Performance hit with 3D vision vs. 3D vision discover
2 / 2
[quote name='TrekCZ' post='1042474' date='Apr 20 2010, 05:19 PM']Yes I understand, but I do not believe that it is correct statement :-)[/quote]
It is correct, trust me. I've done a ton of 3d programming and written 3D engines.
[quote name='fish99' post='1042477' date='Apr 20 2010, 04:22 PM']It is correct, trust me. I've done a ton of 3d programming and written 3D engines.[/quote]
I'm not saying it's impossible that a game could run less than half the framerate in 3D, I'm just saying in general when you're just rendering what is almost the exact same frame again, at the same resolution, there's no reason why it should take longer the 2nd time. All 3D Vision actually does is render two frames with a horizontal camera offset. Of course in a case where the 3D Vision drivers have to do something 'special', say to fix the depth of certain parts of the scene (assuming that's possible), that could cause an extra fps drop in 3D. For instance in HL2 the lazer crosshair causes a significant framerate drop.
I may try the same tests again at 1600*1200 later to see if I get a similar % drop with 3D. I'd be surprised if the % drop was more, but who knows, and I'm curious to find out. Again, I'm not saying performance doesn't vary between resolutions, I'm saying the percentage drop from turning 3D on shouldn't vary between resolutions. So-
number of pixels to render with 3D on = number of pixels to render with 3D off * 2
Remember 3D doesn't double the individual dimensions of the screen, it just renders the same area twice.
I'm not saying it's impossible that a game could run less than half the framerate in 3D, I'm just saying in general when you're just rendering what is almost the exact same frame again, at the same resolution, there's no reason why it should take longer the 2nd time. All 3D Vision actually does is render two frames with a horizontal camera offset. Of course in a case where the 3D Vision drivers have to do something 'special', say to fix the depth of certain parts of the scene (assuming that's possible), that could cause an extra fps drop in 3D. For instance in HL2 the lazer crosshair causes a significant framerate drop.
I may try the same tests again at 1600*1200 later to see if I get a similar % drop with 3D. I'd be surprised if the % drop was more, but who knows, and I'm curious to find out. Again, I'm not saying performance doesn't vary between resolutions, I'm saying the percentage drop from turning 3D on shouldn't vary between resolutions. So-
number of pixels to render with 3D on = number of pixels to render with 3D off * 2
Remember 3D doesn't double the individual dimensions of the screen, it just renders the same area twice.
I did test with Metro in one particular scene (1680x1050)
normal 82 fps
3d vision 38 fps
discover 36 fps (strange, some bug or deliberately slow)
however this is exception proving the rule, I have on tube video with avatar where it goes from 100 to 30.
-------
yep, I have tried other apps and 3d vision discover is now slower than 3d vision, nvidia had to do it deliberately, because it was not so
so even if the problem would not have quadratic complexity, nvidia marketing makes it :-)
Its also important to distinguish between single GPU and SLI when comparing Stereo 3D scaling. From what I've seen, the scaling is much better in SLI as the stereo driver does not lose as much performance to driver overhead/sync timing as its simply rendering an offset version of the same frame on both GPUs. Overall I've found single GPU with 1x280 is a miserable experience, 2x 280 is more than double the performance in many games. 1x480 is sometimes better than 2x280 but generally worst, and 2x480 is just brilliant. A good way to monitor the stereo driver's efficiency and 3D Vision scaling in games is to run Precision or Afterburner in a 2nd monitor to track GPU utilization mapped against FPS. Yes it causes the white flashes but this is more to observe differences in performance. Also with GTX 480 the flashing isn't flashing anymore, its more like a blinking. :)
Its also important to distinguish between single GPU and SLI when comparing Stereo 3D scaling. From what I've seen, the scaling is much better in SLI as the stereo driver does not lose as much performance to driver overhead/sync timing as its simply rendering an offset version of the same frame on both GPUs. Overall I've found single GPU with 1x280 is a miserable experience, 2x 280 is more than double the performance in many games. 1x480 is sometimes better than 2x280 but generally worst, and 2x480 is just brilliant. A good way to monitor the stereo driver's efficiency and 3D Vision scaling in games is to run Precision or Afterburner in a 2nd monitor to track GPU utilization mapped against FPS. Yes it causes the white flashes but this is more to observe differences in performance. Also with GTX 480 the flashing isn't flashing anymore, its more like a blinking. :)
I would imagine it's the additional load of applying color correcting shaders, the workload of splitting into stereoscopic simply must be the very same and evenwhile digging deeper and deeper in my wooden conspirancy theory box I can't find any reason why nvidia would want to deliberately do that...
I would imagine it's the additional load of applying color correcting shaders, the workload of splitting into stereoscopic simply must be the very same and evenwhile digging deeper and deeper in my wooden conspirancy theory box I can't find any reason why nvidia would want to deliberately do that...
[quote name='quadrophoeniX' post='1042572' date='Apr 20 2010, 10:32 PM']I can't find any reason why nvidia would want to deliberately do that...[/quote]
Nvidia 3d vision discover was always significantly faster than 3d vision, now it is significantly slower (it was not synced to 60 fps, now is and with additional shaders it is slower, before it was possible to have more than 60 fps with discover not it is deliberately slowed down)
Nvidia is ruled by devil marketing ... /devil.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':devil:' />
[quote name='quadrophoeniX' post='1042572' date='Apr 20 2010, 10:32 PM']I can't find any reason why nvidia would want to deliberately do that...
