Let's make a giant list of all NVIDIA 3D Vision failures.
2 / 9
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
[quote name='jenson' date='18 March 2011 - 12:41 AM' timestamp='1300434081' post='1209435']
The reason I think it's possible is based upon how a program called "Texmod" works.
That's a texture based application and would require a lot of knowledge about file management and textures. Something the average gamer doesn't kknow about or interested in. This would work for games like Dragon Age 2 where the textures seem to not be rendered properly.
But the question is are all games that exhibit these flaws due to texture problems or can some of them but related to actual geometry?
That's a texture based application and would require a lot of knowledge about file management and textures. Something the average gamer doesn't kknow about or interested in. This would work for games like Dragon Age 2 where the textures seem to not be rendered properly.
But the question is are all games that exhibit these flaws due to texture problems or can some of them but related to actual geometry?
[quote name='photios' date='18 March 2011 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1300465685' post='1209532']
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
[/quote]
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
[quote name='photios' date='18 March 2011 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1300465685' post='1209532']
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
Sorry if I was imprecise in my words. I meant "open up" as in opening up the drivers/profiles for community development. It was not a comment on your communication with the community. You have, by far, over the six or so years I've been on this forum either posting or lurking, the BEST Nvidia rep to engage. Seriously.
[/quote]
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
[quote name='Wazoo' date='17 March 2011 - 07:12 PM' timestamp='1300407165' post='1209346']
Andrew,
Sorry if I was imprecise in my words. I meant "open up" as in opening up the drivers/profiles for community development. It was not a comment on your communication with the community. You have, by far, over the six or so years I've been on this forum either posting or lurking, the BEST Nvidia rep to engage. Seriously.
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
[/quote]
Hey Andrew,
Thanks for the reply. My concern is that time is one thing you really don't have too much of with this tech. From the beginning, you were fighting naysayers who claimed (and still claim) that S3D gaming is a "fad" that will quickly fade. If you can get over that hurdle and actually get them to try it, you've got one shot to impress them otherwise back to Fry's it goes (as pointed out by Jenson in that other thread). They, unfortunately, have a loud voice; much louder then us supporters. For example, Kyle over at HardOcP.com, although he loves triple-monitor gaming, bashes S3D gaming whenever it is mentioned. I believe the only way to combat this is by getting the product as near to perfect as possible as SOON as possible. Countering to the naysayers that this 2-year-old tech just needs more time to cook is not going to help that cause.
While I respect your position that creating profiles "is hard" and "takes a trained eye", the truth of the matter is there really is no downside for opening the process to the community. Will many profiles suck? Maybe. But if there is one thing open-source/cloud-sourced software development has shown over the past several years, is that there is almost limitless, dedicated talent who will figure out almost any problem and do it for FREE out of their love for, well, doing it. I assume creating profiles is not brainless work. Yet it is hard for me to imagine that it is harder than, say, creating video compression algorithms, high-quality flight simulators, or the myriad of VERY complex applications that all thrive in the open-source community.
Thus, PLEASE make the case to the powers-that-be that it would be in Nvidia's best interest to tap into the Army of Fanatics that are the open-sources geniuses that are offering to help make this product a long-term success.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 10:22 AM' timestamp='1300468920' post='1209565']
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
Hey Andrew,
Thanks for the reply. My concern is that time is one thing you really don't have too much of with this tech. From the beginning, you were fighting naysayers who claimed (and still claim) that S3D gaming is a "fad" that will quickly fade. If you can get over that hurdle and actually get them to try it, you've got one shot to impress them otherwise back to Fry's it goes (as pointed out by Jenson in that other thread). They, unfortunately, have a loud voice; much louder then us supporters. For example, Kyle over at HardOcP.com, although he loves triple-monitor gaming, bashes S3D gaming whenever it is mentioned. I believe the only way to combat this is by getting the product as near to perfect as possible as SOON as possible. Countering to the naysayers that this 2-year-old tech just needs more time to cook is not going to help that cause.
While I respect your position that creating profiles "is hard" and "takes a trained eye", the truth of the matter is there really is no downside for opening the process to the community. Will many profiles suck? Maybe. But if there is one thing open-source/cloud-sourced software development has shown over the past several years, is that there is almost limitless, dedicated talent who will figure out almost any problem and do it for FREE out of their love for, well, doing it. I assume creating profiles is not brainless work. Yet it is hard for me to imagine that it is harder than, say, creating video compression algorithms, high-quality flight simulators, or the myriad of VERY complex applications that all thrive in the open-source community.
