[quote="Pirateguybrush"] "3D vision on my brother's 144hz (72fps) screen is cool."
I'm pretty sure that even on a 144hz screen, 3d vision is locked to 120hz?
"I am on a 120Hz 3D projector. Currently, 3D vision only supports 60/60."
There are 120hz 3D projectors? Are they compatible with 3d vision?[/quote][/quote]
His computer didn't have fraps / msi afterburner etc installed so I was unaware of what the the frame cap was, but I presumed that it would be working at 144 as it looked smoother than my DLP. It is possible that this was due to the inherent residual image and lower brightness of LCD technology vs DLP as mentioned in my first post. I will double check the next time I see him.
In theory there shouldn't be anything stopping 3D vision from supporting 144Hz. It was supported back in the CRT days. I think nVidia only locks the low end to 60Hz but doesn't have an upper end limit... at least that would be logical. Bun nVidia aren't known for being logical... It would be cool if someone else with a 144Hz monitor could tell us here and now.
Regarding your second question, as far as I know all projectors which are DLP 3D vision ready are 120Hz projectors. Currently, I'm running on the buggy Viewsonic PJD 6531w.[/quote]
Pirateguybrush said: "3D vision on my brother's 144hz (72fps) screen is cool."
I'm pretty sure that even on a 144hz screen, 3d vision is locked to 120hz?
"I am on a 120Hz 3D projector. Currently, 3D vision only supports 60/60."
There are 120hz 3D projectors? Are they compatible with 3d vision?
His computer didn't have fraps / msi afterburner etc installed so I was unaware of what the the frame cap was, but I presumed that it would be working at 144 as it looked smoother than my DLP. It is possible that this was due to the inherent residual image and lower brightness of LCD technology vs DLP as mentioned in my first post. I will double check the next time I see him.
In theory there shouldn't be anything stopping 3D vision from supporting 144Hz. It was supported back in the CRT days. I think nVidia only locks the low end to 60Hz but doesn't have an upper end limit... at least that would be logical. Bun nVidia aren't known for being logical... It would be cool if someone else with a 144Hz monitor could tell us here and now.
Regarding your second question, as far as I know all projectors which are DLP 3D vision ready are 120Hz projectors. Currently, I'm running on the buggy Viewsonic PJD 6531w.
Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.
If you're really sensitive to input lag, you also get a nice boost with 120hz. You're essentially cutting the display's input lag in half vs 60hz.
Of course, some games have huge amounts of lag in the game engine. So it's really only limited to games that respect gameplay enough to have input lag prioritized to enable responsive control. Otherwise, it's better, but more like "doesn't suck as much".
If you're really sensitive to input lag, you also get a nice boost with 120hz. You're essentially cutting the display's input lag in half vs 60hz.
Of course, some games have huge amounts of lag in the game engine. So it's really only limited to games that respect gameplay enough to have input lag prioritized to enable responsive control. Otherwise, it's better, but more like "doesn't suck as much".
120hz is great to eliminate screen tearing that you usually get at 60hz, and your input is much more responsive at 120hz, so it looks better and feels better.
If you do a lot of competitive gaming then 120hz is the way to go, if you don't mind spending decent money on better quality (no tearing) then its also worthwhile. If you are OK with v-sync 60hz and perfectly happy, then maybe its not worth spending the money.
120hz is great to eliminate screen tearing that you usually get at 60hz, and your input is much more responsive at 120hz, so it looks better and feels better.
If you do a lot of competitive gaming then 120hz is the way to go, if you don't mind spending decent money on better quality (no tearing) then its also worthwhile. If you are OK with v-sync 60hz and perfectly happy, then maybe its not worth spending the money.
It should also be mentioned that some games are capped at 60Hz. In other cases, the games themselves might not be capped, but certain animations or effects might be, as a way to cut resource use in the engine. Actually, certain effects are often capped at much lower than 60hz. The rain ripples on the ground in Thief are the latest example that I've seen: they look like they're 20fps or something.