Nvidia 3d vision discover was always significantly faster than 3d vision, now it is significantly slower (it was not synced to 60 fps, now is and with additional shaders it is slower, before it was possible to have more than 60 fps with discover not it is deliberately slowed down)
Nvidia is ruled by devil marketing ... /devil.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':devil:' />
I have always considered SLI to NOT be cost effective, but with 3D it really sounds mandatory if you want the best gaming performance and details.
Like I said before, in 2 to 3 years I plan on doing a massive overhaul.
1. 3D TV w/ 3D shutter glasses or whatever format will be popular
2. A rebuilt desktop PC w/ SLI and two monster video cards. Whatever is the best on the market at the time
For now I'll make do with my "slow" GTX 280 which runs stuff beautifully in 2D mode but 3D mode requires some tweaking. Either way it's an effective stop gap for now and I can't go beyond 3D discover anyways.
I have always considered SLI to NOT be cost effective, but with 3D it really sounds mandatory if you want the best gaming performance and details.
Like I said before, in 2 to 3 years I plan on doing a massive overhaul.
1. 3D TV w/ 3D shutter glasses or whatever format will be popular
2. A rebuilt desktop PC w/ SLI and two monster video cards. Whatever is the best on the market at the time
For now I'll make do with my "slow" GTX 280 which runs stuff beautifully in 2D mode but 3D mode requires some tweaking. Either way it's an effective stop gap for now and I can't go beyond 3D discover anyways.
It is correct, trust me. I've done a ton of 3d programming and written 3D engines.
It is correct, trust me. I've done a ton of 3d programming and written 3D engines.
I'm afraid Trek is always 'right'...
I'm afraid Trek is always 'right'...
However it could be nice to have here some essay explaining how game performance problem is O(n) between resolutions.
However it could be nice to have here some essay explaining how game performance problem is O(n) between resolutions.
I may try the same tests again at 1600*1200 later to see if I get a similar % drop with 3D. I'd be surprised if the % drop was more, but who knows, and I'm curious to find out. Again, I'm not saying performance doesn't vary between resolutions, I'm saying the percentage drop from turning 3D on shouldn't vary between resolutions. So-
number of pixels to render with 3D on = number of pixels to render with 3D off * 2
Remember 3D doesn't double the individual dimensions of the screen, it just renders the same area twice.
I may try the same tests again at 1600*1200 later to see if I get a similar % drop with 3D. I'd be surprised if the % drop was more, but who knows, and I'm curious to find out. Again, I'm not saying performance doesn't vary between resolutions, I'm saying the percentage drop from turning 3D on shouldn't vary between resolutions. So-
number of pixels to render with 3D on = number of pixels to render with 3D off * 2
Remember 3D doesn't double the individual dimensions of the screen, it just renders the same area twice.
normal 82 fps
3d vision 38 fps
discover 36 fps (strange, some bug or deliberately slow)
however this is exception proving the rule, I have on tube video with avatar where it goes from 100 to 30.
-------
yep, I have tried other apps and 3d vision discover is now slower than 3d vision, nvidia had to do it deliberately, because it was not so
so even if the problem would not have quadratic complexity, nvidia marketing makes it :-)
normal 82 fps
3d vision 38 fps
discover 36 fps (strange, some bug or deliberately slow)
however this is exception proving the rule, I have on tube video with avatar where it goes from 100 to 30.
-------
yep, I have tried other apps and 3d vision discover is now slower than 3d vision, nvidia had to do it deliberately, because it was not so
so even if the problem would not have quadratic complexity, nvidia marketing makes it :-)
-=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
Nvidia 3d vision discover was always significantly faster than 3d vision, now it is significantly slower (it was not synced to 60 fps, now is and with additional shaders it is slower, before it was possible to have more than 60 fps with discover not it is deliberately slowed down)
Nvidia is ruled by devil marketing ...
Nvidia 3d vision discover was always significantly faster than 3d vision, now it is significantly slower (it was not synced to 60 fps, now is and with additional shaders it is slower, before it was possible to have more than 60 fps with discover not it is deliberately slowed down)
Nvidia is ruled by devil marketing ...
I have always considered SLI to NOT be cost effective, but with 3D it really sounds mandatory if you want the best gaming performance and details.
Like I said before, in 2 to 3 years I plan on doing a massive overhaul.
1. 3D TV w/ 3D shutter glasses or whatever format will be popular
2. A rebuilt desktop PC w/ SLI and two monster video cards. Whatever is the best on the market at the time
For now I'll make do with my "slow" GTX 280 which runs stuff beautifully in 2D mode but 3D mode requires some tweaking. Either way it's an effective stop gap for now and I can't go beyond 3D discover anyways.
I have always considered SLI to NOT be cost effective, but with 3D it really sounds mandatory if you want the best gaming performance and details.
Like I said before, in 2 to 3 years I plan on doing a massive overhaul.
1. 3D TV w/ 3D shutter glasses or whatever format will be popular
2. A rebuilt desktop PC w/ SLI and two monster video cards. Whatever is the best on the market at the time
For now I'll make do with my "slow" GTX 280 which runs stuff beautifully in 2D mode but 3D mode requires some tweaking. Either way it's an effective stop gap for now and I can't go beyond 3D discover anyways.