Please help me fix the 60FPS @ 120Hz issue once and for all!
  2 / 6    
FRAPS is an Inejection program! Like all Programs it FAILS under some cases.. IF you really want to see it ...I can prove it to you. getting 98FPS in Stereo 3D :))) Fraps is bogus...It works 99% of the times but not always... What you are trying to do is confusing...thus the results Fraps or other injector shows...
FRAPS is an Inejection program! Like all Programs it FAILS under some cases..

IF you really want to see it ...I can prove it to you. getting 98FPS in Stereo 3D :)))
Fraps is bogus...It works 99% of the times but not always...
What you are trying to do is confusing...thus the results Fraps or other injector shows...

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#16
Posted 08/09/2013 03:27 AM   
I understand perfectly what you are saying, I do that everyday, I have a 3d tv and like all you know, we 3d tv people have to play at 24hz, 24Hz = 24 fps so it sucks, I cryed every time I played like that, and don´t know why but every time I play in 720p mode have alot of crosstalk, so to me 720p was a big no,some day I saw this V sync option and decide to turnit off and just like magic I was having 45 to 60 fps in my 3D games, no more super slow movement and was soooo much better that with vsync on, the only problem that I was still having was the mouse lag, that went away as soon as I put my TV on PC mode, so thats my story and I understand perfectly well what you are talking about my friend :) . Edit: Obviously this in no way is like all you fellows that have 3Dvision but is much better than 24HZ 24 fps, and by the way I don't know any technical stuff guys just talking about my 3d experience.
I understand perfectly what you are saying, I do that everyday, I have a 3d tv and like all you know, we 3d tv people have to play at 24hz, 24Hz = 24 fps so it sucks, I cryed every time I played like that, and don´t know why but every time I play in 720p mode have alot of crosstalk, so to me 720p was a big no,some day I saw this V sync option and decide to turnit off and just like magic I was having 45 to 60 fps in my 3D games, no more super slow movement and was soooo much better that with vsync on, the only problem that I was still having was the mouse lag, that went away as soon as I put my TV on PC mode, so thats my story and I understand perfectly well what you are talking about my friend :) .
Edit: Obviously this in no way is like all you fellows that have 3Dvision but is much better than 24HZ 24 fps, and by the way I don't know any technical stuff guys just talking about my 3d experience.

#17
Posted 08/09/2013 04:06 AM   
[quote="RAGEdemon"] I'm afraid you have the wrong end of the stick old chap, probably because of the late night... Where are you? [/quote] Im right here... where are you? Frame packing is by definition alternating LEFT-RIGHT eyes. Back and forth. Left eye shows right viewpoint/camera, right eye shows left viewpoint/camera. Which is what 3D vision uses. [img]http://www.best-3dtvs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Full-HD-3D-FHD3D-Conversion-300x149.jpg[/img] [quote="RAGEdemon"] LRLRLRLRLR 1122334455 60FPS @ 120Hz It should be: LRLRLRLRL 123456789 Proper 120FPS @ 120Hz [/quote] Impossible. Left/Right frame need to be take at same point to complete a 3D image. If they werent it would not be a correct 3d image. Things would be shifted otherwise. [CODE] LEFT EYE / \ EACH "3D FRAME" NEEDS 2 FRAMES COMPLETE 3D IMAGE \ / RIGHT EYE [/CODE] This is shown on any of the screenshots @ [url]http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/[/url] I know what your saying it looks a bit smoother with VSYNC off. [u]THATS TRUE[/u] This does not change the formula. Its always alternating left-right eyes taken at same point. Your tech. supposed to play video games with VSYNC OFF because of this UNLESS you run into artifact/screen tearing for this reason. There is NO solution for screen tearing. That is the purpose of VSYNC. Screentearing is so prevalent that most people always leave vsync ON. Its a choice, if you want to leave On or risk off. Screen tearing is much more annoying in 3D then 2D. You can play games with VSYNC OFF but most games need it ON. There is no display that supports 120HZ 3D "without vsync" because its not an accepted format. HMD's [u]can[/u] if they use a panel capable of 120HZ through HSBS format. Because each eye will be showing 120fps. At one point this was discussed by I believe John Carmack as a solution to the motion blur issue. If you don't believe me whatevez *shrug*. Dont say I am not "sober" because you disagree.
RAGEdemon said:
I'm afraid you have the wrong end of the stick old chap, probably because of the late night... Where are you?

