02:50 PM   
As Axider has covered already, 3D Vision "halving FPS" is no longer fully accurate unless you are 1) already getting less than 60FPS in 2D AND 2) GPU usage is pegged at 100% in 2D. You have to keep in mind GPUs were much less powerful 3 1/2 years ago (9800GTX+ was used in most launch reviews, GTX 280 in some) while games have not progressed all that much. There's certainly a few that push the envelope with tons of DX10/11 features but for the most part you can turn those features off and they look and run similarly to anything available in 2008-2009.

The more accurate statement with regard to 3D Vision now is it will 1) double your GPU rendering requirements and overall GPU load compared as what you would expect in 2D with 60Hz Vsync/frame limit enabled. As a corollary, running SLI effectively negates the impact of 3D Vision if you can maintain 60FPS in 2D with Vsync with just a single GPU.

So for example, if a game runs in 2D with Vsync/framelimit set to 60Hz and GPU usage is 50% or less, you can generally expect there to be little to no hit if you enable 3D Vision. If GPU usage is greater than 50%, you can expect FPS to drop accordingly. In SLI, as long as you are not hitting 100% GPU usage on a single GPU, you can expect almost no performance penalty from 3D if you add a second card in SLI. There are some exceptions to this however, as stated games that have either CPU or rendering/engine bottlenecks (BF3 etc).

Also as Kingping emphasized, if you want accurate tests with SLI you need to fully disable 3D Vision as simply turning off the emitter just turns off the output, the driver mode however is still set to "3D Vision" which dedicates 1 card per L/R frame regardless whether both frames are output. If you see an increase in framerates in that situation it just means a single GPU is able to render more than 60FPS limit from 3D Vision. Disabling 3D Vision completely in the NVCP might not double that #, again because of CPU/engine limitations.
As Axider has covered already, 3D Vision "halving FPS" is no longer fully accurate unless you are 1) already getting less than 60FPS in 2D AND 2) GPU usage is pegged at 100% in 2D. You have to keep in mind GPUs were much less powerful 3 1/2 years ago (9800GTX+ was used in most launch reviews, GTX 280 in some) while games have not progressed all that much. There's certainly a few that push the envelope with tons of DX10/11 features but for the most part you can turn those features off and they look and run similarly to anything available in 2008-2009.



The more accurate statement with regard to 3D Vision now is it will 1) double your GPU rendering requirements and overall GPU load compared as what you would expect in 2D with 60Hz Vsync/frame limit enabled. As a corollary, running SLI effectively negates the impact of 3D Vision if you can maintain 60FPS in 2D with Vsync with just a single GPU.



So for example, if a game runs in 2D with Vsync/framelimit set to 60Hz and GPU usage is 50% or less, you can generally expect there to be little to no hit if you enable 3D Vision. If GPU usage is greater than 50%, you can expect FPS to drop accordingly. In SLI, as long as you are not hitting 100% GPU usage on a single GPU, you can expect almost no performance penalty from 3D if you add a second card in SLI. There are some exceptions to this however, as stated games that have either CPU or rendering/engine bottlenecks (BF3 etc).



Also as Kingping emphasized, if you want accurate tests with SLI you need to fully disable 3D Vision as simply turning off the emitter just turns off the output, the driver mode however is still set to "3D Vision" which dedicates 1 card per L/R frame regardless whether both frames are output. If you see an increase in framerates in that situation it just means a single GPU is able to render more than 60FPS limit from 3D Vision. Disabling 3D Vision completely in the NVCP might not double that #, again because of CPU/engine limitations.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

#5
Posted 02/19/2012 03:21 PM   
[quote name='Kingping' date='19 February 2012 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1329663040' post='1371349']
the reason is that turning off the emitter doesn't disable 3d vision.
you have to either disable it in ncp or via the "disable 3d vision" shortcut in the start menu.
[/quote]

No, disabling 3D vision completely gives the same FPS as just turning off the emitter. I just tested it :)
[quote name='Kingping' date='19 February 2012 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1329663040' post='1371349']

the reason is that turning off the emitter doesn't disable 3d vision.

you have to either disable it in ncp or via the "disable 3d vision" shortcut in the start menu.





