Search information about EDID for 3DVision on LG OLED 4K 55EF950V (55EF9500)
12 / 32
Here you go it joker EDID with the the Proper Data, Color, HDR and Audio Block for 55UH8500.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/y1c5ucabebuyxgd/acermod4kMOD.inf
Finally received and tested my 55E6 (2016) OLED TV. I really was not anticipating much change from my older 55EF9500 (2015) TV, but I am surprised by the both its greater perceived 3D depth (using same settings), and the increased resolution at this increased depth, in the games I briefly tested. Still using joker18's original EDID mod, since I am not using HDMI for audio data.
I highly recommend getting one of these displays, while they are still being sold...
Finally received and tested my 55E6 (2016) OLED TV. I really was not anticipating much change from my older 55EF9500 (2015) TV, but I am surprised by the both its greater perceived 3D depth (using same settings), and the increased resolution at this increased depth, in the games I briefly tested. Still using joker18's original EDID mod, since I am not using HDMI for audio data.
I highly recommend getting one of these displays, while they are still being sold...
Is it normal for passive 3d vision, using an edid override, to give significantly lower fps than regular active 3d vision?
In a couple of games I have tested (SWTOR and DAO), I am getting roughly 2/3 the fps in passive 3d.
E.g - Where I am getting 60 fps in 2d mode, I will get 30 fps in active 3d vision (as expected), 25 fps in tridef, and about 20 fps in passive 3d vision.
It doesn't seem right to me that the extra step of interleaving the left and right eye images would be so expensive?
Is it normal for passive 3d vision, using an edid override, to give significantly lower fps than regular active 3d vision?
In a couple of games I have tested (SWTOR and DAO), I am getting roughly 2/3 the fps in passive 3d.
E.g - Where I am getting 60 fps in 2d mode, I will get 30 fps in active 3d vision (as expected), 25 fps in tridef, and about 20 fps in passive 3d vision.
It doesn't seem right to me that the extra step of interleaving the left and right eye images would be so expensive?
Did you use same game rendering size in all your tests, or make any other changes? Data interleave (or other format changes like SBS and TAB) should not create the performance change that you are reporting. I have observed comparable performance between 3D Vision and Ignition, for the games I tested previously.
Did you use same game rendering size in all your tests, or make any other changes? Data interleave (or other format changes like SBS and TAB) should not create the performance change that you are reporting. I have observed comparable performance between 3D Vision and Ignition, for the games I tested previously.
Yep, exact same settings and resolution.
I didn't think it looked right.
Interestingly, before I hit cntrl t to activate passive 3d vision, the performance is exactly the same as active 3d vision, 30 fps in the above example. After hitting cntrl t I get a drop down to 20fps.
Interestingly, before I hit cntrl t to activate passive 3d vision, the performance is exactly the same as active 3d vision, 30 fps in the above example. After hitting cntrl t I get a drop down to 20fps.
[quote="davegl1234"]Is it normal for passive 3d vision, using an edid override, to give significantly lower fps than regular active 3d vision?
In a couple of games I have tested (SWTOR and DAO), I am getting roughly 2/3 the fps in passive 3d.
E.g - Where I am getting 60 fps in 2d mode, I will get 30 fps in active 3d vision (as expected), 25 fps in tridef, and about 20 fps in passive 3d vision.
It doesn't seem right to me that the extra step of interleaving the left and right eye images would be so expensive?[/quote]
You are probably using different resolutions. There is no other explanation for performance difference between 3dvision and passive
davegl1234 said:Is it normal for passive 3d vision, using an edid override, to give significantly lower fps than regular active 3d vision?
In a couple of games I have tested (SWTOR and DAO), I am getting roughly 2/3 the fps in passive 3d.
E.g - Where I am getting 60 fps in 2d mode, I will get 30 fps in active 3d vision (as expected), 25 fps in tridef, and about 20 fps in passive 3d vision.
It doesn't seem right to me that the extra step of interleaving the left and right eye images would be so expensive?
You are probably using different resolutions. There is no other explanation for performance difference between 3dvision and passive
Intel i7 8086K
Gigabyte GTX 1080Ti Aorus Extreme
DDR4 2x8gb 3200mhz Cl14
TV LG OLED65E6V
Avegant Glyph
Windows 10 64bits
Is it normal for fps to drop (or gpu usage to increase if still at 60 fps) when activating 3d via cntrl+t?