Thus, PLEASE make the case to the powers-that-be that it would be in Nvidia's best interest to tap into the Army of Fanatics that are the open-sources geniuses that are offering to help make this product a long-term success.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 12:12 PM' timestamp='1300468334' post='1209558']
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
[/quote]
Okay a little background info: around Geforce Driver ~195.xx, you guys added the ability of 3-way SLI and QUAD SLI to be used in 3D vision. But witnessing the GPU load graph was just terrible in games DX9, I mean you literally played COD: MW2 at about 20fps with QUAD SLI enabled and 3D Vision. A single gTX 295 in DX9 was significantly faster. Fast forward this until later when the GTX 480 came out along with 3D Vision surround, I believe 258.96 fixed 3-way SLI for 400 series owners but not for 200 series owners and certainly not for the GTX 295 in QUAD SLI 3D Vision. Now the ironic thing is that 3D Vision and QUAD SLI DOES WORK well and scales well nominally in Directx 10 (258.96 and on). With 258.96 and forward, QUAD SLI/3D Vision doesn't even engage in DX9, yet it does in DX10 and with pretty good scaling. With the 256 driver inception, someone on the driver team either accidentally turned off QUAD SLI with 3D Vision and DX9 or did so purposefully because they saw that the SLI graph was about an inch wide in DX9 and running terrible FPS, which is why you state on the 3D Vision Surround page that:
"* Please note that in the first Beta driver for 3D Vision Surround, we do not recommend running GeForce GTX 295 Quad SLI because there are bugs in the driver which may result in system instability. We will be providing a future driver update to support this configuration."
Now the issue isn't just 3D Vision surround, but present if 3D Vision is used at all. I'm not entirely sure if I got all my driver timelines above as representing when these implementation and fixes were done but I am close and close enough to give you a history of the problem.
Take these two games with the latest driver and run Geforce Driver 267.24 and the latest USB emitter drive (266.21 or whatever it is):
Metro 2033 DX10 mode: Scales great, great GPU load, you can max the game out, QUAD SLI is a beast.
Call of Duty: Black Ops: No QUAD SLI indicator pops up, yet GPU usage shows all 4 gpu's being used, but being used at around 20-30%, where DX10 is minimum 55% and nominally 70% and up. Then couple this with the issue of having SLI (any kind thereof) turned on with DLP and you have a stuttery, tunnel vision mess in DX9. You should be able to kill two birds with one stone in fixing the SLI/DLP problem (which you stated your QA team has already been able to reproduce), which really you should fix SLI in all its forms here. And to fix the DLP/SLI issue for me in DX9 and 3D BluRays, you must fix QUAD SLI too, because that's the kind of SLI I have.
Now, I'm a DLP owner, so I don't game 3D Vision surround, but IF I did I would NOT be able to do Surround with GTX 295 co-op cards anyways. Why? Because the GTX 295 co-op card has only TWO outputs. To do Surround, you need THREE outputs. Which means, that to run Surround with 295's you de facto MUST enable QUAD SLI to game at all across THREE displays. But the perfomance is just shotty and awful in DX9 with QUAD SLI/3D Vision. QUAD-SLI 2D on the other hand is perfect. No issues. So your problem is a driver one as far as I can tell with QUAD-SLI and 3D Vision.
So here's the summation:
(1)QUAD SLI does not work, at all, in DX9 and decent in DX10. Just Cause 2, Metro 2033, and to a lesser extent BFBC 2 work great.
(2)One cannot use 3D Vision Surround optimally with GTX 295 co-op cards without enabling QUAD SLI which will immediately turn us back to (1) above.
(3) One must turn off QUAD-SLI using a DLP for DX9 and 3D Blu-Rays otherwise you get the lag effect of the other image which gives a kind of tunnel vision effect along with massive eye strain.
What I'm also curious about is WHY Directx 10 does not suffer from this problem. You have a partial fix there and I'm curious as to why that is so. It seems that THAT should be a point of departure for any kind of fix. I know there are rumors that you guys are coming out with another multi-gpu card next week, so I do not want to see the 295 left in the dust as another kind of niche experiment, that goes for the 9800 gx2 as well. If you're gonna sale these beast cards, make them work right with your best product: 3D Vision. We know they work, and we know they are just driver problems.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 12:12 PM' timestamp='1300468334' post='1209558']
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
Okay a little background info: around Geforce Driver ~195.xx, you guys added the ability of 3-way SLI and QUAD SLI to be used in 3D vision. But witnessing the GPU load graph was just terrible in games DX9, I mean you literally played COD: MW2 at about 20fps with QUAD SLI enabled and 3D Vision. A single gTX 295 in DX9 was significantly faster. Fast forward this until later when the GTX 480 came out along with 3D Vision surround, I believe 258.96 fixed 3-way SLI for 400 series owners but not for 200 series owners and certainly not for the GTX 295 in QUAD SLI 3D Vision. Now the ironic thing is that 3D Vision and QUAD SLI DOES WORK well and scales well nominally in Directx 10 (258.96 and on). With 258.96 and forward, QUAD SLI/3D Vision doesn't even engage in DX9, yet it does in DX10 and with pretty good scaling. With the 256 driver inception, someone on the driver team either accidentally turned off QUAD SLI with 3D Vision and DX9 or did so purposefully because they saw that the SLI graph was about an inch wide in DX9 and running terrible FPS, which is why you state on the 3D Vision Surround page that:
"* Please note that in the first Beta driver for 3D Vision Surround, we do not recommend running GeForce GTX 295 Quad SLI because there are bugs in the driver which may result in system instability. We will be providing a future driver update to support this configuration."