No, disabling 3D vision completely gives the same FPS as just turning off the emitter. I just tested it :)

#6
Posted 02/19/2012 06:33 PM   
[quote name='xtrem3x' date='19 February 2012 - 01:33 PM' timestamp='1329676410' post='1371430']
No, disabling 3D vision completely gives the same FPS as just turning off the emitter. I just tested it :)
[/quote]
If that's the case, the game is either CPU limited or doesn't have an SLI profile and isn't getting the full benefit of AFR. 3D Vision's SLI mode maximizes 3D performance and will only ever achieve single-GPU framerates when 3D Vision is enabled.

If you checked Alan Wake, that's most likely the cause, no SLI profile.
[quote name='xtrem3x' date='19 February 2012 - 01:33 PM' timestamp='1329676410' post='1371430']

No, disabling 3D vision completely gives the same FPS as just turning off the emitter. I just tested it :)



If that's the case, the game is either CPU limited or doesn't have an SLI profile and isn't getting the full benefit of AFR. 3D Vision's SLI mode maximizes 3D performance and will only ever achieve single-GPU framerates when 3D Vision is enabled.



If you checked Alan Wake, that's most likely the cause, no SLI profile.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

#7
Posted 02/19/2012 06:49 PM   
[quote name='chiz' date='19 February 2012 - 06:49 PM' timestamp='1329677371' post='1371439']
If that's the case, the game is either CPU limited or doesn't have an SLI profile and isn't getting the full benefit of AFR. 3D Vision's SLI mode maximizes 3D performance and will only ever achieve single-GPU framerates when 3D Vision is enabled.

If you checked Alan Wake, that's most likely the cause, no SLI profile.
[/quote]

I checked Serious Sam 3 and Skyrim
[quote name='chiz' date='19 February 2012 - 06:49 PM' timestamp='1329677371' post='1371439']

If that's the case, the game is either CPU limited or doesn't have an SLI profile and isn't getting the full benefit of AFR. 3D Vision's SLI mode maximizes 3D performance and will only ever achieve single-GPU framerates when 3D Vision is enabled.



If you checked Alan Wake, that's most likely the cause, no SLI profile.





I checked Serious Sam 3 and Skyrim

#8
Posted 02/19/2012 07:54 PM   
Im running single gpu (gtx570) and I too don't notice much of a preformance hit when 3d vision is turned on. I do have my cpu overclocked to 4.5 ghz when playing demanding games.

For example, first level serious sam 3 without 3d vision (4.5ghz, 570 OC to 815mhz, 1680x1050 no anti-aliasing) I get around 90fps. With 3d vision Im getting around 82fps.

HardReset about 120fps without 3d and 110 with.
Im running single gpu (gtx570) and I too don't notice much of a preformance hit when 3d vision is turned on. I do have my cpu overclocked to 4.5 ghz when playing demanding games.



For example, first level serious sam 3 without 3d vision (4.5ghz, 570 OC to 815mhz, 1680x1050 no anti-aliasing) I get around 90fps. With 3d vision Im getting around 82fps.



HardReset about 120fps without 3d and 110 with.

#9
Posted 02/19/2012 09:20 PM   
It's nice to know I'm not the only one :)
It's nice to know I'm not the only one :)

#10
Posted 02/19/2012 10:31 PM   
It always halves your fps to have true 3D.
It always halves your fps to have true 3D.

#11
Posted 02/21/2012 01:09 AM   
I'd be annoyed to the extreme right now if i were xtrem3x, lol.
I'd be annoyed to the extreme right now if i were xtrem3x, lol.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#12
Posted 02/21/2012 01:36 AM   
[quote name='CamRaiD' date='21 February 2012 - 01:09 AM' timestamp='1329786543' post='1372042']
It always halves your fps to have true 3D.
[/quote]

So you haven't read the thread then...
[quote name='CamRaiD' date='21 February 2012 - 01:09 AM' timestamp='1329786543' post='1372042']

It always halves your fps to have true 3D.





So you haven't read the thread then...

#13
Posted 02/21/2012 01:40 AM   
Scroll To Top