I just checked and it doesnt seem to with active 3d vision (i.e whether or not 3d is shown, if enabled in the control you get half the performance as the two images are being rendered anyway). Hitting cntrl+t doesnt affect fps.
This isnt what im seeing in passive 3d...i get the halving of fps by having 3d enabled in the control panel, then a further 40% when hitting cntrl+t.
Is it normal for fps to drop (or gpu usage to increase if still at 60 fps) when activating 3d via cntrl+t?
I just checked and it doesnt seem to with active 3d vision (i.e whether or not 3d is shown, if enabled in the control you get half the performance as the two images are being rendered anyway). Hitting cntrl+t doesnt affect fps.
This isnt what im seeing in passive 3d...i get the halving of fps by having 3d enabled in the control panel, then a further 40% when hitting cntrl+t.
Ok, maybe I'm not explaining what I'm seeing very well.
I have actually been looking at gpu usage, rather than fps, which during my investigations the games have been locked at 60 fps.
Everything else has been identical (resolution, game settings etc).
In active 3d vision, gpu usage is at 30% in 2d mode, 60% in 3d mode (effectively halving performance - if I was at 100% in 2d mode, i would be getting 30 fps in 3d mode, roughly).
In passive 3d vision, gpu is at 30% in 2d mode and roughly 80% in 3d mode (so way more taxing). Tridef sits in the middle at about 70% gpu usage.
In passive mode, when I open the game with 3d selected in the control panel, the 3d effect is 'hidden' by default, and gpu usage is at 60%; when I hit cntrl+t to activate it, gpu usage goes up to roughly 80%. Active 3d vision remains at 60% gpu usage, regardless of whether 3d is hidden/shown by cntrl+t.
I.e passive 3d vision is of the same performance as active when 3d is 'hidden', but activated in the control panel, but way more taxing when 3d is 'shown'.
Ok, maybe I'm not explaining what I'm seeing very well.
I have actually been looking at gpu usage, rather than fps, which during my investigations the games have been locked at 60 fps.
Everything else has been identical (resolution, game settings etc).
In active 3d vision, gpu usage is at 30% in 2d mode, 60% in 3d mode (effectively halving performance - if I was at 100% in 2d mode, i would be getting 30 fps in 3d mode, roughly).
In passive 3d vision, gpu is at 30% in 2d mode and roughly 80% in 3d mode (so way more taxing). Tridef sits in the middle at about 70% gpu usage.
In passive mode, when I open the game with 3d selected in the control panel, the 3d effect is 'hidden' by default, and gpu usage is at 60%; when I hit cntrl+t to activate it, gpu usage goes up to roughly 80%. Active 3d vision remains at 60% gpu usage, regardless of whether 3d is hidden/shown by cntrl+t.
I.e passive 3d vision is of the same performance as active when 3d is 'hidden', but activated in the control panel, but way more taxing when 3d is 'shown'.
I use HDMI checkerboard (3DTV Play) or the Acer EDID override (Passive) for my Samsung UN55HU9000 and the benchmarks are the same.
Tridef is slower when user's profile are used but tridef with most official profiles I get the same results as 3D Vision.
Except
Dark Souls 3 and Fallout 4
He asked this question in another thread.
I asked him what game(s)? What are his specs?
Here's his answer, it will probably help a little with the discussion
[quote="davegl1234"]Apologies, I wasn't particularly clear.
Im talking in terms of fps.
Ive had the same regular 3d vision > tridef > optimized for 3d vision in two games i've tried (SWTOR and Dragon Age Origins)
Windows 10, 1080 SLI, latest driver (378.78)[/quote]
BTW it's Optomized for Nvidia GeForce, not optimized for 3d vision http://www.nvidia.com/object/optimized-for-geforce-3d-overview.html and it's always a line interlace format that is output when accessing Nvidia's Stereoscopic drivers via this solution.
zig11727 is accessing Nvidia's steroscopic drivers via 3D Vision, you are not. So I've no idea what you mean when you're saying that you're using passive at one moment and 3D Vision the next?
So are you saying you are using Checkerboard? Because you keep saying "active 3D Vision" and really aren't being very clear
Also after using TriDef, it's a good idea to reboot, so that any interaction between it and 3D Vision, is completely terminated.
zig11727 is accessing Nvidia's steroscopic drivers via 3D Vision, you are not. So I've no idea what you mean when you're saying that you're using passive at one moment and 3D Vision the next?