Now the issue isn't just 3D Vision surround, but present if 3D Vision is used at all. I'm not entirely sure if I got all my driver timelines above as representing when these implementation and fixes were done but I am close and close enough to give you a history of the problem.
Take these two games with the latest driver and run Geforce Driver 267.24 and the latest USB emitter drive (266.21 or whatever it is):
Metro 2033 DX10 mode: Scales great, great GPU load, you can max the game out, QUAD SLI is a beast.
Call of Duty: Black Ops: No QUAD SLI indicator pops up, yet GPU usage shows all 4 gpu's being used, but being used at around 20-30%, where DX10 is minimum 55% and nominally 70% and up. Then couple this with the issue of having SLI (any kind thereof) turned on with DLP and you have a stuttery, tunnel vision mess in DX9. You should be able to kill two birds with one stone in fixing the SLI/DLP problem (which you stated your QA team has already been able to reproduce), which really you should fix SLI in all its forms here. And to fix the DLP/SLI issue for me in DX9 and 3D BluRays, you must fix QUAD SLI too, because that's the kind of SLI I have.
Now, I'm a DLP owner, so I don't game 3D Vision surround, but IF I did I would NOT be able to do Surround with GTX 295 co-op cards anyways. Why? Because the GTX 295 co-op card has only TWO outputs. To do Surround, you need THREE outputs. Which means, that to run Surround with 295's you de facto MUST enable QUAD SLI to game at all across THREE displays. But the perfomance is just shotty and awful in DX9 with QUAD SLI/3D Vision. QUAD-SLI 2D on the other hand is perfect. No issues. So your problem is a driver one as far as I can tell with QUAD-SLI and 3D Vision.
So here's the summation:
(1)QUAD SLI does not work, at all, in DX9 and decent in DX10. Just Cause 2, Metro 2033, and to a lesser extent BFBC 2 work great.
(2)One cannot use 3D Vision Surround optimally with GTX 295 co-op cards without enabling QUAD SLI which will immediately turn us back to (1) above.
(3) One must turn off QUAD-SLI using a DLP for DX9 and 3D Blu-Rays otherwise you get the lag effect of the other image which gives a kind of tunnel vision effect along with massive eye strain.
What I'm also curious about is WHY Directx 10 does not suffer from this problem. You have a partial fix there and I'm curious as to why that is so. It seems that THAT should be a point of departure for any kind of fix. I know there are rumors that you guys are coming out with another multi-gpu card next week, so I do not want to see the 295 left in the dust as another kind of niche experiment, that goes for the 9800 gx2 as well. If you're gonna sale these beast cards, make them work right with your best product: 3D Vision. We know they work, and we know they are just driver problems.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia']We absolutely support movie playback with TMT5 or PDVD10 without 3D Vision or 3DTV Play. If its not working for you, please tell me and I will investigate fixing that.[/QUOTE]
Yes but only [b]anaglyph[/b] 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a [B]FACT[/B]. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say... /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
andrewf@nvidia said:We absolutely support movie playback with TMT5 or PDVD10 without 3D Vision or 3DTV Play. If its not working for you, please tell me and I will investigate fixing that.[/QUOTE]
Yes but only anaglyph 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a FACT. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say... /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
[quote name='photios' date='18 March 2011 - 01:21 PM' timestamp='1300472490' post='1209598']
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 01:47 PM' timestamp='1300474021' post='1209615']
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
[/quote]
Yes I understand that, but I just wanted you to be aware that QUAD SLI has a unique problem of it's own with DX9 apps that predated the DLP TV issue that came up recently, it was only at that point that SLI had a common problem with TriSLI/QUAD-SLI. What I'm concerned about is that the DLP/SLI fix will just fix the problem for standard single GPUs SLI, and QUAD SLI and 3-way SLI for 200 series cards will again be left out in the cold. As I noted, QUAD SLI visual indicators do not turn on at all with DX9 and when they did before with previous older drivers prior to 258.96, the performance was horrible. I'm willing to bet that standard SLI turns on with DX9 and 3D Vision, which means you have two sets of problems here.
I WILL keep you updated on how this is fixed in the next major driver release.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 01:47 PM' timestamp='1300474021' post='1209615']
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
Yes I understand that, but I just wanted you to be aware that QUAD SLI has a unique problem of it's own with DX9 apps that predated the DLP TV issue that came up recently, it was only at that point that SLI had a common problem with TriSLI/QUAD-SLI. What I'm concerned about is that the DLP/SLI fix will just fix the problem for standard single GPUs SLI, and QUAD SLI and 3-way SLI for 200 series cards will again be left out in the cold. As I noted, QUAD SLI visual indicators do not turn on at all with DX9 and when they did before with previous older drivers prior to 258.96, the performance was horrible. I'm willing to bet that standard SLI turns on with DX9 and 3D Vision, which means you have two sets of problems here.
I WILL keep you updated on how this is fixed in the next major driver release.
