Nvidia 3d vision surround worth the upgrade with current gen cards?
Hey everyone, new to the forums. I would really like to get some input on what settings everyone is using for 3d surround and with what GPUs (including older gen so I can get a reference of performance)? I am currently gaming in 3d on one monitor and love it, but now I'm starting to get the itch to move to 3d surround. I know it's takes a strong system to run it, but I'm ok with turning down the settings some. I'm currently using 2x GTX 770 classified in sli. I usually play BF4, Crysis 3, Metro LL, Far Cry and Dirt 3 (many others but these are the more graphical intense ones...) So what settings are you all having to turn down to to achieve acceptable frame rates with also acceptable graphics quality at 1080p 3d surround? Include the GPUs as well. Is it even worth the upgrade with current gen cards? Thanks in advanced!!
Hey everyone, new to the forums. I would really like to get some input on what settings everyone is using for 3d surround and with what GPUs (including older gen so I can get a reference of performance)? I am currently gaming in 3d on one monitor and love it, but now I'm starting to get the itch to move to 3d surround. I know it's takes a strong system to run it, but I'm ok with turning down the settings some. I'm currently using 2x GTX 770 classified in sli. I usually play BF4, Crysis 3, Metro LL, Far Cry and Dirt 3 (many others but these are the more graphical intense ones...)

So what settings are you all having to turn down to to achieve acceptable frame rates with also acceptable graphics quality at 1080p 3d surround? Include the GPUs as well. Is it even worth the upgrade with current gen cards? Thanks in advanced!!

#1
Posted 05/19/2014 01:12 PM   
I´m using GTX 780 SLI @ 3D Vision Surround. You`ll need as much power as you get. Metro LL for example with low settings drops sometimes to a framrate of 30-35 in outer areas. BF3 with high settings and 2*MSAA is stable on 60 fps Vsync. Grid 2 with Medium-high settings also 60 fps on Vsync stable without drops, also Crysis 3. I recommend at least 2* GTX 780 SLI. To be honest ... it`s time to say goodbye from 4*MSAA and Ultra Settings @ hardware killing games using 3D Vision Surround @ 5760*1080 ... but believe me, it is worth ... 100%. Sorry for bad English ... this isn`t my mother tongue.
I´m using GTX 780 SLI @ 3D Vision Surround.
You`ll need as much power as you get.

Metro LL for example with low settings drops sometimes to a framrate of 30-35 in outer areas.
BF3 with high settings and 2*MSAA is stable on 60 fps Vsync.
Grid 2 with Medium-high settings also 60 fps on Vsync stable without drops, also Crysis 3.

I recommend at least 2* GTX 780 SLI. To be honest ... it`s time to say goodbye from 4*MSAA and Ultra Settings @ hardware killing games using 3D Vision Surround @ 5760*1080 ... but believe me, it is worth ... 100%.

Sorry for bad English ... this isn`t my mother tongue.
#2
Posted 05/19/2014 03:30 PM   
If you're looking for a "bigger" 3d experience, it's worth considering a projector if you have the space.
If you're looking for a "bigger" 3d experience, it's worth considering a projector if you have the space.

#3
Posted 05/19/2014 03:38 PM   
Using my 2D surround setup as a reference you can't compare big image through projector with a surround setup. 50cm from an insane fov brings you into the game. As far as I have read a 3D projector brings the game out of the screen significantly. High depth, high convergence. One way to make a big screen small is to sit very far from it. You can't make a valid comparison as the 3D effect changes with viewing distance and viewing distance changes depending on screen setup. 3D surround is the most demanding and pricy setup. Sorry for unstructured post. Just added points as they occured.
Using my 2D surround setup as a reference you can't compare big image through projector with a surround setup.

50cm from an insane fov brings you into the game.

As far as I have read a 3D projector brings the game out of the screen significantly.
High depth, high convergence.

One way to make a big screen small is to sit very far from it.

You can't make a valid comparison as the 3D effect changes with viewing distance and viewing distance changes depending on screen setup.

