Official 334.67 Driver Thread for New 3D Vision Game Support Feedback
  10 / 17    
"Fake" 3D, aka reprojection 3D, is necessarily limited. There's more to stereoscopic vision than just depth. Each eye gives us a unique angle, a unique image with unique details. That's why true 720p 3D appears more detailed than 720p 2D, and likewise for 1080p 3D vs 1080p 2D. Just hold a finger in front of your face and compare what your left and right eyes see when the other is closed. Not only does your finger appear a little different, but what is completely blocked behind your finger when viewed with your left eye is completely revealed when you open your right eye. You might also notice that more distant objects don't show that kind of variation. That's just how our stereoscopic vision works. Nvidia of course understands this. That's why depth is limited with this new method. It's 3D built off of a 2D image, but the unique details that would be there with natural stereoscopic 3D aren't there. Depth is accurate, thanks to the z-buffer, but again depth isn't the only thing we see with stereoscopic vision. So, there has to be a fudge factor, aka, halos around close characters and objects. I hope Nvidia can improve it, of course, but I understand that it's inherently limited. The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background? Easy to suggest, difficult to implement I imagine though!
"Fake" 3D, aka reprojection 3D, is necessarily limited. There's more to stereoscopic vision than just depth. Each eye gives us a unique angle, a unique image with unique details. That's why true 720p 3D appears more detailed than 720p 2D, and likewise for 1080p 3D vs 1080p 2D. Just hold a finger in front of your face and compare what your left and right eyes see when the other is closed. Not only does your finger appear a little different, but what is completely blocked behind your finger when viewed with your left eye is completely revealed when you open your right eye. You might also notice that more distant objects don't show that kind of variation. That's just how our stereoscopic vision works.

Nvidia of course understands this. That's why depth is limited with this new method. It's 3D built off of a 2D image, but the unique details that would be there with natural stereoscopic 3D aren't there. Depth is accurate, thanks to the z-buffer, but again depth isn't the only thing we see with stereoscopic vision. So, there has to be a fudge factor, aka, halos around close characters and objects. I hope Nvidia can improve it, of course, but I understand that it's inherently limited.

The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background?

Easy to suggest, difficult to implement I imagine though!

Posted 01/29/2014 11:32 AM   
[quote="Airion"]The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background?[/quote]Daaaammnn. That's a good idea. Anything that suffers from the stereo unprojection problem gets the depth buffer treatment, and it's otherwise true 3D. [url]http://developer.download.nvidia.com/whitepapers/2011/StereoUnproject.pdf[/url]
Airion said:The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background?
Daaaammnn. That's a good idea.

Anything that suffers from the stereo unprojection problem gets the depth buffer treatment, and it's otherwise true 3D.

http://developer.download.nvidia.com/whitepapers/2011/StereoUnproject.pdf

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

Posted 01/29/2014 11:43 AM   
What a great idea (though no idea how technically challenging it would be). That would work really well for layered scenes, but I wonder how the transition point from one method to the other would work on a plane surface, like a long field or ocean.
What a great idea (though no idea how technically challenging it would be). That would work really well for layered scenes, but I wonder how the transition point from one method to the other would work on a plane surface, like a long field or ocean.

Posted 01/29/2014 11:56 AM   
Arma 3 is at last playable in 3D (fake) by changing the profile to Assassins Creed Black Flag in Nvidia inspector. Of course I wish it was as good as Arma 2 looked but at least there is a smaller performance lost because of it. SteveK, I don't know if Nvidia can improve on this profile specifically for Arma 3 could you? That aside, it is welcome news that Nvidia hasn't completely abandoned us 3D gamers and are looking towards a compromised addition to 3D so thanks.
Arma 3 is at last playable in 3D (fake) by changing the profile to Assassins Creed Black Flag in Nvidia inspector. Of course I wish it was as good as Arma 2 looked but at least there is a smaller performance lost because of it. SteveK, I don't know if Nvidia can improve on this profile specifically for Arma 3 could you? That aside, it is welcome news that Nvidia hasn't completely abandoned us 3D gamers and are looking towards a compromised addition to 3D so thanks.

Posted 01/29/2014 12:13 PM   
Likewise, I have no idea how technically challenging it would be, though I would assume reprojection 3D is very complicated in the first place. I'm sure there would still be problems and artifacts, but hopefully less noticeable. For example, some work could be done to blend and smooth over transition points. That's largely what reprojection 3D is doing in the first place as I understand it: making a fake second image and masking the inherent errors as best as possible.
Likewise, I have no idea how technically challenging it would be, though I would assume reprojection 3D is very complicated in the first place.