Im right here... where are you?
Frame packing is by definition alternating LEFT-RIGHT eyes. Back and forth. Left eye shows right viewpoint/camera, right eye shows left viewpoint/camera. Which is what 3D vision uses.
Image
RAGEdemon said:
LRLRLRLRLR
1122334455
60FPS @ 120Hz

It should be:
LRLRLRLRL
123456789
Proper 120FPS @ 120Hz

Impossible. Left/Right frame need to be take at same point to complete a 3D image. If they werent it would not be a correct 3d image. Things would be shifted otherwise.


LEFT EYE
/ \
EACH "3D FRAME" NEEDS 2 FRAMES COMPLETE 3D IMAGE
\ /
RIGHT EYE

This is shown on any of the screenshots @ http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/

I know what your saying it looks a bit smoother with VSYNC off. THATS TRUE
This does not change the formula. Its always alternating left-right eyes taken at same point.

Your tech. supposed to play video games with VSYNC OFF because of this UNLESS you run into artifact/screen tearing for this reason.

There is NO solution for screen tearing. That is the purpose of VSYNC. Screentearing is so prevalent that most people always leave vsync ON. Its a choice, if you want to leave On or risk off. Screen tearing is much more annoying in 3D then 2D. You can play games with VSYNC OFF but most games need it ON.

There is no display that supports 120HZ 3D "without vsync" because its not an accepted format. HMD's can if they use a panel capable of 120HZ through HSBS format. Because each eye will be showing 120fps. At one point this was discussed by I believe John Carmack as a solution to the motion blur issue.

If you don't believe me whatevez *shrug*.
Dont say I am not "sober" because you disagree.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#18
Posted 08/09/2013 04:36 AM   
[quote="RAGEdemon"] It should be: LRLRLRLRL 123456789 Proper 120FPS @ 120Hz[/quote] If I understand correctly, this is what you want to happen: *camera is moving through 3D space* -Left eye sees frame #1 *camera continues moving, and renderer redraws scene to show the new camera location -Right eye sees frame #2. I can't see how this could create workable 3D, because the left and right eye are now out of sync, since they are looking at two different scenes [u]from two different points in time[/u]. So when the brain tries to combine the images to make a 3D image, it won't be able to do it properly, because the geometry will be all wrong. EDIT: I realise that eqzitara already pointed this out above. EDIT2: Vsync causes mouse lag. Are you sure the extra smoothness you are feeling with Vsync off isn't just a more responsive mouse?
RAGEdemon said:
It should be:
LRLRLRLRL
123456789
Proper 120FPS @ 120Hz


If I understand correctly, this is what you want to happen:

*camera is moving through 3D space*
-Left eye sees frame #1
*camera continues moving, and renderer redraws scene to show the new camera location
-Right eye sees frame #2.


I can't see how this could create workable 3D, because the left and right eye are now out of sync, since they are looking at two different scenes from two different points in time. So when the brain tries to combine the images to make a 3D image, it won't be able to do it properly, because the geometry will be all wrong.



EDIT: I realise that eqzitara already pointed this out above.

EDIT2: Vsync causes mouse lag. Are you sure the extra smoothness you are feeling with Vsync off isn't just a more responsive mouse?

ImageVolnaPC.com - Tips, tweaks, performance comparisons (PhysX card, SLI scaling, etc)

#19
Posted 08/09/2013 06:16 AM   
[s]That's why NVidia pushed 120Hz. It is alternating eyes, and they are definitely out of sync as you pan around. But at 120Hz, it's small enough to not be noticeable. Less than that, and it can be a problem. It was partly for flicker, but also to minimize side effects like this. [/s]My bad. The driver does do both eyes at a specific moment in time. No panning in between. The 2nd eye is buffered for frame sequential, but it is the view from that eye and that moment in time. For vSync, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that vSync is always on when running in 3D automatic mode. If a game makes their own UI and 3D code, then you can disable vSync and get tearing.
That's why NVidia pushed 120Hz. It is alternating eyes, and they are definitely out of sync as you pan around. But at 120Hz, it's small enough to not be noticeable. Less than that, and it can be a problem. It was partly for flicker, but also to minimize side effects like this.
My bad. The driver does do both eyes at a specific moment in time. No panning in between. The 2nd eye is buffered for frame sequential, but it is the view from that eye and that moment in time.