3D surround is the most demanding and pricy setup.

Sorry for unstructured post. Just added points as they occured.

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

#4
Posted 05/19/2014 06:53 PM   
Definitely consider a projector. Surround would be cool too, though I think you'll get even more immersion from a projector, and you'll actually be get better performance, since you'll be playing at 720p. [quote="Pirateguybrush"]If you're looking for a "bigger" 3d experience, it's worth considering a projector if you have the space.[/quote]I've noticed that when I stand 2-3m away from my monitor, the 3D depth gets really awesome. Would you say that what I'm seeing is comparable to the depth on a projector? I played Brothers: Tale of Two Sons when I was sick last year, and it was the most amazing 3D experience I've ever had. But now I'm thinking that that might have been simply because I was sick and sitting 2m away in my sofa bed while playing. [quote="ronrebell"]Metro LL for example with low settings drops sometimes to a framrate of 30-35 in outer areas.[/quote]Wow. And that's with a system that's almost as good as is currently possible. Even if you upgraded to 780tis and a 4770k, that'd probably only give you an extra 5ps or so. As much as I'd love surround, I don't think I'd ever do it, for that reason. I guess it depends on where an individual's priorities lie - mine tend to lie with high framerate. I just wish that gaming hardware didn't always feel like it's lagging behind the demands of the actual games.
Definitely consider a projector. Surround would be cool too, though I think you'll get even more immersion from a projector, and you'll actually be get better performance, since you'll be playing at 720p.

Pirateguybrush said:If you're looking for a "bigger" 3d experience, it's worth considering a projector if you have the space.
I've noticed that when I stand 2-3m away from my monitor, the 3D depth gets really awesome. Would you say that what I'm seeing is comparable to the depth on a projector?

I played Brothers: Tale of Two Sons when I was sick last year, and it was the most amazing 3D experience I've ever had. But now I'm thinking that that might have been simply because I was sick and sitting 2m away in my sofa bed while playing.

ronrebell said:Metro LL for example with low settings drops sometimes to a framrate of 30-35 in outer areas.
Wow. And that's with a system that's almost as good as is currently possible. Even if you upgraded to 780tis and a 4770k, that'd probably only give you an extra 5ps or so.

As much as I'd love surround, I don't think I'd ever do it, for that reason. I guess it depends on where an individual's priorities lie - mine tend to lie with high framerate.

I just wish that gaming hardware didn't always feel like it's lagging behind the demands of the actual games.

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

#5
Posted 05/20/2014 12:25 AM   
A projector experience is a little bit different than Surround, because of the size of the objects. I ran a 3 CRT Surround setup for awhile, and it was indeed terrific. But, I prefer the projector experience, because it makes it more seamless and immersive. When playing Dead Space, I get Isacc slightly outside of the screen, in the room. No edge clipping to throw off the illusion. And, necromorphs at actually 6 feet tall is quite impressive. When I ran Surround, it was a different experience, not as lifelike. Monitor bezels were annoying though, and gave a picture frame aspect that I don't have with projector. More like looking into a picture. This was before I'd discovered the wonders of Convergence though, so perhaps it's comparable. In terms of arc-seconds of visual acuity, an up close monitor is roughly comparable to a far away projector.
A projector experience is a little bit different than Surround, because of the size of the objects. I ran a 3 CRT Surround setup for awhile, and it was indeed terrific.

But, I prefer the projector experience, because it makes it more seamless and immersive. When playing Dead Space, I get Isacc slightly outside of the screen, in the room. No edge clipping to throw off the illusion. And, necromorphs at actually 6 feet tall is quite impressive.

When I ran Surround, it was a different experience, not as lifelike. Monitor bezels were annoying though, and gave a picture frame aspect that I don't have with projector. More like looking into a picture.

This was before I'd discovered the wonders of Convergence though, so perhaps it's comparable. In terms of arc-seconds of visual acuity, an up close monitor is roughly comparable to a far away projector.