[quote name='NickDvB' date='18 March 2011 - 12:28 PM' timestamp='1300472901' post='1209605']
Another one to add to the list...
Yes but only [b]anaglyph[/b] 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a [B]FACT[/B]. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say... /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
[/quote]
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
[quote name='NickDvB' date='18 March 2011 - 12:28 PM' timestamp='1300472901' post='1209605']
Another one to add to the list...
Yes but only anaglyph 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a FACT. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say... /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
[quote name='roller11' date='18 March 2011 - 07:33 PM' timestamp='1300476799' post='1209640']
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
[/quote]
I'm not sure about checkerboard mode (I can't test it) but I'm sure that Nvidia graphics card users can not enable 120Hz quad-buffer output in programs like PowerDVD10 and TMT5 on any display type without a 3dvision emitter connected. I know that ATI HD5000 and later cards support checkerboard [b]AND[/b] 120Hz ouput modes, the HD6000 cards also support HDMI 1.4. I think Nvidia owners might be able to output to HDMI 1.4 from bluray player programs without buying 3DTVplay or having an emitter connected but I'm not sure.
[quote name='roller11' date='18 March 2011 - 07:33 PM' timestamp='1300476799' post='1209640']
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
I'm not sure about checkerboard mode (I can't test it) but I'm sure that Nvidia graphics card users can not enable 120Hz quad-buffer output in programs like PowerDVD10 and TMT5 on any display type without a 3dvision emitter connected. I know that ATI HD5000 and later cards support checkerboard AND 120Hz ouput modes, the HD6000 cards also support HDMI 1.4. I think Nvidia owners might be able to output to HDMI 1.4 from bluray player programs without buying 3DTVplay or having an emitter connected but I'm not sure.
I'm not sure what you mean by "quad buffered", I just didn't want anyone to think that with a single gtx480, one cannot play Blu Ray 3D at either 1920x1080/24 Frame Pack, or, 1920x1080/60 checkerboard without 3D Vision or 3DTV Play. All that's required to do this is the appropriate geforce driver off nvidia's website.
I'm not sure what you mean by "quad buffered", I just didn't want anyone to think that with a single gtx480, one cannot play Blu Ray 3D at either 1920x1080/24 Frame Pack, or, 1920x1080/60 checkerboard without 3D Vision or 3DTV Play. All that's required to do this is the appropriate geforce driver off nvidia's website.
But to enable full resolution 1920x1080/120 output to a 3DTV (over Dual-link DVI or VGA) you would still have to buy a 3Dvision emitter and glasses, even if you can't use the glasses with the display! Actually the same is true for all pre-HDMI 1.4 DLP projector owners, ATI card users do not have this problem. /wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />
But to enable full resolution 1920x1080/120 output to a 3DTV (over Dual-link DVI or VGA) you would still have to buy a 3Dvision emitter and glasses, even if you can't use the glasses with the display! Actually the same is true for all pre-HDMI 1.4 DLP projector owners, ATI card users do not have this problem. /wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />
I think you'll find quite a few games don't have .CUR files and just use internal bitmaps instead. They might be quite critical in some games, too. Instead of taking away from the game by making it harder to see the cursor, I think you're better off taking away from the 3D pointer. Make it fairly small and somewhat transparent. If the object it is over starts to get near screen depth, either switch to a big, hollow circle or just make the 3D pointer go away entirely. That will keep the 3D pointer from making it hard to see the 2D pointer. It's still going to be on the ugly side, though.
Then there's the problem of the game's interface. If you are over that, you need to go to the UI's depth.
I think you'll find quite a few games don't have .CUR files and just use internal bitmaps instead. They might be quite critical in some games, too. Instead of taking away from the game by making it harder to see the cursor, I think you're better off taking away from the 3D pointer. Make it fairly small and somewhat transparent. If the object it is over starts to get near screen depth, either switch to a big, hollow circle or just make the 3D pointer go away entirely. That will keep the 3D pointer from making it hard to see the 2D pointer. It's still going to be on the ugly side, though.
Then there's the problem of the game's interface. If you are over that, you need to go to the UI's depth.
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
[/quote]
See now this response makes me angry. It made me angry enough that I stopped lurking and actually signed up to reply to you Andrew. Nvidia's 3D driver has been around for ten years, maybe more. I know because I used it. You guys aren't fooling anyone because everyone knows that you repackaged the old forceware 3D driver and slapped a 3D Vision label on it. For god's sakes it even uses the same test application, the same laser sight bitmaps, and even the old DX7 game profiles are still in there.
And the crazy part is that the old 3D driver actually had MORE features than 3D Vision. You guys removed the ability to set the screen size, you removed the other output types like interlaced, you removed Windows XP support, you removed OpenGL support, you removed the ability to change the glasses timing, and you removed DX7 support. What the hell were you guys thinking?