For vSync, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that vSync is always on when running in 3D automatic mode. If a game makes their own UI and 3D code, then you can disable vSync and get tearing.

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

#20
Posted 08/09/2013 06:57 AM   
[quote="RAGEdemon"][quote="D-Man11"]Doesn't it go 112233445566 simply because each frame has to be rendered twice. Once for each eye, so you get a 3D perspective. If each frame was different, your brain could not properly process the object from both views because the 2nd view is changed and the object is moved/changed.[/quote] No, I'm afraid that is a huge misconception, probably the same misconception that the driver writers believed. Try it yourself. Force vSync to OFF, and check that you are getting 120fps in a game by using a utility such as FRAPS. You will notice much smoother gameplay and 3D will be perfectly fine - even more immerse due to higher fluidity I would say... if it wasn't for the tearing :)[/quote]I'm not at all sure this is a misconception. The Vireio driver for the Oculus Rift does injection like NVidia. The Rift is a SBS display, and thus you'd expect them to do both eyes at once. The original Vireio driver did not in fact work that way. It would draw one eye, leaving the other eye with last-frame data, then alternate to the other eye. I don't know for certain that this caused negative side effects, but I can say with assurance that the overall Vireio experience was not pleasant. Now, there are a lot of other people looking at this on MTBS, and they felt it was a sufficiently big problem that they completely blew up the driver, and rewrote it from scratch to do both eyes at once. I'm not saying this proof one way or the other, but there are some plenty smart people over there that deliberately set the project back by 3 months to solve this problem. It's worth taking a look at their discussions.
RAGEdemon said:
D-Man11 said:Doesn't it go 112233445566 simply because each frame has to be rendered twice. Once for each eye, so you get a 3D perspective. If each frame was different, your brain could not properly process the object from both views because the 2nd view is changed and the object is moved/changed.


No, I'm afraid that is a huge misconception, probably the same misconception that the driver writers believed.

Try it yourself. Force vSync to OFF, and check that you are getting 120fps in a game by using a utility such as FRAPS. You will notice much smoother gameplay and 3D will be perfectly fine - even more immerse due to higher fluidity I would say... if it wasn't for the tearing :)
I'm not at all sure this is a misconception.


The Vireio driver for the Oculus Rift does injection like NVidia. The Rift is a SBS display, and thus you'd expect them to do both eyes at once. The original Vireio driver did not in fact work that way. It would draw one eye, leaving the other eye with last-frame data, then alternate to the other eye.

I don't know for certain that this caused negative side effects, but I can say with assurance that the overall Vireio experience was not pleasant.

Now, there are a lot of other people looking at this on MTBS, and they felt it was a sufficiently big problem that they completely blew up the driver, and rewrote it from scratch to do both eyes at once.

I'm not saying this proof one way or the other, but there are some plenty smart people over there that deliberately set the project back by 3 months to solve this problem. It's worth taking a look at their discussions.