I'm sure there would still be problems and artifacts, but hopefully less noticeable. For example, some work could be done to blend and smooth over transition points. That's largely what reprojection 3D is doing in the first place as I understand it: making a fake second image and masking the inherent errors as best as possible.

Posted 01/29/2014 12:15 PM   
[quote="Airion"]"Fake" 3D, aka reprojection 3D, is necessarily limited. There's more to stereoscopic vision than just depth. Each eye gives us a unique angle, a unique image with unique details. That's why true 720p 3D appears more detailed than 720p 2D, and likewise for 1080p 3D vs 1080p 2D. Just hold a finger in front of your face and compare what your left and right eyes see when the other is closed. Not only does your finger appear a little different, but what is completely blocked behind your finger when viewed with your left eye is completely revealed when you open your right eye. You might also notice that more distant objects don't show that kind of variation. That's just how our stereoscopic vision works. Nvidia of course understands this. That's why depth is limited with this new method. It's 3D built off of a 2D image, but the unique details that would be there with natural stereoscopic 3D aren't there. Depth is accurate, thanks to the z-buffer, but again depth isn't the only thing we see with stereoscopic vision. So, there has to be a fudge factor, aka, halos around close characters and objects. I hope Nvidia can improve it, of course, but I understand that it's inherently limited. The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background? Easy to suggest, difficult to implement I imagine though![/quote] Ya this will be I guess difficult to implement,as in an fast paced action game this might tend to not work properly at certain places hmm
Airion said:"Fake" 3D, aka reprojection 3D, is necessarily limited. There's more to stereoscopic vision than just depth. Each eye gives us a unique angle, a unique image with unique details. That's why true 720p 3D appears more detailed than 720p 2D, and likewise for 1080p 3D vs 1080p 2D. Just hold a finger in front of your face and compare what your left and right eyes see when the other is closed. Not only does your finger appear a little different, but what is completely blocked behind your finger when viewed with your left eye is completely revealed when you open your right eye. You might also notice that more distant objects don't show that kind of variation. That's just how our stereoscopic vision works. Nvidia of course understands this. That's why depth is limited with this new method. It's 3D built off of a 2D image, but the unique details that would be there with natural stereoscopic 3D aren't there. Depth is accurate, thanks to the z-buffer, but again depth isn't the only thing we see with stereoscopic vision. So, there has to be a fudge factor, aka, halos around close characters and objects. I hope Nvidia can improve it, of course, but I understand that it's inherently limited. The only solution I can imagine is if somehow a true second stereoscopic image could be rendered only in problem areas (where there are halos) to substitute the reprojection image. Although there would be the expected shader problems, they would probably be less noticeable than the halo artifacts, especially since these are areas closer to the viewer with less depth. At greater depth, there's greater problems with broken shaders, but very little problems with reprojection. So, how some kind of hybrid? Native stereoscopic 3D for the foreground, reprojection "fake" 3D for the background? Easy to suggest, difficult to implement I imagine though!


Ya this will be I guess difficult to implement,as in an fast paced action game this might tend to not work properly at certain places hmm

Posted 01/29/2014 12:42 PM   
Well, there are only a subset of shaders that actually cause problems, typically stuff like shadows, fire, fog, water. That's sort of the magic that Mike_ar69 applies most successfully, to fix those broken shaders. What if the driver could just project those using this new depth buffer technique instead? They'd still be 'fake' in the sense of applied from the depth buffer, but if it was a subset of the screen and on something like shadows where haloing or imperfection would really not be noticeable, that'd be a killer way to combine the two. Pretty sure this could be done if you knew the shaders involved, like hand finding them. Less sure the driver would be able to discern which shader was a candidate for depth instead of real, but hey NVidia knows 3D.
Well, there are only a subset of shaders that actually cause problems, typically stuff like shadows, fire, fog, water. That's sort of the magic that Mike_ar69 applies most successfully, to fix those broken shaders.

What if the driver could just project those using this new depth buffer technique instead? They'd still be 'fake' in the sense of applied from the depth buffer, but if it was a subset of the screen and on something like shadows where haloing or imperfection would really not be noticeable, that'd be a killer way to combine the two.