It would be nice if you guys would go download the 93.71 Forceware 3D driver, run it on XP, and then make 3D Vision have all the features that it has. If you did that you would win back all the respect I have lost for Nvidia the last few years.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='18 March 2011 - 12:22 PM' timestamp='1300468920' post='1209565']
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
See now this response makes me angry. It made me angry enough that I stopped lurking and actually signed up to reply to you Andrew. Nvidia's 3D driver has been around for ten years, maybe more. I know because I used it. You guys aren't fooling anyone because everyone knows that you repackaged the old forceware 3D driver and slapped a 3D Vision label on it. For god's sakes it even uses the same test application, the same laser sight bitmaps, and even the old DX7 game profiles are still in there.
And the crazy part is that the old 3D driver actually had MORE features than 3D Vision. You guys removed the ability to set the screen size, you removed the other output types like interlaced, you removed Windows XP support, you removed OpenGL support, you removed the ability to change the glasses timing, and you removed DX7 support. What the hell were you guys thinking?
It would be nice if you guys would go download the 93.71 Forceware 3D driver, run it on XP, and then make 3D Vision have all the features that it has. If you did that you would win back all the respect I have lost for Nvidia the last few years.
AMD Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.8GHZ
8GB RAM
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb @ 2048x1536 @ 85hz
Edimensional glasses and Nvidia 3D Vision
The reason I think it's possible is based upon how a program called "Texmod" works.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_modifying_in-game_graphics
[/quote]
That's a texture based application and would require a lot of knowledge about file management and textures. Something the average gamer doesn't kknow about or interested in. This would work for games like Dragon Age 2 where the textures seem to not be rendered properly.
But the question is are all games that exhibit these flaws due to texture problems or can some of them but related to actual geometry?
The reason I think it's possible is based upon how a program called "Texmod" works.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_modifying_in-game_graphics
That's a texture based application and would require a lot of knowledge about file management and textures. Something the average gamer doesn't kknow about or interested in. This would work for games like Dragon Age 2 where the textures seem to not be rendered properly.
But the question is are all games that exhibit these flaws due to texture problems or can some of them but related to actual geometry?
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
[/quote]
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
QUAD SLI, I'll say it again: QUAD - SLI! Nvidia you going to fix it with it 3D Vision or not? I'm going to keep bitching about it till it is fixed. You fixed 3-way SLI on the 400/500 series cards, but ignore the 200 series cards beyond standard SLI.
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
Andrew,
Sorry if I was imprecise in my words. I meant "open up" as in opening up the drivers/profiles for community development. It was not a comment on your communication with the community. You have, by far, over the six or so years I've been on this forum either posting or lurking, the BEST Nvidia rep to engage. Seriously.
[/quote]
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
Andrew,
Sorry if I was imprecise in my words. I meant "open up" as in opening up the drivers/profiles for community development. It was not a comment on your communication with the community. You have, by far, over the six or so years I've been on this forum either posting or lurking, the BEST Nvidia rep to engage. Seriously.
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
[/quote]
Hey Andrew,
Thanks for the reply. My concern is that time is one thing you really don't have too much of with this tech. From the beginning, you were fighting naysayers who claimed (and still claim) that S3D gaming is a "fad" that will quickly fade. If you can get over that hurdle and actually get them to try it, you've got one shot to impress them otherwise back to Fry's it goes (as pointed out by Jenson in that other thread). They, unfortunately, have a loud voice; much louder then us supporters. For example, Kyle over at HardOcP.com, although he loves triple-monitor gaming, bashes S3D gaming whenever it is mentioned. I believe the only way to combat this is by getting the product as near to perfect as possible as SOON as possible. Countering to the naysayers that this 2-year-old tech just needs more time to cook is not going to help that cause.
While I respect your position that creating profiles "is hard" and "takes a trained eye", the truth of the matter is there really is no downside for opening the process to the community. Will many profiles suck? Maybe. But if there is one thing open-source/cloud-sourced software development has shown over the past several years, is that there is almost limitless, dedicated talent who will figure out almost any problem and do it for FREE out of their love for, well, doing it. I assume creating profiles is not brainless work. Yet it is hard for me to imagine that it is harder than, say, creating video compression algorithms, high-quality flight simulators, or the myriad of VERY complex applications that all thrive in the open-source community.
Thus, PLEASE make the case to the powers-that-be that it would be in Nvidia's best interest to tap into the Army of Fanatics that are the open-sources geniuses that are offering to help make this product a long-term success.
Thanks,
Paul
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
Hey Andrew,
Thanks for the reply. My concern is that time is one thing you really don't have too much of with this tech. From the beginning, you were fighting naysayers who claimed (and still claim) that S3D gaming is a "fad" that will quickly fade. If you can get over that hurdle and actually get them to try it, you've got one shot to impress them otherwise back to Fry's it goes (as pointed out by Jenson in that other thread). They, unfortunately, have a loud voice; much louder then us supporters. For example, Kyle over at HardOcP.com, although he loves triple-monitor gaming, bashes S3D gaming whenever it is mentioned. I believe the only way to combat this is by getting the product as near to perfect as possible as SOON as possible. Countering to the naysayers that this 2-year-old tech just needs more time to cook is not going to help that cause.