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

#21
Posted 08/09/2013 07:09 AM   
Good morning all, OK,I believe it would be best to discuss this in stages. I believe that everyone here is of the opinion that at 120Hz, in S3D, the game is showing 120FPS. I believe that this is a misconception. I may of course be wrong, and I welcome being proven so. On the other hand, I also invite you to keep an open mind. So, let me first show evidence that the game is only showing 60FPS, not 120fps. Lets boot up some games which allow me to get 120FPS in 2D. A lot of games are hard locked to 60FPS so we have to be careful about what we choose. Mass Effect 1/2/3, for example are bad choices as they cap at 60FPS. First, we will measure the GPU usage in 2D. Then let's toggle S3D, and measure the GPU usage for comparison. In theory, the GPU usage will be ~30% higher due to S3D. But what if the opposite is true? What if by enabling S3D, the GPU usage significantly lowers? Would one then concede that yes, the GPUs are not working as hard as when they were in 2D? GPU usages are measured by MSI Afterburner's On Screen Display server... Painkiller: 120FPS 2D, GPU1 = 60%, GPU2 = 40%. Total GPU = 100 S3D, GPU1 = 33%, GPU2 = 32%. Total GPU = 65 Dirt3: 120FPS 2D, GPU1 = 65%, GPU2 = 65%. Total GPU = 130 S3D, GPU1 = 55%, GPU2 = 55%. Total GPU = 110 Trackmania Forever: 120FPS 2D, GPU1 = 45%, GPU2 = 40%. Total GPU = 85 S3D, GPU1 = 31%, GPU2 = 19%. Total GPU = 50 Crysis 3: 120FPS 2D, GPU1 = 90%, GPU2 = 70%. Total GPU = 160 S3D, GPU1 = 37%, GPU2 = 50%. Total GPU = 87 OK, now, from the above games, we can clearly see that the GPU usage is significantly lower in S3D, compared to 2D. If the game was running at 120FPS, you would expect that the GPU usage would be at least exactly the same, but most probably ~30% higher due to the demand that S3D puts onto the GPU. If I remember correctly, nVidia uses a Z buffer to shift perspective of a given scene. What the 3D vision driver does is it shifts the perspective left, and outputs to the left eye, then it shifts the perspective of the [u]same scene[/u] right, and outputs to the right eye. This is of course less GPU intensive than calculating the right eye perspective from a completely new scene. Yes, it's 120Hz, and 120FPS, but every frame is being cloned, effectively outputting only 60 real new FPS. What I am proposing is that one does not need the other eye to get the same frame. If the other eye gets a frame which is a little progressed in time, it will not notice the difference, because by the time the next eye swap occurs, that frame will be new too. Perhaps I can give a better analogy... Imagine there is a movie which has been filmed using 2 different cameras. The movie is filmed at 25fps by both cameras, but the cameras are not recording the same frames. The first camera is recording a frame at: 0.00s 0.04s 0.08s 0.12s 0.16s The second camera is recording a frame at: 0.02s 0.06s 0.10s 0.14s 0.18s Now, you have a special HMD which allows each eye piece to have its own input signal. The left eye piece is going to be getting images from the first camera at 25fps. The second eye piece is going to be getting images from the second camera at 25fps, but they will be different frames. When you view through both eye pieces simultaneously, you will in fact be seeing 50fps, not 25! Your brain won't even notice the fps-; as far as it's concerned, each eye is getting fluid sensory data from which it can't pick apart one frame from the next. Now, would you rather hook up the same camera to both eyes so that you will only be limited to 25fps?
Good morning all,

OK,I believe it would be best to discuss this in stages.

I believe that everyone here is of the opinion that at 120Hz, in S3D, the game is showing 120FPS.

I believe that this is a misconception. I may of course be wrong, and I welcome being proven so. On the other hand, I also invite you to keep an open mind.

So, let me first show evidence that the game is only showing 60FPS, not 120fps.

Lets boot up some games which allow me to get 120FPS in 2D. A lot of games are hard locked to 60FPS so we have to be careful about what we choose. Mass Effect 1/2/3, for example are bad choices as they cap at 60FPS. First, we will measure the GPU usage in 2D. Then let's toggle S3D, and measure the GPU usage for comparison.

In theory, the GPU usage will be ~30% higher due to S3D.

But what if the opposite is true? What if by enabling S3D, the GPU usage significantly lowers?

Would one then concede that yes, the GPUs are not working as hard as when they were in 2D?

GPU usages are measured by MSI Afterburner's On Screen Display server...

Painkiller:
120FPS
2D, GPU1 = 60%, GPU2 = 40%. Total GPU = 100
S3D, GPU1 = 33%, GPU2 = 32%. Total GPU = 65

Dirt3:
120FPS
2D, GPU1 = 65%, GPU2 = 65%. Total GPU = 130
S3D, GPU1 = 55%, GPU2 = 55%. Total GPU = 110

Trackmania Forever:
120FPS
2D, GPU1 = 45%, GPU2 = 40%. Total GPU = 85
S3D, GPU1 = 31%, GPU2 = 19%. Total GPU = 50

Crysis 3:
120FPS
2D, GPU1 = 90%, GPU2 = 70%. Total GPU = 160
S3D, GPU1 = 37%, GPU2 = 50%. Total GPU = 87

OK, now, from the above games, we can clearly see that the GPU usage is significantly lower in S3D, compared to 2D. If the game was running at 120FPS, you would expect that the GPU usage would be at least exactly the same, but most probably ~30% higher due to the demand that S3D puts onto the GPU.

If I remember correctly, nVidia uses a Z buffer to shift perspective of a given scene. What the 3D vision driver does is it shifts the perspective left, and outputs to the left eye, then it shifts the perspective of the same scene right, and outputs to the right eye. This is of course less GPU intensive than calculating the right eye perspective from a completely new scene.