Pretty sure this could be done if you knew the shaders involved, like hand finding them. Less sure the driver would be able to discern which shader was a candidate for depth instead of real, but hey NVidia knows 3D.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

Posted 01/29/2014 01:05 PM   
Greetings! Late to the party as well, and I don't post here much, but this thread needs as many responses as possible. I saw the new driver notification pop up last night on my PC, and first thing being first, went to the release highlights to see if I cared about this release. Then I read the 3D Vision profile changes and almost shat a hole through my chair as my eyes bugged out. "WHAT? THEY FIXED THESE GAMES THEMSELVES?" I may have even said out loud, not sure. In suspicious disbelief, I made a beeline for this forum assuming it would be lit up, to see what was actually going on, which of course landed me here. As I read the first page, at first my honest reaction was that my heart sank a little. Nonetheless, ambivalence turned eventually into appreciation that nVidia: A) Has not actually abandoned this tech B) Is communicating with us on this very forum, which is a sight for sore eyes alone C) Has at least tried to to "something". I sincerely hope this means that they have a vision going forward (a 3D Vision at that yuk yuk) I saw the AC4 screenshots, and my first impression (not having tried it) was that it's better than nothing, but the first screenie looks odd - the definition on the scene is actually decent but that 2D cardboard Kenway looks really distracting. I still plan to give it a go and hopefully it's more useful than 2D. I've played a good amount of the game in 2D because it's plain fun, using triple screen to sort of make me feel better about playing in 2D :P Thanks Steve @ nVidia for being here and answering questions, it's fantastic. One question I've always had: This might seem very simplistic and probably is because I'm not a rendering expert by any means, but why can't the drivers actually let the entire scene render and then do it again with the offset, and use that method to give us true stereoscopy? Even if certain objects are cheating and rendering with no depth information; wouldn't the geometry for each eye still be correct? Hope this makes sense.... If it was this obvious I guess it would've been done by now though :P But, nVidia, I'll leave you with one thought: The first time I went into my local retailer and saw a machine set up there running 3D Vision, I walked over and put your gen 1 glasses on, and the store had Half Life 2 running. I couldn't believe what I was seeing - all of a sudden these made up worlds had come to life, as if they actually existed. I knew that I would be making a purchase very soon. Not long after, I made that purchase, and strutted through my front door carrying that 22" Samsung box and a 3D Vision box, anticipating what WoW (don't judge I used to love it LOL) was going to look like. Again, I was blown away, couldn't believe my eyes - everything was now right in front of me in glorious 3D - I waved at the air amazed as my dragon mount hovered in front of my screen (even though that damn sky is still at the wrong depth dang it) Those first days were probably wasted far more on looking at everything than actually playing any game. As time went on it became clear that the solution wasn't without it's issues, but I always hoped for improvements, most of which never came, and yet I still invested in 3DV2 when it came out - nicer glasses, bigger Asus 27", little to no loss in brightness - great! But now many games getting released were not working well with 3DV. Helix to the rescue I guess. My point is that you have a product nobody else is doing even this well, (Rift notwithstanding yet), and you have customers that love the product and pay silly amounts of money to be at the front edge of gaming tech; but we also have to do a lot of research and rely on passionate and highly talented community members to make YOUR tech usable much of the time. A premiere tech should have premiere support, please stop just catering to the lowest common denominator. After these years especially, convergence should be accessible be default, and explained in the start-up tutorial when 3DV is activated. Why hide a massively important feature for example? Toggle for this new rendering mode: YES - 3DV users like options Have the rating system reflect this new mode: YES - don't deceive us or new customers Provide SDK for community fixes of shaders: HECK YES - how much money have to spent on this new pseudo-solution when people here and elsewhere will do it, and actually have better fixes out for some games? I would genuinely (not being glib) be interested to know why this is the case that someone like Helix can fix a game but nVidia can't? If it's a legal issue, I'd like an official confirmation of that but I just can't see any other reason. That's about it, thanks for reading, and thanks for posting here, and thanks for the progress with the new drivers.
Greetings!

Late to the party as well, and I don't post here much, but this thread needs as many responses as possible.

I saw the new driver notification pop up last night on my PC, and first thing being first, went to the release highlights to see if I cared about this release.

Then I read the 3D Vision profile changes and almost shat a hole through my chair as my eyes bugged out.

"WHAT? THEY FIXED THESE GAMES THEMSELVES?" I may have even said out loud, not sure.

In suspicious disbelief, I made a beeline for this forum assuming it would be lit up, to see what was actually going on, which of course landed me here.

As I read the first page, at first my honest reaction was that my heart sank a little. Nonetheless, ambivalence turned eventually into appreciation that nVidia:

A) Has not actually abandoned this tech
B) Is communicating with us on this very forum, which is a sight for sore eyes alone
C) Has at least tried to to "something".