So are you saying you are using Checkerboard? Because you keep saying "active 3D Vision" and really aren't being very clear
Also after using TriDef, it's a good idea to reboot, so that any interaction between it and 3D Vision, is completely terminated.
I have a 3d vision monitor for active, and an lg hdtv for passive (edid override).
Basically, gpu usage doubles on the active monitor, when gaming in 3d, but trebles on the passive tv. Im pretty sure this isnt right and something else is causing it.
Ill give completely uninstalling tridef a go, thanks.
I have a 3d vision monitor for active, and an lg hdtv for passive (edid override).
Basically, gpu usage doubles on the active monitor, when gaming in 3d, but trebles on the passive tv. Im pretty sure this isnt right and something else is causing it.
Ill give completely uninstalling tridef a go, thanks.
No need to uninstall TriDef, I never said that.
I haven't used TriDef in quite awhile, but when I did use it, I had to reboot my PC when I was done playing and switching back to Nvidia's stereoscopic drivers. Otherwise, there would be a performance hit because TriDef was still running in the background. Simply killing open processes, didn't seem to resolve it. Only a reboot seemed to suffice.
Also, I'm pretty certain that your active monitor is not 4K.
FFS, if it's 1080P, you do realize that running your 4K display is equivalent to running "4" 1080P displays. That's more than 3D Vision Surround, so yah, there would be a performance difference
[img]http://i.imgur.com/bng5aLZ.jpg[/img]
Vs
[img]http://www.nvidia.com/content/3d-vision/images/3d-surround/multiple-displays.jpg[/img]
Vs your 1080P monitor? No idea what you have, as once again, you fail to give details, perhaps it's 1440P?
[img]http://static.digit.in/fckeditor/uploads/acer1.jpg[/img]
I haven't used TriDef in quite awhile, but when I did use it, I had to reboot my PC when I was done playing and switching back to Nvidia's stereoscopic drivers. Otherwise, there would be a performance hit because TriDef was still running in the background. Simply killing open processes, didn't seem to resolve it. Only a reboot seemed to suffice.
Also, I'm pretty certain that your active monitor is not 4K.
FFS, if it's 1080P, you do realize that running your 4K display is equivalent to running "4" 1080P displays. That's more than 3D Vision Surround, so yah, there would be a performance difference
Vs
Vs your 1080P monitor? No idea what you have, as once again, you fail to give details, perhaps it's 1440P?
It is indeed 1440p (asus rog swift), but that doesnt change the fact that in one instance gpu usage is doubling and in the other trebbling v 2d on each lcd.
Also, for a more direct comparison, i have used 1440p on the hdtv in passive mode, via gedesato upscaling from 1440p (giving me the exact same gpu usage in 2d vs my pc monitor, but significantly more in 3d), and also i can render on my hdtv in 1440p passive 3d, which i have done, it just sits with black borders in the center of my screen (and gives the same result).
It is indeed 1440p (asus rog swift), but that doesnt change the fact that in one instance gpu usage is doubling and in the other trebbling v 2d on each lcd.
Also, for a more direct comparison, i have used 1440p on the hdtv in passive mode, via gedesato upscaling from 1440p (giving me the exact same gpu usage in 2d vs my pc monitor, but significantly more in 3d), and also i can render on my hdtv in 1440p passive 3d, which i have done, it just sits with black borders in the center of my screen (and gives the same result).
http://www.mediafire.com/file/y1c5ucabebuyxgd/acermod4kMOD.inf
My video card is week. But I'll Wait for the new 1080 Ti to come out to get it, and will keep this baby handy!
I highly recommend getting one of these displays, while they are still being sold...
In a couple of games I have tested (SWTOR and DAO), I am getting roughly 2/3 the fps in passive 3d.
E.g - Where I am getting 60 fps in 2d mode, I will get 30 fps in active 3d vision (as expected), 25 fps in tridef, and about 20 fps in passive 3d vision.
It doesn't seem right to me that the extra step of interleaving the left and right eye images would be so expensive?
I didn't think it looked right.
Interestingly, before I hit cntrl t to activate passive 3d vision, the performance is exactly the same as active 3d vision, 30 fps in the above example. After hitting cntrl t I get a drop down to 20fps.