Yes, it's 120Hz, and 120FPS, but every frame is being cloned, effectively outputting only 60 real new FPS.

What I am proposing is that one does not need the other eye to get the same frame. If the other eye gets a frame which is a little progressed in time, it will not notice the difference, because by the time the next eye swap occurs, that frame will be new too.

Perhaps I can give a better analogy...

Imagine there is a movie which has been filmed using 2 different cameras. The movie is filmed at 25fps by both cameras, but the cameras are not recording the same frames. The first camera is recording a frame at:
0.00s 0.04s 0.08s 0.12s 0.16s

The second camera is recording a frame at:
0.02s 0.06s 0.10s 0.14s 0.18s

Now, you have a special HMD which allows each eye piece to have its own input signal.

The left eye piece is going to be getting images from the first camera at 25fps. The second eye piece is going to be getting images from the second camera at 25fps, but they will be different frames.

When you view through both eye pieces simultaneously, you will in fact be seeing 50fps, not 25! Your brain won't even notice the fps-; as far as it's concerned, each eye is getting fluid sensory data from which it can't pick apart one frame from the next.

Now, would you rather hook up the same camera to both eyes so that you will only be limited to 25fps?

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.

#22
Posted 08/09/2013 11:58 AM   
[quote="bo3b"][s]That's why NVidia pushed 120Hz. It is alternating eyes, and they are definitely out of sync as you pan around. But at 120Hz, it's small enough to not be noticeable. Less than that, and it can be a problem. It was partly for flicker, but also to minimize side effects like this. [/s]My bad. The driver does do both eyes at a specific moment in time. No panning in between. The 2nd eye is buffered for frame sequential, but it is the view from that eye and that moment in time. For vSync, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that vSync is always on when running in 3D automatic mode. If a game makes their own UI and 3D code, then you can disable vSync and get tearing.[/quote] Thank you for the confirmation that we are not perceiving true 120FPS bo3b. I was beginning to think that I was going a little crazy ;-) What you say about the Vireio driver is fascinating. Would you kindly link me to the discussion? Of course there is no doubt that getting the same frames (albeit from different perspectives), would be superior to getting different frames, but I wonder how it would compare to 3D vision where frames are being doubled. i.e. would one prefer 120fps with discomfort from different progressive frames to each eye, or 60fps with the same frame for both eyes. Given the option that I can't have both, I am confident that I would prefer the 120fps option. What about the Oculus rift? What would be the refresh rate/maximum allowable FPS to each eye? Is it 60? I wonder if they are aware 120 would be measurably better... IIRC they plan to use AMOLED screens which are easily able to handle high refresh rates... I have not done necessary legwork to support this claim though.
bo3b said:That's why NVidia pushed 120Hz. It is alternating eyes, and they are definitely out of sync as you pan around. But at 120Hz, it's small enough to not be noticeable. Less than that, and it can be a problem. It was partly for flicker, but also to minimize side effects like this.
My bad. The driver does do both eyes at a specific moment in time. No panning in between. The 2nd eye is buffered for frame sequential, but it is the view from that eye and that moment in time.


For vSync, I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that vSync is always on when running in 3D automatic mode. If a game makes their own UI and 3D code, then you can disable vSync and get tearing.


Thank you for the confirmation that we are not perceiving true 120FPS bo3b. I was beginning to think that I was going a little crazy ;-)

What you say about the Vireio driver is fascinating. Would you kindly link me to the discussion?

Of course there is no doubt that getting the same frames (albeit from different perspectives), would be superior to getting different frames, but I wonder how it would compare to 3D vision where frames are being doubled. i.e. would one prefer 120fps with discomfort from different progressive frames to each eye, or 60fps with the same frame for both eyes. Given the option that I can't have both, I am confident that I would prefer the 120fps option.

What about the Oculus rift? What would be the refresh rate/maximum allowable FPS to each eye?

Is it 60? I wonder if they are aware 120 would be measurably better... IIRC they plan to use AMOLED screens which are easily able to handle high refresh rates... I have not done necessary legwork to support this claim though.

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.