I sincerely hope this means that they have a vision going forward (a 3D Vision at that yuk yuk)

I saw the AC4 screenshots, and my first impression (not having tried it) was that it's better than nothing, but the first screenie looks odd - the definition on the scene is actually decent but that 2D cardboard Kenway looks really distracting. I still plan to give it a go and hopefully it's more useful than 2D. I've played a good amount of the game in 2D because it's plain fun, using triple screen to sort of make me feel better about playing in 2D :P

Thanks Steve @ nVidia for being here and answering questions, it's fantastic.

One question I've always had:
This might seem very simplistic and probably is because I'm not a rendering expert by any means, but why can't the drivers actually let the entire scene render and then do it again with the offset, and use that method to give us true stereoscopy? Even if certain objects are cheating and rendering with no depth information; wouldn't the geometry for each eye still be correct? Hope this makes sense.... If it was this obvious I guess it would've been done by now though :P

But, nVidia, I'll leave you with one thought:

The first time I went into my local retailer and saw a machine set up there running 3D Vision, I walked over and put your gen 1 glasses on, and the store had Half Life 2 running. I couldn't believe what I was seeing - all of a sudden these made up worlds had come to life, as if they actually existed. I knew that I would be making a purchase very soon. Not long after, I made that purchase, and strutted through my front door carrying that 22" Samsung box and a 3D Vision box, anticipating what WoW (don't judge I used to love it LOL) was going to look like. Again, I was blown away, couldn't believe my eyes - everything was now right in front of me in glorious 3D - I waved at the air amazed as my dragon mount hovered in front of my screen (even though that damn sky is still at the wrong depth dang it) Those first days were probably wasted far more on looking at everything than actually playing any game.


As time went on it became clear that the solution wasn't without it's issues, but I always hoped for improvements, most of which never came, and yet I still invested in 3DV2 when it came out - nicer glasses, bigger Asus 27", little to no loss in brightness - great! But now many games getting released were not working well with 3DV. Helix to the rescue I guess.

My point is that you have a product nobody else is doing even this well, (Rift notwithstanding yet), and you have customers that love the product and pay silly amounts of money to be at the front edge of gaming tech; but we also have to do a lot of research and rely on passionate and highly talented community members to make YOUR tech usable much of the time.

A premiere tech should have premiere support, please stop just catering to the lowest common denominator. After these years especially, convergence should be accessible be default, and explained in the start-up tutorial when 3DV is activated. Why hide a massively important feature for example?

Toggle for this new rendering mode: YES - 3DV users like options

Have the rating system reflect this new mode: YES - don't deceive us or new customers

Provide SDK for community fixes of shaders: HECK YES - how much money have to spent on this new pseudo-solution when people here and elsewhere will do it, and actually have better fixes out for some games? I would genuinely (not being glib) be interested to know why this is the case that someone like Helix can fix a game but nVidia can't? If it's a legal issue, I'd like an official confirmation of that but I just can't see any other reason.

That's about it, thanks for reading, and thanks for posting here, and thanks for the progress with the new drivers.

Core i7 920 @ 3.6Ghz, 6GB 3 Channel, SLi GTX670 2GB, SSD

Posted 01/29/2014 06:07 PM   
[quote="Pirateguybrush"]Only the ones specifically mentioned.[/quote] Thanks! :)
Pirateguybrush said:Only the ones specifically mentioned.


Thanks! :)

Posted 01/29/2014 06:07 PM   
While I'm experiencing non 3D related issues with these drivers (driver stopped responding and it has been restored / dwm has stopped working) I'm pretty positive about Nvidia's renewed interest in 3D Vision. I basically agree that "movie-like, PowerDVD" 3D is not as good as "pure" 3D Vision, but the new technology is pointing to the right direction, because we all know that 3D Vision's major flaws over the years have been its developer-dependent nature (always check Bioshock Infinite forums for details) combined with Directx 11's apparent hostility towards stereoscopic 3D (in spite of what Microsoft said). There's obviously room for improvements, as suggested by the previous pages of this thread, so I'm waiting for future releases with hope. After all, this is currently beta stuff. As for other directx 11 games I'd like to play in 3D, I'd say Deus EX Human Revolution may look better with Nvidia's "fake" 3D than Nixxes's own "real" 3D. Sleeping Dogs may work better as well, as the "good" rating on the 3D compatibility list is a bit exaggerated. The Bureau is another title which comes to mind and maybe L.A. Noir with Dx11 on. Generally speaking, all titles which don't support 3D well/ at all should be considered: the list of available directx 11 titles is not that long. Why not supporting Directx 9 as well?
While I'm experiencing non 3D related issues with these drivers (driver stopped responding and it has been restored / dwm has stopped working) I'm pretty positive about Nvidia's renewed interest in 3D Vision. I basically agree that "movie-like, PowerDVD" 3D is not as good as "pure" 3D Vision, but the new technology is pointing to the right direction, because we all know that 3D Vision's major flaws over the years have been its developer-dependent nature (always check Bioshock Infinite forums for details) combined with Directx 11's apparent hostility towards stereoscopic 3D (in spite of what Microsoft said). There's obviously room for improvements, as suggested by the previous pages of this thread, so I'm waiting for future releases with hope. After all, this is currently beta stuff.
As for other directx 11 games I'd like to play in 3D, I'd say Deus EX Human Revolution may look better with Nvidia's "fake" 3D than Nixxes's own "real" 3D. Sleeping Dogs may work better as well, as the "good" rating on the 3D compatibility list is a bit exaggerated. The Bureau is another title which comes to mind and maybe L.A. Noir with Dx11 on. Generally speaking, all titles which don't support 3D well/ at all should be considered: the list of available directx 11 titles is not that long. Why not supporting Directx 9 as well?