While I respect your position that creating profiles "is hard" and "takes a trained eye", the truth of the matter is there really is no downside for opening the process to the community. Will many profiles suck? Maybe. But if there is one thing open-source/cloud-sourced software development has shown over the past several years, is that there is almost limitless, dedicated talent who will figure out almost any problem and do it for FREE out of their love for, well, doing it. I assume creating profiles is not brainless work. Yet it is hard for me to imagine that it is harder than, say, creating video compression algorithms, high-quality flight simulators, or the myriad of VERY complex applications that all thrive in the open-source community.
Thus, PLEASE make the case to the powers-that-be that it would be in Nvidia's best interest to tap into the Army of Fanatics that are the open-sources geniuses that are offering to help make this product a long-term success.
Thanks,
Paul
i7-7700k. 1080ti GTX. 32 gig RAM. Windows 10. Soundblaster Titanium Creative 7.1 Surround Sound.
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
[/quote]
Okay a little background info: around Geforce Driver ~195.xx, you guys added the ability of 3-way SLI and QUAD SLI to be used in 3D vision. But witnessing the GPU load graph was just terrible in games DX9, I mean you literally played COD: MW2 at about 20fps with QUAD SLI enabled and 3D Vision. A single gTX 295 in DX9 was significantly faster. Fast forward this until later when the GTX 480 came out along with 3D Vision surround, I believe 258.96 fixed 3-way SLI for 400 series owners but not for 200 series owners and certainly not for the GTX 295 in QUAD SLI 3D Vision. Now the ironic thing is that 3D Vision and QUAD SLI DOES WORK well and scales well nominally in Directx 10 (258.96 and on). With 258.96 and forward, QUAD SLI/3D Vision doesn't even engage in DX9, yet it does in DX10 and with pretty good scaling. With the 256 driver inception, someone on the driver team either accidentally turned off QUAD SLI with 3D Vision and DX9 or did so purposefully because they saw that the SLI graph was about an inch wide in DX9 and running terrible FPS, which is why you state on the 3D Vision Surround page that:
"* Please note that in the first Beta driver for 3D Vision Surround, we do not recommend running GeForce GTX 295 Quad SLI because there are bugs in the driver which may result in system instability. We will be providing a future driver update to support this configuration."
Now the issue isn't just 3D Vision surround, but present if 3D Vision is used at all. I'm not entirely sure if I got all my driver timelines above as representing when these implementation and fixes were done but I am close and close enough to give you a history of the problem.
Take these two games with the latest driver and run Geforce Driver 267.24 and the latest USB emitter drive (266.21 or whatever it is):
Metro 2033 DX10 mode: Scales great, great GPU load, you can max the game out, QUAD SLI is a beast.
Call of Duty: Black Ops: No QUAD SLI indicator pops up, yet GPU usage shows all 4 gpu's being used, but being used at around 20-30%, where DX10 is minimum 55% and nominally 70% and up. Then couple this with the issue of having SLI (any kind thereof) turned on with DLP and you have a stuttery, tunnel vision mess in DX9. You should be able to kill two birds with one stone in fixing the SLI/DLP problem (which you stated your QA team has already been able to reproduce), which really you should fix SLI in all its forms here. And to fix the DLP/SLI issue for me in DX9 and 3D BluRays, you must fix QUAD SLI too, because that's the kind of SLI I have.
Now, I'm a DLP owner, so I don't game 3D Vision surround, but IF I did I would NOT be able to do Surround with GTX 295 co-op cards anyways. Why? Because the GTX 295 co-op card has only TWO outputs. To do Surround, you need THREE outputs. Which means, that to run Surround with 295's you de facto MUST enable QUAD SLI to game at all across THREE displays. But the perfomance is just shotty and awful in DX9 with QUAD SLI/3D Vision. QUAD-SLI 2D on the other hand is perfect. No issues. So your problem is a driver one as far as I can tell with QUAD-SLI and 3D Vision.
So here's the summation:
(1)QUAD SLI does not work, at all, in DX9 and decent in DX10. Just Cause 2, Metro 2033, and to a lesser extent BFBC 2 work great.
(2)One cannot use 3D Vision Surround optimally with GTX 295 co-op cards without enabling QUAD SLI which will immediately turn us back to (1) above.
(3) One must turn off QUAD-SLI using a DLP for DX9 and 3D Blu-Rays otherwise you get the lag effect of the other image which gives a kind of tunnel vision effect along with massive eye strain.
What I'm also curious about is WHY Directx 10 does not suffer from this problem. You have a partial fix there and I'm curious as to why that is so. It seems that THAT should be a point of departure for any kind of fix. I know there are rumors that you guys are coming out with another multi-gpu card next week, so I do not want to see the 295 left in the dust as another kind of niche experiment, that goes for the 9800 gx2 as well. If you're gonna sale these beast cards, make them work right with your best product: 3D Vision. We know they work, and we know they are just driver problems.
Hi
Can you specify what isnt working with Quad SLI?