#23
Posted 08/09/2013 12:24 PM   
RAGEdemon I'm not here to call you stupid but taking left and right eye frames at different points in time introduces significant problems. 3D Vision supports passive displays where both images are viewed simultaniously. Tell me how good your solution will work then. If you are doing frame sequential at 120hz or passive interlieved at 60hz you will display at most 60hz for each eye. 3D is basically 60hz until the where displays are capable at showing 3D at higher frequency. In the ideal case where the gameworld updates at 120hz and everytime the shutter glasses open you see the eyeposition as updated at 120hz it would probably work pretty well but your idea fails under too many circumstances to be used in general.
RAGEdemon I'm not here to call you stupid but taking left and right eye frames at different points in time introduces significant problems. 3D Vision supports passive displays where both images are viewed simultaniously. Tell me how good your solution will work then. If you are doing frame sequential at 120hz or passive interlieved at 60hz you will display at most 60hz for each eye. 3D is basically 60hz until the where displays are capable at showing 3D at higher frequency.

In the ideal case where the gameworld updates at 120hz and everytime the shutter glasses open you see the eyeposition as updated at 120hz it would probably work pretty well but your idea fails under too many circumstances to be used in general.

Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?

donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com

#24
Posted 08/09/2013 12:37 PM   
[quote="eqzitara"][quote="RAGEdemon"] I'm afraid you have the wrong end of the stick old chap, probably because of the late night... Where are you? [/quote] Im right here... where are you? If you don't believe me whatevez *shrug*. Dont say I am not "sober" because you disagree.[/quote] Hi eqzitara, I am sorry if I have offended you. It was not my intention. I do not recall using the quoted word "sober". I was asking which part of the world you were in. I am in England, and at the time of the post, it was 3am. I can't have been too clear at that time at night :) No hard feelings!
eqzitara said:
RAGEdemon said:
I'm afraid you have the wrong end of the stick old chap, probably because of the late night... Where are you?

Im right here... where are you?
If you don't believe me whatevez *shrug*.
Dont say I am not "sober" because you disagree.


Hi eqzitara,

I am sorry if I have offended you. It was not my intention. I do not recall using the quoted word "sober".

I was asking which part of the world you were in. I am in England, and at the time of the post, it was 3am. I can't have been too clear at that time at night :)

No hard feelings!

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.

#25
Posted 08/09/2013 12:40 PM   
[quote="Flugan"]RAGEdemon I'm not here to call you stupid but taking left and right eye frames at different points in time introduces significant problems. 3D Vision supports passive displays where both images are viewed simultaniously. Tell me how good your solution will work then. If you are doing frame sequential at 120hz or passive interlieved at 60hz you will display at most 60hz for each eye. 3D is basically 60hz until the where displays are capable at showing 3D at higher frequency. In the ideal case where the gameworld updates at 120hz and everytime the shutter glasses open you see the eyeposition as updated at 120hz it would probably work pretty well but your idea fails under too many circumstances to be used in general.[/quote] Hi Flugan, What a strange response... "I'm not here to call you stupid but" passive display such as 3D vision discover is already at 120fps. You just need a 120Hz capable display. If you have one, boot up 3d vision Discover, and a program such as fraps or any other FPS measuring utility, and see for yourself. Ideally, as someone above pointed out, fraps isn't the best. Try looking at the GPU usage instead :)
Flugan said:RAGEdemon I'm not here to call you stupid but taking left and right eye frames at different points in time introduces significant problems. 3D Vision supports passive displays where both images are viewed simultaniously. Tell me how good your solution will work then. If you are doing frame sequential at 120hz or passive interlieved at 60hz you will display at most 60hz for each eye. 3D is basically 60hz until the where displays are capable at showing 3D at higher frequency.

In the ideal case where the gameworld updates at 120hz and everytime the shutter glasses open you see the eyeposition as updated at 120hz it would probably work pretty well but your idea fails under too many circumstances to be used in general.


Hi Flugan,

What a strange response... "I'm not here to call you stupid but" passive display such as 3D vision discover is already at 120fps. You just need a 120Hz capable display.

If you have one, boot up 3d vision Discover, and a program such as fraps or any other FPS measuring utility, and see for yourself.

Ideally, as someone above pointed out, fraps isn't the best. Try looking at the GPU usage instead :)

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.

#26
Posted 08/09/2013 12:52 PM   
Are you Calling 3D Vision discover a passive 3D solution. I would call it anaglyph. I was mostly pointing out that some of the screens supported by the 3D Vision renderer outputs two images at the same time and applying your rendering scheme and using one of those would not work well. There are also far too many games which can't sustain 120hz even in 2D.
Are you Calling 3D Vision discover a passive 3D solution. I would call it anaglyph.