Posted 01/29/2014 06:16 PM   
The Bureau has a fix already, and it apparently looks great.
The Bureau has a fix already, and it apparently looks great.

Posted 01/29/2014 06:30 PM   
Here, some people complain that convergence does not work! THIS IS NOT SO! The problem is that objects can not go off the screen!(This is very bad for the game in the first person!) In addition, the threshold should be increased to increase the depth 3D! Dear developers! Allow objects extend beyond the screen! (How to CRYSIS 3) YES! Will halos around objects! But! This is better than 2D weapon in the hands and objects when approaching them ... Yes! And be sure to make a note that it is "CONVERSION"! And make choices: - buffer 3D / true 3D! Do not enter inexperienced users misleading ... According to fear God! Thanks for the feedback NVIDIA! God bless you!
Here, some people complain that convergence does not work! THIS IS NOT SO! The problem is that objects can not go off the screen!(This is very bad for the game in the first person!) In addition, the threshold should be increased to increase the depth 3D!
Dear developers! Allow objects extend beyond the screen! (How to CRYSIS 3) YES! Will halos around objects! But! This is better than 2D weapon in the hands and objects when approaching them ...
Yes! And be sure to make a note that it is "CONVERSION"! And make choices: - buffer 3D / true 3D! Do not enter inexperienced users
misleading ... According to fear God!
Thanks for the feedback NVIDIA! God bless you!

GTX 980 Ti, Intel core i7-7700K GPU 4.6 GHz, HMZ T-3 HTC VIVE

Posted 01/29/2014 06:47 PM   
Hi!. Thank you. I was waiting for something like this drivers for a long time... The effect is not nice... sometimes is really flat in trees or thinks inmediately near.. But im happy we can play this games keeped in a box for a long time , without headeache. A suggestion if i can doit, is there are not any programmer of yours, that can study the helyx´s dll used in Bioshock 3, to make something with it? Anyway, Welcome again to the world of 3d Gamers Nvidia, Please, don´t let us alone again please... By the way , sorry for my bad english...
Hi!.
Thank you. I was waiting for something like this drivers for a long time...
The effect is not nice... sometimes is really flat in trees or thinks inmediately near..
But im happy we can play this games keeped in a box for a long time , without headeache.
A suggestion if i can doit, is there are not any programmer of yours, that can study the helyx´s dll
used in Bioshock 3, to make something with it?
Anyway, Welcome again to the world of 3d Gamers Nvidia, Please, don´t let us alone again please...
By the way , sorry for my bad english...

Posted 01/29/2014 08:17 PM   
Hello all, am I the only one who is having serious performance issues with these new drivers and 3d profiles?
Hello all, am I the only one who is having serious performance issues with these new drivers and 3d profiles?

Intel 7700k @ 4.2Ghz / 32GB @ 3200
Asus Z270 / 2 x Evga 1070
4 x Samsung 840 Raid 0
4 x Samsung 850 Pro Raid 0
Samsung 950 Pro
Epson 5040UB 3DTVPlay

Posted 01/29/2014 08:55 PM   
[quote="mgriggs22"]Hello all, am I the only one who is having serious performance issues with these new drivers and 3d profiles?[/quote] I don't know if you've read through this whole thread, but apparently some were having the same issues but it was because they hadn't rebooted after the driver install. You might try that if you haven't already.
mgriggs22 said:Hello all, am I the only one who is having serious performance issues with these new drivers and 3d profiles?


I don't know if you've read through this whole thread, but apparently some were having the same issues but it was because they hadn't rebooted after the driver install. You might try that if you haven't already.

|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64

Posted 01/29/2014 11:50 PM   
  10 / 17    
Scroll To Top