I hate only being able to play games in 1680 x 1050 - where the 1920 x 1200 Monitors for crying out
1 / 2
Its been ages now since NVidia released their glasses. I sold my 1920x1200 monitor to buy the kit, but playing 3d at 1680 x 1050 is ok, but when you have a game that does not work well in 3D and have to use the same resolution it sucks.
I've seen hints of the LG monitor and a couple of others, but does it really take that long to bring out a decent monitor.
I recon it has something to do with the fact that games get a FPS hit with a higher res monitor and you will need a £500 card to manage it.
Are Nvidia going to do a deal with Samsung so we can trade in these current monitors as most of us have probably downgraded?
Its been ages now since NVidia released their glasses. I sold my 1920x1200 monitor to buy the kit, but playing 3d at 1680 x 1050 is ok, but when you have a game that does not work well in 3D and have to use the same resolution it sucks.
I've seen hints of the LG monitor and a couple of others, but does it really take that long to bring out a decent monitor.
I recon it has something to do with the fact that games get a FPS hit with a higher res monitor and you will need a £500 card to manage it.
Are Nvidia going to do a deal with Samsung so we can trade in these current monitors as most of us have probably downgraded?
Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10
Always follow this guy he seems to know everything before we do and is a massive 3d vision enthusiast! [url="http://3dvision-blog.com/"]http://3dvision-blog.com/[/url]
So almost a year later and still the only things we have are blog and news site articles teasing that someone is planning to release a full HD 120hz monitor with a blanket "we'll know more in the future!" statement at the end. LG was touting a full HD 120hz monitor in early 2009. Release the damn thing already. LG, Acer (with their GD245HQ), and other monitor producers are probably just intentionally holding off on release until the public shows more interest and/or Sony makes its advertisement push.
So almost a year later and still the only things we have are blog and news site articles teasing that someone is planning to release a full HD 120hz monitor with a blanket "we'll know more in the future!" statement at the end. LG was touting a full HD 120hz monitor in early 2009. Release the damn thing already. LG, Acer (with their GD245HQ), and other monitor producers are probably just intentionally holding off on release until the public shows more interest and/or Sony makes its advertisement push.
Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).
Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).
[quote name='Likay' post='960324' date='Dec 6 2009, 01:40 PM']Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).[/quote]
I remember playing GLQuake when it first came out at 320x300 and thinking that this is the best thing ever. /haha.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':haha:' />
[quote name='Likay' post='960324' date='Dec 6 2009, 01:40 PM']Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).
I remember playing GLQuake when it first came out at 320x300 and thinking that this is the best thing ever. /haha.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':haha:' />
I7 2600k @5Ghz | Asus P8Z68-V Pro | SS Phase Change | Corsair AX1200 watt PSU | G-Skill 1600CL7 | Asus GTX680 x2 SLI | Lian-Li PC8N-WX | Intel 520 120GB SSD | HP ZR24w 24" S-IPS x3 Nvidia Surround | Samsung S27A950D 27" 120Hz LCD
[quote name='Likay' post='960324' date='Dec 5 2009, 08:40 PM']Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).[/quote]
No offense intended here but you honestly can't see the difference? Even just going from a 22" at 1680x1050 to a 24" at 1920x1200 in 2D I can see a clear notable increase in detail. I can only imagine viewing 3D at 1920x1200 where you are effectively viewing 4.6 megapixels versus 3.5 when viewing 3D at 1680x1050.
I completely agree that the 3D experience should come first, and I along with everyone else was fine with playing games in SD resolution back when we had no choice, but that doesn't make full HD any less gorgeous and hence desirable for viewing 3D. The 3D experience is Nvidia's (and the developers') territory, so let's see some monitor manufacturers step up to the plate to do their part and get those full HD monitors out the door! :D
[quote name='Likay' post='960324' date='Dec 5 2009, 08:40 PM']Isn't this HD hysteria taking weird proportions? Myself i'm happy with 1280x720 ws or 1280x960 4:3 for as long as aa is working... Is there in fact anybody who's able to see any difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 monitors?
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days... /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />).
No offense intended here but you honestly can't see the difference? Even just going from a 22" at 1680x1050 to a 24" at 1920x1200 in 2D I can see a clear notable increase in detail. I can only imagine viewing 3D at 1920x1200 where you are effectively viewing 4.6 megapixels versus 3.5 when viewing 3D at 1680x1050.
I completely agree that the 3D experience should come first, and I along with everyone else was fine with playing games in SD resolution back when we had no choice, but that doesn't make full HD any less gorgeous and hence desirable for viewing 3D. The 3D experience is Nvidia's (and the developers') territory, so let's see some monitor manufacturers step up to the plate to do their part and get those full HD monitors out the door! :D
No offense taken. :D I believe i by that sentence exagerated a "tad". /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />
And since everything developes quite fast i'm quite sure everybody will have what desired for in good time.