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

#6
Posted 05/20/2014 07:03 AM   
In terms of depth, I'd say I actually feel like I get more depth from sitting in front of a monitor, when compared to sitting a few metres from my projector screen. I say this because I can't seem to focus properly on things that are very far out of screen depth without a little discomfort, no matter where that screen is located. Which seems strange to me, as I can look at my hand in front of my face and focus on that perfectly well, but if I adjust the convergence on my projector so something is an arms' length away from my face, it's almost impossible to focus on. The net result of this is when using my monitor, I can have things be much closer to my face than I could with a projector. Interestingly, with my current setup (projector onto a wall, screen size about 113 inches, sitting about 3m away), the actual proportion of my vision that it takes up is only slightly greater than when I'm sitting at my monitor. However the 3d effect on a projector is still very strong, and the size element works quite nicely (as bo3b has described).
In terms of depth, I'd say I actually feel like I get more depth from sitting in front of a monitor, when compared to sitting a few metres from my projector screen. I say this because I can't seem to focus properly on things that are very far out of screen depth without a little discomfort, no matter where that screen is located. Which seems strange to me, as I can look at my hand in front of my face and focus on that perfectly well, but if I adjust the convergence on my projector so something is an arms' length away from my face, it's almost impossible to focus on.

The net result of this is when using my monitor, I can have things be much closer to my face than I could with a projector.

Interestingly, with my current setup (projector onto a wall, screen size about 113 inches, sitting about 3m away), the actual proportion of my vision that it takes up is only slightly greater than when I'm sitting at my monitor.

However the 3d effect on a projector is still very strong, and the size element works quite nicely (as bo3b has described).

#7
Posted 05/20/2014 08:26 AM   
I also can't focus on anything that pops out too much. I always have to use very low convergence in most games, otherwise things start to look broken and split in two. Some people say that they prefer third person games because you can crank the convergence up. But I find the opposite: in 3rd person games I have to set the convergence real low because there's always the odd object or NPC that juts right into the camera and stresses my eyes. btw, how do you find sitting at a monitor compared to looking at the same monitor from far away? [quote="Pirateguybrush"]Interestingly, with my current setup (projector onto a wall, screen size about 113 inches, sitting about 3m away), the actual proportion of my vision that it takes up is only slightly greater than when I'm sitting at my monitor. [/quote]I think your eyes know the difference though. Imagine looking at a faraway mountain, compared to looking at that same mountain on a postcard at your face. Technically, they could be the same size on your retina, but somehow I think the real mountain would still seem bigger. I'm sure there are more visual cues involved than the just the amount of space it takes up on your retina. [quote="bo3b"]A projector experience is a little bit different than Surround, because of the size of the objects. I ran a 3 CRT Surround setup for awhile, and it was indeed terrific. But, I prefer the projector experience, because it makes it more seamless and immersive. When playing Dead Space, I get Isacc slightly outside of the screen, in the room. No edge clipping to throw off the illusion. And, necromorphs at actually 6 feet tall is quite impressive. When I ran Surround, it was a different experience, not as lifelike. Monitor bezels were annoying though, and gave a picture frame aspect that I don't have with projector. More like looking into a picture. [/quote] I tried surround only briefly, because I happened to have three monitors anyway. But the monitors were all different models, sizes, resolutions, and even aspect ratios. It was horrible. I tried Dishonored, and I literally could barely get out of the first room because I was so disoriented. The mismatched monitors didn't help, but neither did the bezels and crazy distorted FOV on the side screens. I definitely don't recommend doing what I did! If going surround, I think getting the best monitors for the job is probably a must. Small bezels, identical colour characteristics, and nice flexible mounts so that they can really come out at almost a perpendicular angle to the main monitor.
I also can't focus on anything that pops out too much. I always have to use very low convergence in most games, otherwise things start to look broken and split in two.

Some people say that they prefer third person games because you can crank the convergence up. But I find the opposite: in 3rd person games I have to set the convergence real low because there's always the odd object or NPC that juts right into the camera and stresses my eyes.

btw, how do you find sitting at a monitor compared to looking at the same monitor from far away?