You are probably using different resolutions. There is no other explanation for performance difference between 3dvision and passive
Intel i7 8086K
Gigabyte GTX 1080Ti Aorus Extreme
DDR4 2x8gb 3200mhz Cl14
TV LG OLED65E6V
Avegant Glyph
Windows 10 64bits
I just checked and it doesnt seem to with active 3d vision (i.e whether or not 3d is shown, if enabled in the control you get half the performance as the two images are being rendered anyway). Hitting cntrl+t doesnt affect fps.
This isnt what im seeing in passive 3d...i get the halving of fps by having 3d enabled in the control panel, then a further 40% when hitting cntrl+t.
http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/chtiblue/album/530b52d4cb85770d6e000049/3Dvision with 55" LG OLED EG920 interlieved 3D (3840x2160) overide mode, GTX 2080 Ti XC Ultra EVGA, core i5 @4.3GHz, 16Gb@2130, windows 7&10 64bit, Dolby Atmos 5.1.4 Marantz 6010 AVR
I have actually been looking at gpu usage, rather than fps, which during my investigations the games have been locked at 60 fps.
Everything else has been identical (resolution, game settings etc).
In active 3d vision, gpu usage is at 30% in 2d mode, 60% in 3d mode (effectively halving performance - if I was at 100% in 2d mode, i would be getting 30 fps in 3d mode, roughly).
In passive 3d vision, gpu is at 30% in 2d mode and roughly 80% in 3d mode (so way more taxing). Tridef sits in the middle at about 70% gpu usage.
In passive mode, when I open the game with 3d selected in the control panel, the 3d effect is 'hidden' by default, and gpu usage is at 60%; when I hit cntrl+t to activate it, gpu usage goes up to roughly 80%. Active 3d vision remains at 60% gpu usage, regardless of whether 3d is hidden/shown by cntrl+t.
I.e passive 3d vision is of the same performance as active when 3d is 'hidden', but activated in the control panel, but way more taxing when 3d is 'shown'.
Tridef is slower when user's profile are used but tridef with most official profiles I get the same results as 3D Vision.
Except
Dark Souls 3 and Fallout 4
Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7 32GB Ram i9-9900K GigaByte Aorus Extreme Gaming 2080TI (single) Game Blaster Z Windows 10 X64 build #17763.195 Define R6 Blackout Case Corsair H110i GTX Sandisk 1TB (OS) SanDisk 2TB SSD (Games) Seagate EXOs 8 and 12 TB drives Samsung UN46c7000 HD TV Samsung UN55HU9000 UHD TVCurrently using ACER PASSIVE EDID override on 3D TVs LG 55
I asked him what game(s)? What are his specs?
Here's his answer, it will probably help a little with the discussion
BTW it's Optomized for Nvidia GeForce, not optimized for 3d vision http://www.nvidia.com/object/optimized-for-geforce-3d-overview.html and it's always a line interlace format that is output when accessing Nvidia's Stereoscopic drivers via this solution.
zig11727 is accessing Nvidia's steroscopic drivers via 3D Vision, you are not. So I've no idea what you mean when you're saying that you're using passive at one moment and 3D Vision the next?
So are you saying you are using Checkerboard? Because you keep saying "active 3D Vision" and really aren't being very clear
Also after using TriDef, it's a good idea to reboot, so that any interaction between it and 3D Vision, is completely terminated.
Basically, gpu usage doubles on the active monitor, when gaming in 3d, but trebles on the passive tv. Im pretty sure this isnt right and something else is causing it.
Ill give completely uninstalling tridef a go, thanks.
I haven't used TriDef in quite awhile, but when I did use it, I had to reboot my PC when I was done playing and switching back to Nvidia's stereoscopic drivers. Otherwise, there would be a performance hit because TriDef was still running in the background. Simply killing open processes, didn't seem to resolve it. Only a reboot seemed to suffice.
Also, I'm pretty certain that your active monitor is not 4K.
FFS, if it's 1080P, you do realize that running your 4K display is equivalent to running "4" 1080P displays. That's more than 3D Vision Surround, so yah, there would be a performance difference
Vs
Vs your 1080P monitor? No idea what you have, as once again, you fail to give details, perhaps it's 1440P?
Also, for a more direct comparison, i have used 1440p on the hdtv in passive mode, via gedesato upscaling from 1440p (giving me the exact same gpu usage in 2d vs my pc monitor, but significantly more in 3d), and also i can render on my hdtv in 1440p passive 3d, which i have done, it just sits with black borders in the center of my screen (and gives the same result).