But as is today 3d gives a lot more than one step up in resolution though. I'm used to play with 1024x768 native res with 100" screen and on top of that using digital keystone correction which reduces the actual horisontal resolution a bit. I'm fully satisfied but would of course not say no to higher resolution. :P
No offense taken. :D I believe i by that sentence exagerated a "tad". /teehee.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':teehee:' />
And since everything developes quite fast i'm quite sure everybody will have what desired for in good time.
But as is today 3d gives a lot more than one step up in resolution though. I'm used to play with 1024x768 native res with 100" screen and on top of that using digital keystone correction which reduces the actual horisontal resolution a bit. I'm fully satisfied but would of course not say no to higher resolution. :P
I dont think 1920 is going to be a grand departure from 1680, its just a little higher. For gaming, there shouldnt be much of a difference. Most of the 1920 displays are 1080 also. To me thats not a good thing either. I think the LG display coming out is 1920x1080 not 1200, so I wonder. At least it wont have to resize for an HD movie. I dont see any part #s, which leads me to believe we have months to go to be able to purchase anything in the 1920 resolution.
I dont think 1920 is going to be a grand departure from 1680, its just a little higher. For gaming, there shouldnt be much of a difference. Most of the 1920 displays are 1080 also. To me thats not a good thing either. I think the LG display coming out is 1920x1080 not 1200, so I wonder. At least it wont have to resize for an HD movie. I dont see any part #s, which leads me to believe we have months to go to be able to purchase anything in the 1920 resolution.
I agree, I can't really tell the difference from 1680 x 1050 and 1920 x 1200. It's a little thing. Anyway I also thougth about that when I was about to trade my LG 24" FULL HD for the 2233rz in order to play 3D. But the realism and graphics enhancement using the googles was so freaking amazing that I can't care less that my 3D display ain't FULL HD. It's a lot better than it was with the older display and that's what matters. Sometimes It feels that this display is 2 or 4 inches bigger when playing 3D.
I agree, I can't really tell the difference from 1680 x 1050 and 1920 x 1200. It's a little thing. Anyway I also thougth about that when I was about to trade my LG 24" FULL HD for the 2233rz in order to play 3D. But the realism and graphics enhancement using the googles was so freaking amazing that I can't care less that my 3D display ain't FULL HD. It's a lot better than it was with the older display and that's what matters. Sometimes It feels that this display is 2 or 4 inches bigger when playing 3D.
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bits - Core i7 2600K @ 4.5ghz - Asus Maximus IV Extreme Z68 - Geforce EVGA GTX 690 - 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 9-9-9-24 (2T) - Thermaltake Armor+ - SSD Intel 510 Series Sata3 256GB - HD WD Caviar Black Sata3 64mb 2TB - HD WD Caviar Black 1TB Sata3 64mb - Bose Sound System - LG H20L GGW Blu Ray/DVD/CD RW - LG GH20 DVD RAM - PSU Thermaltake Toughpower 1000W - Samsung S27A950D 3D Vision Ready + 3D HDTV SAMSUNG PL63C7000 3DTVPLAY + ROLLERMOD CHECKERBOARD
I don't care so much about 1080P, I think 1680 x 1050 is a fine resolution. I mean, I've got a Zalman, which is 1680 x 525 in 3D and it looks acceptable. Full HD would be great but think about the performance hit. Playing at 16 x 10 max settings in stereo is already a stretch for some games so at 1080P its not gonna happen. Aside from resolution, though, why can't we get a screen bigger than 22"? I might have to go with a projector (sadly, still only at 720P).
I don't care so much about 1080P, I think 1680 x 1050 is a fine resolution. I mean, I've got a Zalman, which is 1680 x 525 in 3D and it looks acceptable. Full HD would be great but think about the performance hit. Playing at 16 x 10 max settings in stereo is already a stretch for some games so at 1080P its not gonna happen. Aside from resolution, though, why can't we get a screen bigger than 22"? I might have to go with a projector (sadly, still only at 720P).
There are plenty of older games and newer less-graphically-intense games that work well in 3D that would also [i]perform[/i] fine in 3D at 1920x1200. Not every game one plays in 3D has to be the most recent available. I mean in the case of finding a game that doesn't play well at that res, you could always turn it down to 1680x1050 or lower for games that require it, and still have the ability to play most games at 1920x1200. All I'm saying is that it would be nice if we at least had the option, but it's currently not possible in any way :(
There are plenty of older games and newer less-graphically-intense games that work well in 3D that would also perform fine in 3D at 1920x1200. Not every game one plays in 3D has to be the most recent available. I mean in the case of finding a game that doesn't play well at that res, you could always turn it down to 1680x1050 or lower for games that require it, and still have the ability to play most games at 1920x1200. All I'm saying is that it would be nice if we at least had the option, but it's currently not possible in any way :(
I've seen hints of the LG monitor and a couple of others, but does it really take that long to bring out a decent monitor.
I recon it has something to do with the fact that games get a FPS hit with a higher res monitor and you will need a £500 card to manage it.
Are Nvidia going to do a deal with Samsung so we can trade in these current monitors as most of us have probably downgraded?
Probably not, but worth a suggestion.
I've seen hints of the LG monitor and a couple of others, but does it really take that long to bring out a decent monitor.
