Single GTX 680 3D performance (Battle Field 3), Or your experiences
Edit: Thread title should be a question. I'm going to buy a single 3D monitor so that I can play BF3 in 3D. How will a single 680 2gb preform in 3D on a single monitor? What average/consistent FPS should I expect at low/med/high/ultra/custom. If you say custom please include your AA setting First hand experience is preferred. I have done a ton of Google searches and never quite found a direct answer or one that was semi current. MY SYSTEM CPU: 3570K I5 ; ZALMAN WATER COOLER MOBO: MSI MPOWER RAM:16GB 1866GHZ ; PATRIOT SSD:240GB MUSHKIN GRAPHICS: 680GTX 2GB The monitor I plan to buy within a month or two: Asus VG278H http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236206
Edit: Thread title should be a question.

I'm going to buy a single 3D monitor so that I can play BF3 in 3D. How will a single 680 2gb preform in 3D on a single monitor?

What average/consistent FPS should I expect at low/med/high/ultra/custom. If you say custom please include your AA setting

First hand experience is preferred. I have done a ton of Google searches and never quite found a direct answer or one that was semi current.

MY SYSTEM
CPU: 3570K I5 ; ZALMAN WATER COOLER
MOBO: MSI MPOWER
RAM:16GB 1866GHZ ; PATRIOT
SSD:240GB MUSHKIN
GRAPHICS: 680GTX 2GB

The monitor I plan to buy within a month or two: Asus VG278H
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236206

#1
Posted 03/16/2013 12:09 AM   
I really dont like giving "first hand" everyones comps are different. Let's do a test. Try your highest setting you want. Then lowest "acceptable" if you dont meet the requirements I say. Download fraps. Turn off vsync in Nvidia control panel and in game. Start game. You want consistent 100-120fps. If your below that download a tool like evga precision/msi and confirm whats at full load and either overclock or look into getting new parts.
I really dont like giving "first hand" everyones comps are different. Let's do a test. Try your highest setting you want. Then lowest "acceptable" if you dont meet the requirements I say.

Download fraps. Turn off vsync in Nvidia control panel and in game. Start game.
You want consistent 100-120fps.

If your below that download a tool like evga precision/msi and confirm whats at full load and either overclock or look into getting new parts.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

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

#2
Posted 03/16/2013 12:47 AM   
To clarify; I currently have a 1680 x 1050 @ 60hz When I turn Vsync off I get 85 fps minimal on Custom with max AA (MAX EVERY THING) My CPU is at 4.2ghz......
To clarify; I currently have a 1680 x 1050 @ 60hz

When I turn Vsync off I get 85 fps minimal on Custom with max AA (MAX EVERY THING)

My CPU is at 4.2ghz......

#3
Posted 03/16/2013 12:46 AM   
What I'm using is pretty similar to what your getting, 3570k at 4.4Ghz, 670 at 1254/7k i.e. a bit faster than a 680. Just hopped on a 64 man server as was curious myself. Performance at ultra is useless, at least in my opinion. It drops down to 35FPS or so alot, not great for aiming. Performance at the high preset is alot better, but thats probably because it does without MSAA and opts for FXAA, FPS hovers around 50 or so, doesn't drop much below that. Performance at medium with 4x MSAA is about the same, probably what I'd play with. To be honest BF3 isn't that great anyway in 3D, like alot of other first person games it suffers the issue of just your gun being 3D, then everything else in the scene being pretty flat, even after using commands to bump the convergence up.
What I'm using is pretty similar to what your getting, 3570k at 4.4Ghz, 670 at 1254/7k i.e. a bit faster than a 680.

Just hopped on a 64 man server as was curious myself. Performance at ultra is useless, at least in my opinion. It drops down to 35FPS or so alot, not great for aiming. Performance at the high preset is alot better, but thats probably because it does without MSAA and opts for FXAA, FPS hovers around 50 or so, doesn't drop much below that. Performance at medium with 4x MSAA is about the same, probably what I'd play with.

To be honest BF3 isn't that great anyway in 3D, like alot of other first person games it suffers the issue of just your gun being 3D, then everything else in the scene being pretty flat, even after using commands to bump the convergence up.

#4
Posted 03/16/2013 12:52 AM   
Hey great feed back from every one. I already have a 680gtx so im not going to freak about the $100 difference if I SLI How ever if I feel like putting the effort in I will sell my 680gtx 2gb and buy 2 670 4gb for sli. Or I might just get another 680gtx or even just wait to do a 7xx SLI (doing it right the first time)
Hey great feed back from every one.

I already have a 680gtx so im not going to freak about the $100 difference if I SLI

How ever if I feel like putting the effort in I will sell my 680gtx 2gb and buy 2 670 4gb for sli.

Or I might just get another 680gtx or even just wait to do a 7xx SLI (doing it right the first time)

#5
Posted 03/16/2013 12:53 AM   
I revised what I said. Didnt like it when I reread it. 3D needs 120 fps. Its essentially 2D @ 120fps. So basically if you can start a game and get your settings to work at around 120-100fps you should be golden. I recommend doing the steps. Ultra is definetly out your grasp though.
I revised what I said. Didnt like it when I reread it.


3D needs 120 fps. Its essentially 2D @ 120fps. So basically if you can start a game and get your settings to work at around 120-100fps you should be golden. I recommend doing the steps.