I was mostly pointing out that some of the screens supported by the 3D Vision renderer outputs two images at the same time and applying your rendering scheme and using one of those would not work well.

There are also far too many games which can't sustain 120hz even in 2D.

Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?

donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com

#27
Posted 08/09/2013 12:55 PM   
[quote="Flugan"]Are you Calling 3D Vision discover a passive 3D solution. I would call it anaglyph. I was mostly pointing out that some of the screens supported by the 3D Vision renderer outputs two images at the same time and applying your rendering scheme and using one of those would not work well. There are also far too many games which can't sustain 120hz even in 2D.[/quote] Hi Flugan, Anaglyph is a passive solution, yes. I believe that the specific displays you are referring to are limited to 60Hz regardless. If they were 120Hz, i believe they too would benefit, assuming my brain's logic circuits are working fine ;-) Remember that even on a passive display, the pixels designated for one eye are independently moving from that of the other eye. At every real frame change, one eye will have different scene information than the other eye. In the next frame, the second eye will catch up. What I am proposing is that each frame "leap frogs" over the other eye's frame, instead of playing catch up. It shouldn't be much worse. IIRC, on a passive display, what you gain in FPS/refresh rate, you lose in resolution as it is halved.
Flugan said:Are you Calling 3D Vision discover a passive 3D solution. I would call it anaglyph.

I was mostly pointing out that some of the screens supported by the 3D Vision renderer outputs two images at the same time and applying your rendering scheme and using one of those would not work well.

There are also far too many games which can't sustain 120hz even in 2D.


Hi Flugan,

Anaglyph is a passive solution, yes. I believe that the specific displays you are referring to are limited to 60Hz regardless. If they were 120Hz, i believe they too would benefit, assuming my brain's logic circuits are working fine ;-)

Remember that even on a passive display, the pixels designated for one eye are independently moving from that of the other eye. At every real frame change, one eye will have different scene information than the other eye. In the next frame, the second eye will catch up.

What I am proposing is that each frame "leap frogs" over the other eye's frame, instead of playing catch up. It shouldn't be much worse.

IIRC, on a passive display, what you gain in FPS/refresh rate, you lose in resolution as it is halved.

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.

#28
Posted 08/09/2013 01:08 PM   
I see where you are coming from now. On my 120Hz monitor in 2D, I get 120Hz/120 FPS to both eyes. But then when I switch to 3D I get 60 frames per eye, but they are duplicate frames. So now instead of getting 120 individual frames like in 2D, I get 60 individual Frames total. I always assumed this was expected behavior. Monitors are bound to the laws of physics and can only refresh the screen so many times per second. So, I've always understood that Refresh and FPS were tied together. That while the videocard is capable of drawing frames in excess of the refresh rate, they were simply dumped/unused. So perhaps what you are experiencing is 1133557799, or something to that effect? You are making it so that you are getting 120 individual FPS, but at the same time only seeing 60x2 while another 60 are being dumped/unused? 2D= 120 individual FPS = 120 individual FPS to both eyes = nothing dumped/unused 3D = 60 individual FPS = 60 invidual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = nothing dumped/unused or 3D = 120 individual FPS = 60 individual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = another 60 indidual frames (drawn twice) that go unused/discarded I'd imagine the discarded frames would be a mix of even and odd frames
I see where you are coming from now.

On my 120Hz monitor in 2D, I get 120Hz/120 FPS to both eyes. But then when I switch to 3D I get 60 frames per eye, but they are duplicate frames. So now instead of getting 120 individual frames like in 2D, I get 60 individual Frames total.

I always assumed this was expected behavior. Monitors are bound to the laws of physics and can only refresh the screen so many times per second. So, I've always understood that Refresh and FPS were tied together. That while the videocard is capable of drawing frames in excess of the refresh rate, they were simply dumped/unused.

So perhaps what you are experiencing is 1133557799, or something to that effect? You are making it so that you are getting 120 individual FPS, but at the same time only seeing 60x2 while another 60 are being dumped/unused?