I recon it has something to do with the fact that games get a FPS hit with a higher res monitor and you will need a £500 card to manage it.
Are Nvidia going to do a deal with Samsung so we can trade in these current monitors as most of us have probably downgraded?
Probably not, but worth a suggestion.
http://estereomania.blogspot.com/
http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/Fguillotine/
Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10
Current parts:
3D Vision w/Acer HN274H 27"
ASUS Sabertooth
i7 2600k
ASUS GTX 580
Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1866
W7
LG has only announced the 23-inch panels, there will be some time before monitors with these panels start appearing.
As for Sony... they probably will not have the Bravia 3D on the market before the end of the first half of 2010, so there is still some time.
LG has only announced the 23-inch panels, there will be some time before monitors with these panels start appearing.
As for Sony... they probably will not have the Bravia 3D on the market before the end of the first half of 2010, so there is still some time.
My 3D Vision Blog - 3dvision-blog.com
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
I remember playing GLQuake when it first came out at 320x300 and thinking that this is the best thing ever.
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
I remember playing GLQuake when it first came out at 320x300 and thinking that this is the best thing ever.
I7 2600k @5Ghz | Asus P8Z68-V Pro | SS Phase Change | Corsair AX1200 watt PSU | G-Skill 1600CL7 | Asus GTX680 x2 SLI | Lian-Li PC8N-WX | Intel 520 120GB SSD | HP ZR24w 24" S-IPS x3 Nvidia Surround | Samsung S27A950D 27" 120Hz LCD
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
No offense intended here but you honestly can't see the difference? Even just going from a 22" at 1680x1050 to a 24" at 1920x1200 in 2D I can see a clear notable increase in detail. I can only imagine viewing 3D at 1920x1200 where you are effectively viewing 4.6 megapixels versus 3.5 when viewing 3D at 1680x1050.
I completely agree that the 3D experience should come first, and I along with everyone else was fine with playing games in SD resolution back when we had no choice, but that doesn't make full HD any less gorgeous and hence desirable for viewing 3D. The 3D experience is Nvidia's (and the developers') territory, so let's see some monitor manufacturers step up to the plate to do their part and get those full HD monitors out the door! :D
In my opinion 3d should come first with decent and good image and resolution at second. At least at the point we are today (which means i'm not satisfied with 320x200 resolutions as with "good" ol days...
No offense intended here but you honestly can't see the difference? Even just going from a 22" at 1680x1050 to a 24" at 1920x1200 in 2D I can see a clear notable increase in detail. I can only imagine viewing 3D at 1920x1200 where you are effectively viewing 4.6 megapixels versus 3.5 when viewing 3D at 1680x1050.
I completely agree that the 3D experience should come first, and I along with everyone else was fine with playing games in SD resolution back when we had no choice, but that doesn't make full HD any less gorgeous and hence desirable for viewing 3D. The 3D experience is Nvidia's (and the developers') territory, so let's see some monitor manufacturers step up to the plate to do their part and get those full HD monitors out the door! :D
Current parts:
3D Vision w/Acer HN274H 27"
ASUS Sabertooth
i7 2600k
ASUS GTX 580
Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1866
W7
And since everything developes quite fast i'm quite sure everybody will have what desired for in good time.
But as is today 3d gives a lot more than one step up in resolution though. I'm used to play with 1024x768 native res with 100" screen and on top of that using digital keystone correction which reduces the actual horisontal resolution a bit. I'm fully satisfied but would of course not say no to higher resolution. :P
And since everything developes quite fast i'm quite sure everybody will have what desired for in good time.
But as is today 3d gives a lot more than one step up in resolution though. I'm used to play with 1024x768 native res with 100" screen and on top of that using digital keystone correction which reduces the actual horisontal resolution a bit. I'm fully satisfied but would of course not say no to higher resolution. :P
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
Hell, I use 1280x720 with 8xaa and 16x aniso... it's not exactly ugly
FRAME RATE IS LIFE
what next, you guys want 32 bit color and 24 bit z-buffer? GTFO
Hell, I use 1280x720 with 8xaa and 16x aniso... it's not exactly ugly
FRAME RATE IS LIFE
what next, you guys want 32 bit color and 24 bit z-buffer? GTFO
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bits - Core i7 2600K @ 4.5ghz - Asus Maximus IV Extreme Z68 - Geforce EVGA GTX 690 - 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 9-9-9-24 (2T) - Thermaltake Armor+ - SSD Intel 510 Series Sata3 256GB - HD WD Caviar Black Sata3 64mb 2TB - HD WD Caviar Black 1TB Sata3 64mb - Bose Sound System - LG H20L GGW Blu Ray/DVD/CD RW - LG GH20 DVD RAM - PSU Thermaltake Toughpower 1000W - Samsung S27A950D 3D Vision Ready + 3D HDTV SAMSUNG PL63C7000 3DTVPLAY + ROLLERMOD CHECKERBOARD
check my blog - cybereality.com
Current parts:
3D Vision w/Acer HN274H 27"
ASUS Sabertooth
i7 2600k
ASUS GTX 580
Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1866
W7