Pirateguybrush said:Interestingly, with my current setup (projector onto a wall, screen size about 113 inches, sitting about 3m away), the actual proportion of my vision that it takes up is only slightly greater than when I'm sitting at my monitor.
I think your eyes know the difference though. Imagine looking at a faraway mountain, compared to looking at that same mountain on a postcard at your face. Technically, they could be the same size on your retina, but somehow I think the real mountain would still seem bigger. I'm sure there are more visual cues involved than the just the amount of space it takes up on your retina.

bo3b said:A projector experience is a little bit different than Surround, because of the size of the objects. I ran a 3 CRT Surround setup for awhile, and it was indeed terrific.

But, I prefer the projector experience, because it makes it more seamless and immersive. When playing Dead Space, I get Isacc slightly outside of the screen, in the room. No edge clipping to throw off the illusion. And, necromorphs at actually 6 feet tall is quite impressive.

When I ran Surround, it was a different experience, not as lifelike. Monitor bezels were annoying though, and gave a picture frame aspect that I don't have with projector. More like looking into a picture.



I tried surround only briefly, because I happened to have three monitors anyway. But the monitors were all different models, sizes, resolutions, and even aspect ratios. It was horrible. I tried Dishonored, and I literally could barely get out of the first room because I was so disoriented. The mismatched monitors didn't help, but neither did the bezels and crazy distorted FOV on the side screens.

I definitely don't recommend doing what I did! If going surround, I think getting the best monitors for the job is probably a must. Small bezels, identical colour characteristics, and nice flexible mounts so that they can really come out at almost a perpendicular angle to the main monitor.

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

#8
Posted 05/20/2014 10:16 AM   
I have tested it all at home: Projector (121"-screen), 3DTV (60"-screen), Monitor-Single, 3D Vision Full HD 3D Surround (3 x 27" monitors). I even took a day off just to test it side-by-side so I could finally decide which would be the overall most immersive way to enjoy glorious 3D for gaming. I ended up with the Sony HMZ (first HMZ-T1, then HMZ-T2, now HMZ-T3) because honestly it combines the best of all worlds (yes you have to invest 10 minutes to modify it so you can wear it comfortably). Unfortunately most people are not willing to even invest those few minutes to get themselves what I think is the paradise for 3D gaming (ok 1080p would be even better).......at least until the Oculus retail version is released. But then this one is the most immersive way (at least for me) for gaming in 3D. The HMZ gives you the huge percepted screen of the projector (some say they don't have this perception - for me it definitely works), it gives you a very good field of view, it gives you the popping colours of an OLED-screen and it has absolutely no distracting bezels which totally took me out of the immersion when trying 3D Vision Surround. Beside "720p only" (and that is the crucial point for many) the HMZ for me is the best of both worlds (projector and 3D Vision Surround)!
I have tested it all at home: Projector (121"-screen), 3DTV (60"-screen), Monitor-Single, 3D Vision Full HD 3D Surround (3 x 27" monitors). I even took a day off just to test it side-by-side so I could finally decide which would be the overall most immersive way to enjoy glorious 3D for gaming.
I ended up with the Sony HMZ (first HMZ-T1, then HMZ-T2, now HMZ-T3) because honestly it combines the best of all worlds (yes you have to invest 10 minutes to modify it so you can wear it comfortably). Unfortunately most people are not willing to even invest those few minutes to get themselves what I think is the paradise for 3D gaming (ok 1080p would be even better).......at least until the Oculus retail version is released. But then this one is the most immersive way (at least for me) for gaming in 3D.

The HMZ gives you the huge percepted screen of the projector (some say they don't have this perception - for me it definitely works), it gives you a very good field of view, it gives you the popping colours of an OLED-screen and it has absolutely no distracting bezels which totally took me out of the immersion when trying 3D Vision Surround.

Beside "720p only" (and that is the crucial point for many) the HMZ for me is the best of both worlds (projector and 3D Vision Surround)!

#9
Posted 05/20/2014 11:39 AM   
Scroll To Top