Either way, 120Hz is definitely worthwhile overall. If you're a hardcore competitive gamer, it's probably a must. For the rest of us, it's nice to have, but its benefits are easily trumped by 3Dvision (which you also need a 120Hz monitor for, but you won't actually see 120fps in 3D).
It should also be mentioned that some games are capped at 60Hz. In other cases, the games themselves might not be capped, but certain animations or effects might be, as a way to cut resource use in the engine. Actually, certain effects are often capped at much lower than 60hz. The rain ripples on the ground in Thief are the latest example that I've seen: they look like they're 20fps or something.
Either way, 120Hz is definitely worthwhile overall. If you're a hardcore competitive gamer, it's probably a must. For the rest of us, it's nice to have, but its benefits are easily trumped by 3Dvision (which you also need a 120Hz monitor for, but you won't actually see 120fps in 3D).
Something important that's often neglected is that with a 120Hz screen the tearing problem is largely eradicated. You can either leave v-sync off, but since you have 120 refreshes per second the size of the tears is much small and therefore tearing is much less noticeable, OR, turn v-sync on, have no tearing, and the framerate drop associated with v-sync is much much smaller since the 'wait' for a refresh is going to be smaller with 120 refreshes per second.
For this reason, I would choose to game on a 120Hz screen even if I didn't use it for 3D.
Something important that's often neglected is that with a 120Hz screen the tearing problem is largely eradicated. You can either leave v-sync off, but since you have 120 refreshes per second the size of the tears is much small and therefore tearing is much less noticeable, OR, turn v-sync on, have no tearing, and the framerate drop associated with v-sync is much much smaller since the 'wait' for a refresh is going to be smaller with 120 refreshes per second.
For this reason, I would choose to game on a 120Hz screen even if I didn't use it for 3D.
His computer didn't have fraps / msi afterburner etc installed so I was unaware of what the the frame cap was, but I presumed that it would be working at 144 as it looked smoother than my DLP. It is possible that this was due to the inherent residual image and lower brightness of LCD technology vs DLP as mentioned in my first post. I will double check the next time I see him.
In theory there shouldn't be anything stopping 3D vision from supporting 144Hz. It was supported back in the CRT days. I think nVidia only locks the low end to 60Hz but doesn't have an upper end limit... at least that would be logical. Bun nVidia aren't known for being logical... It would be cool if someone else with a 144Hz monitor could tell us here and now.
Regarding your second question, as far as I know all projectors which are DLP 3D vision ready are 120Hz projectors. Currently, I'm running on the buggy Viewsonic PJD 6531w.
Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.
Of course, some games have huge amounts of lag in the game engine. So it's really only limited to games that respect gameplay enough to have input lag prioritized to enable responsive control. Otherwise, it's better, but more like "doesn't suck as much".
If you do a lot of competitive gaming then 120hz is the way to go, if you don't mind spending decent money on better quality (no tearing) then its also worthwhile. If you are OK with v-sync 60hz and perfectly happy, then maybe its not worth spending the money.
i7 4790k @ 4.6 - 16GB RAM - 2x SLI Titan X
27" ASUS ROG SWIFT, 28" - 65" Samsung UHD8200 4k 3DTV - Oculus Rift CV1 - 34" Acer Predator X34 Ultrawide
Old kit:
i5 2500k @ 4.4 - 8gb RAM
Acer H5360BD projector
GTX 580, SLI 670, GTX 980 EVGA SC
Acer XB280HK 4k 60hz
Oculus DK2
Either way, 120Hz is definitely worthwhile overall. If you're a hardcore competitive gamer, it's probably a must. For the rest of us, it's nice to have, but its benefits are easily trumped by 3Dvision (which you also need a 120Hz monitor for, but you won't actually see 120fps in 3D).
Nzxt Phantom ; I7 4770k ; Sli Gtx 770 ; 16 Gb TridentX F3-2400
MSI z87-g45 Gaming ; Ocz Zt 750w ; Corsair h100i ; Asus vg278hr
For this reason, I would choose to game on a 120Hz screen even if I didn't use it for 3D.