- Corruption
- Performance
- Crashes
Help me figure out what isnt working so I can make sure its tested.
Okay a little background info: around Geforce Driver ~195.xx, you guys added the ability of 3-way SLI and QUAD SLI to be used in 3D vision. But witnessing the GPU load graph was just terrible in games DX9, I mean you literally played COD: MW2 at about 20fps with QUAD SLI enabled and 3D Vision. A single gTX 295 in DX9 was significantly faster. Fast forward this until later when the GTX 480 came out along with 3D Vision surround, I believe 258.96 fixed 3-way SLI for 400 series owners but not for 200 series owners and certainly not for the GTX 295 in QUAD SLI 3D Vision. Now the ironic thing is that 3D Vision and QUAD SLI DOES WORK well and scales well nominally in Directx 10 (258.96 and on). With 258.96 and forward, QUAD SLI/3D Vision doesn't even engage in DX9, yet it does in DX10 and with pretty good scaling. With the 256 driver inception, someone on the driver team either accidentally turned off QUAD SLI with 3D Vision and DX9 or did so purposefully because they saw that the SLI graph was about an inch wide in DX9 and running terrible FPS, which is why you state on the 3D Vision Surround page that:
"* Please note that in the first Beta driver for 3D Vision Surround, we do not recommend running GeForce GTX 295 Quad SLI because there are bugs in the driver which may result in system instability. We will be providing a future driver update to support this configuration."
Now the issue isn't just 3D Vision surround, but present if 3D Vision is used at all. I'm not entirely sure if I got all my driver timelines above as representing when these implementation and fixes were done but I am close and close enough to give you a history of the problem.
Take these two games with the latest driver and run Geforce Driver 267.24 and the latest USB emitter drive (266.21 or whatever it is):
Metro 2033 DX10 mode: Scales great, great GPU load, you can max the game out, QUAD SLI is a beast.
Call of Duty: Black Ops: No QUAD SLI indicator pops up, yet GPU usage shows all 4 gpu's being used, but being used at around 20-30%, where DX10 is minimum 55% and nominally 70% and up. Then couple this with the issue of having SLI (any kind thereof) turned on with DLP and you have a stuttery, tunnel vision mess in DX9. You should be able to kill two birds with one stone in fixing the SLI/DLP problem (which you stated your QA team has already been able to reproduce), which really you should fix SLI in all its forms here. And to fix the DLP/SLI issue for me in DX9 and 3D BluRays, you must fix QUAD SLI too, because that's the kind of SLI I have.
Now, I'm a DLP owner, so I don't game 3D Vision surround, but IF I did I would NOT be able to do Surround with GTX 295 co-op cards anyways. Why? Because the GTX 295 co-op card has only TWO outputs. To do Surround, you need THREE outputs. Which means, that to run Surround with 295's you de facto MUST enable QUAD SLI to game at all across THREE displays. But the perfomance is just shotty and awful in DX9 with QUAD SLI/3D Vision. QUAD-SLI 2D on the other hand is perfect. No issues. So your problem is a driver one as far as I can tell with QUAD-SLI and 3D Vision.
So here's the summation:
(1)QUAD SLI does not work, at all, in DX9 and decent in DX10. Just Cause 2, Metro 2033, and to a lesser extent BFBC 2 work great.
(2)One cannot use 3D Vision Surround optimally with GTX 295 co-op cards without enabling QUAD SLI which will immediately turn us back to (1) above.
(3) One must turn off QUAD-SLI using a DLP for DX9 and 3D Blu-Rays otherwise you get the lag effect of the other image which gives a kind of tunnel vision effect along with massive eye strain.
What I'm also curious about is WHY Directx 10 does not suffer from this problem. You have a partial fix there and I'm curious as to why that is so. It seems that THAT should be a point of departure for any kind of fix. I know there are rumors that you guys are coming out with another multi-gpu card next week, so I do not want to see the 295 left in the dust as another kind of niche experiment, that goes for the 9800 gx2 as well. If you're gonna sale these beast cards, make them work right with your best product: 3D Vision. We know they work, and we know they are just driver problems.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia']We absolutely support movie playback with TMT5 or PDVD10 without 3D Vision or 3DTV Play. If its not working for you, please tell me and I will investigate fixing that.[/QUOTE]
Yes but only [b]anaglyph[/b] 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a [B]FACT[/B]. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say...
[/quote]
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
[/quote]
Yes I understand that, but I just wanted you to be aware that QUAD SLI has a unique problem of it's own with DX9 apps that predated the DLP TV issue that came up recently, it was only at that point that SLI had a common problem with TriSLI/QUAD-SLI. What I'm concerned about is that the DLP/SLI fix will just fix the problem for standard single GPUs SLI, and QUAD SLI and 3-way SLI for 200 series cards will again be left out in the cold. As I noted, QUAD SLI visual indicators do not turn on at all with DX9 and when they did before with previous older drivers prior to 258.96, the performance was horrible. I'm willing to bet that standard SLI turns on with DX9 and 3D Vision, which means you have two sets of problems here.