2D= 120 individual FPS = 120 individual FPS to both eyes = nothing dumped/unused

3D = 60 individual FPS = 60 invidual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = nothing dumped/unused

or

3D = 120 individual FPS = 60 individual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = another 60 indidual frames (drawn twice) that go unused/discarded

I'd imagine the discarded frames would be a mix of even and odd frames

#29
Posted 08/09/2013 01:47 PM   
[quote="D-Man11"]I see where you are coming from now. On my 120Hz monitor in 2D, I get 120Hz/120 FPS to both eyes. But then when I switch to 3D I get 60 frames per eye, but they are duplicate frames. So now instead of getting 120 individual frames like in 2D, I get 60 individual Frames total. I always assumed this was expected behavior. Monitors are bound to the laws of physics and can only refresh the screen so many times per second. So, I've always understood that Refresh and FPS were tied together. That while the videocard is capable of drawing frames in excess of the refresh rate, they were simply dumped/unused. So perhaps what you are experiencing is 1133557799, or something to that effect? You are making it so that you are getting 120 individual FPS, but at the same time only seeing 60x2 while another 60 are being dumped/unused? 2D= 120 individual FPS = 120 individual FPS to both eyes = nothing dumped/unused 3D = 60 individual FPS = 60 invidual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = nothing dumped/unused or 3D = 120 individual FPS = 60 individual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = another 60 indidual frames (drawn twice) that go unused/discarded[/quote] Hi D-Man11, You have a good grasp of what I am saying. I just want to clarify that in 3D, true 120FPS is possible. I think what you believe (and may possibly be correct in doing so) is that each frame needs to be duplicated for the other eye (from a different perspective) to be able to see 3D. What I am saying is that this is most likely not the case, i.e. both eyes do not need to see the same frame (from a different perspective) to be able to perceive 3D. Each frame for each eye would be progressive, instead of one eye duplicating the other eye. I think that there is a widely held belief from people here that 3D only works when you see 2 images which are the same from 2 perspectives. This cannot be the case as with 3D vision, one eye is always getting one frame which is a little different in progress than the other. It is true that you won't be able to take a JPS screenshot of this. This would only work where there is progressive motion. I think it would be helpful if we stop thinking of S3D as a set of JPS images in sequence. If we think of a video feed at 60fps to one eye (where your brain cannot pick each frame apart), and another video feed at 60fps to the other eye. The frames used in these video feeds do not need to be the same because your brain cannot pick out individual frames. As far as the brain is concerned, you are receiving fluid motion to both eyes.
D-Man11 said:I see where you are coming from now.

On my 120Hz monitor in 2D, I get 120Hz/120 FPS to both eyes. But then when I switch to 3D I get 60 frames per eye, but they are duplicate frames. So now instead of getting 120 individual frames like in 2D, I get 60 individual Frames total.

I always assumed this was expected behavior. Monitors are bound to the laws of physics and can only refresh the screen so many times per second. So, I've always understood that Refresh and FPS were tied together. That while the videocard is capable of drawing frames in excess of the refresh rate, they were simply dumped/unused.

So perhaps what you are experiencing is 1133557799, or something to that effect? You are making it so that you are getting 120 individual FPS, but at the same time only seeing 60x2 while another 60 are being dumped/unused?

2D= 120 individual FPS = 120 individual FPS to both eyes = nothing dumped/unused

3D = 60 individual FPS = 60 invidual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = nothing dumped/unused

or

3D = 120 individual FPS = 60 individual frames to each eye (drawn twice) = another 60 indidual frames (drawn twice) that go unused/discarded


Hi D-Man11,

You have a good grasp of what I am saying. I just want to clarify that in 3D, true 120FPS is possible.

I think what you believe (and may possibly be correct in doing so) is that each frame needs to be duplicated for the other eye (from a different perspective) to be able to see 3D.

What I am saying is that this is most likely not the case, i.e. both eyes do not need to see the same frame (from a different perspective) to be able to perceive 3D.

Each frame for each eye would be progressive, instead of one eye duplicating the other eye.

I think that there is a widely held belief from people here that 3D only works when you see 2 images which are the same from 2 perspectives. This cannot be the case as with 3D vision, one eye is always getting one frame which is a little different in progress than the other.

It is true that you won't be able to take a JPS screenshot of this. This would only work where there is progressive motion.

I think it would be helpful if we stop thinking of S3D as a set of JPS images in sequence.

If we think of a video feed at 60fps to one eye (where your brain cannot pick each frame apart), and another video feed at 60fps to the other eye. The frames used in these video feeds do not need to be the same because your brain cannot pick out individual frames. As far as the brain is concerned, you are receiving fluid motion to both eyes.

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.

#30
Posted 08/09/2013 01:58 PM   
  2 / 6    
Scroll To Top