I WILL keep you updated on how this is fixed in the next major driver release.
Hi
On another thread I posted that I beleive we have a fix coming for DX9 apps with SLI on a DLP TV. That will be in our next major driver release. So Please lets watch for that and hope it fixes your problem.
Yes I understand that, but I just wanted you to be aware that QUAD SLI has a unique problem of it's own with DX9 apps that predated the DLP TV issue that came up recently, it was only at that point that SLI had a common problem with TriSLI/QUAD-SLI. What I'm concerned about is that the DLP/SLI fix will just fix the problem for standard single GPUs SLI, and QUAD SLI and 3-way SLI for 200 series cards will again be left out in the cold. As I noted, QUAD SLI visual indicators do not turn on at all with DX9 and when they did before with previous older drivers prior to 258.96, the performance was horrible. I'm willing to bet that standard SLI turns on with DX9 and 3D Vision, which means you have two sets of problems here.
I WILL keep you updated on how this is fixed in the next major driver release.
Another one to add to the list...
Yes but only [b]anaglyph[/b] 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a [B]FACT[/B]. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say...
[/quote]
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
Another one to add to the list...
Yes but only anaglyph 3D mode, you can not enable checkerboard or 120Hz quad-buffer output on an Nvidia card with any 3DBluray player application without having a 3Dvision emitter connected, this is a FACT. Please check with your development team and if they willing to fix the issue that would be really great, you would make a lot of DLP users very happy. Please let us know what they have to say...
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
[/quote]
I'm not sure about checkerboard mode (I can't test it) but I'm sure that Nvidia graphics card users can not enable 120Hz quad-buffer output in programs like PowerDVD10 and TMT5 on any display type without a 3dvision emitter connected. I know that ATI HD5000 and later cards support checkerboard [b]AND[/b] 120Hz ouput modes, the HD6000 cards also support HDMI 1.4. I think Nvidia owners might be able to output to HDMI 1.4 from bluray player programs without buying 3DTVplay or having an emitter connected but I'm not sure.
Are you saying this is a fact only on DLP, not on samsung Plasma, LEDs?
I'm not sure about checkerboard mode (I can't test it) but I'm sure that Nvidia graphics card users can not enable 120Hz quad-buffer output in programs like PowerDVD10 and TMT5 on any display type without a 3dvision emitter connected. I know that ATI HD5000 and later cards support checkerboard AND 120Hz ouput modes, the HD6000 cards also support HDMI 1.4. I think Nvidia owners might be able to output to HDMI 1.4 from bluray player programs without buying 3DTVplay or having an emitter connected but I'm not sure.
Then there's the problem of the game's interface. If you are over that, you need to go to the UI's depth.
Then there's the problem of the game's interface. If you are over that, you need to go to the UI's depth.
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
[/quote]
See now this response makes me angry. It made me angry enough that I stopped lurking and actually signed up to reply to you Andrew. Nvidia's 3D driver has been around for ten years, maybe more. I know because I used it. You guys aren't fooling anyone because everyone knows that you repackaged the old forceware 3D driver and slapped a 3D Vision label on it. For god's sakes it even uses the same test application, the same laser sight bitmaps, and even the old DX7 game profiles are still in there.
And the crazy part is that the old 3D driver actually had MORE features than 3D Vision. You guys removed the ability to set the screen size, you removed the other output types like interlaced, you removed Windows XP support, you removed OpenGL support, you removed the ability to change the glasses timing, and you removed DX7 support. What the hell were you guys thinking?
It would be nice if you guys would go download the 93.71 Forceware 3D driver, run it on XP, and then make 3D Vision have all the features that it has. If you did that you would win back all the respect I have lost for Nvidia the last few years.
Wazoo
I replied on another thread you are on about the profiles. Creating profiles is hard and takes a lot of training. We are considering how to open those up to the community but it does take a trained eye to do it.
If you remember we didnt open up SLI profiles at first, but we did over time. Give us time, we've only been doing 3D Vision now for a little over 2 years.
See now this response makes me angry. It made me angry enough that I stopped lurking and actually signed up to reply to you Andrew. Nvidia's 3D driver has been around for ten years, maybe more. I know because I used it. You guys aren't fooling anyone because everyone knows that you repackaged the old forceware 3D driver and slapped a 3D Vision label on it. For god's sakes it even uses the same test application, the same laser sight bitmaps, and even the old DX7 game profiles are still in there.
And the crazy part is that the old 3D driver actually had MORE features than 3D Vision. You guys removed the ability to set the screen size, you removed the other output types like interlaced, you removed Windows XP support, you removed OpenGL support, you removed the ability to change the glasses timing, and you removed DX7 support. What the hell were you guys thinking?
It would be nice if you guys would go download the 93.71 Forceware 3D driver, run it on XP, and then make 3D Vision have all the features that it has. If you did that you would win back all the respect I have lost for Nvidia the last few years.
AMD Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.8GHZ
8GB RAM
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb @ 2048x1536 @ 85hz
Edimensional glasses and Nvidia 3D Vision