Ultra is definetly out your grasp though.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

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

#6
Posted 03/16/2013 12:58 AM   
[quote] To clarify; I currently have a 1680 x 1050 @ 60hz When I turn Vsync off I get 85 fps minimal on Custom with max AA (MAX EVERY THING) My CPU is at 4.2ghz...... [/quote] Thats esentially 42.5fps minimal in 3D. So thats not bad though I have no idea what your average is. You want consistent 50fps(100fps@2D) though imo and you probably want 1920x1080 though. If that "custom" is as low as your prepared to go it wont cut it.
To clarify; I currently have a 1680 x 1050 @ 60hz

When I turn Vsync off I get 85 fps minimal on Custom with max AA (MAX EVERY THING)

My CPU is at 4.2ghz......


Thats esentially 42.5fps minimal in 3D. So thats not bad though I have no idea what your average is. You want consistent 50fps(100fps@2D) though imo and you probably want 1920x1080 though. If that "custom" is as low as your prepared to go it wont cut it.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

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

#7
Posted 03/16/2013 01:14 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]I revised what I said. Didnt like it when I reread it. 3D needs 120 fps. Its essentially 2D @ 120fps. So basically if you can start a game and get your settings to work at around 120-100fps you should be golden. I recommend doing the steps. Ultra is definetly out your grasp though.[/quote] well put. In 2d I prefer medium settings for multiplayer . The shadows are really intense on this game. (ambiant occulation is off, shadows are turned down, AA is at 4x) For 3d I get the impression FXAA is the way to go
eqzitara said:I revised what I said. Didnt like it when I reread it.


3D needs 120 fps. Its essentially 2D @ 120fps. So basically if you can start a game and get your settings to work at around 120-100fps you should be golden. I recommend doing the steps.

Ultra is definetly out your grasp though.


well put. In 2d I prefer medium settings for multiplayer . The shadows are really intense on this game.

(ambiant occulation is off, shadows are turned down, AA is at 4x)

For 3d I get the impression FXAA is the way to go

#8
Posted 03/16/2013 01:15 AM   
In addition I do use EVGA precision X along with the Onscreen display. this also works in BF3 console: Render.drawfps true
In addition I do use EVGA precision X along with the Onscreen display.

this also works in BF3 console: Render.drawfps true

#9
Posted 03/16/2013 01:21 AM   
A single 680 won't get you capped 60FPS per eye in 3D for BF3 at 1080p, two would get you close, especially with an OC'd IVB CPU in MP. BF3 uses a ton of VRAM too which can make the game feel sluggish even if the FPS meter is nice and high. I haven't played BF3 in some time, but I remember when a lot of us were playing and testing, my pair of GTX 480s with everything set to Ultra except for Shadows (high or medium) and MSAA set to 2x, I would get between 40 and 60 FPS. The game engine had a nasty habit of plateauing at Vsync straps and it didn't seem like anything in the Fermi generation could overcome it. Kepler kinda blew all of that up, just ran BF3 much more efficiently and easily eclipsed 60FPS with a single GPU in 2D. Basically doubling that rendering power for 3D and you should be able to get 60FPS per eye. I personally still played BF3 MP in 2D, didn't want to give up the frames and got consistently 60+ FPS with a pair of 480s. I finished the campaign and even the co-op missions in 3D, but the bounce between 40-60FPS was motion-sickness inducing at times.
A single 680 won't get you capped 60FPS per eye in 3D for BF3 at 1080p, two would get you close, especially with an OC'd IVB CPU in MP. BF3 uses a ton of VRAM too which can make the game feel sluggish even if the FPS meter is nice and high.

I haven't played BF3 in some time, but I remember when a lot of us were playing and testing, my pair of GTX 480s with everything set to Ultra except for Shadows (high or medium) and MSAA set to 2x, I would get between 40 and 60 FPS. The game engine had a nasty habit of plateauing at Vsync straps and it didn't seem like anything in the Fermi generation could overcome it.

Kepler kinda blew all of that up, just ran BF3 much more efficiently and easily eclipsed 60FPS with a single GPU in 2D. Basically doubling that rendering power for 3D and you should be able to get 60FPS per eye. I personally still played BF3 MP in 2D, didn't want to give up the frames and got consistently 60+ FPS with a pair of 480s. I finished the campaign and even the co-op missions in 3D, but the bounce between 40-60FPS was motion-sickness inducing at times.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

#10
Posted 03/16/2013 02:54 AM   
[quote="chiz1"]A single 680 won't get you capped 60FPS per eye in 3D for BF3 at 1080p, two would get you close, especially with an OC'd IVB CPU in MP. BF3 uses a ton of VRAM too which can make the game feel sluggish even if the FPS meter is nice and high. I haven't played BF3 in some time, but I remember when a lot of us were playing and testing, my pair of GTX 480s with everything set to Ultra except for Shadows (high or medium) and MSAA set to 2x, I would get between 40 and 60 FPS. The game engine had a nasty habit of plateauing at Vsync straps and it didn't seem like anything in the Fermi generation could overcome it. Kepler kinda blew all of that up, just ran BF3 much more efficiently and easily eclipsed 60FPS with a single GPU in 2D. Basically doubling that rendering power for 3D and you should be able to get 60FPS per eye. I personally still played BF3 MP in 2D, didn't want to give up the frames and got consistently 60+ FPS with a pair of 480s. I finished the campaign and even the co-op missions in 3D, but the bounce between 40-60FPS was motion-sickness inducing at times.[/quote] Does that mean 120fps in 3d would look like 60fps and 60fps would look like 30fps? I know in 2D 60fps vs 30fps there is a big difference in smoothness. like you said the game has a tendency to lock out at 60fps in 3D. Does that mean I will have 30fps performance? (same question asked 2 different ways)
chiz1 said:A single 680 won't get you capped 60FPS per eye in 3D for BF3 at 1080p, two would get you close, especially with an OC'd IVB CPU in MP. BF3 uses a ton of VRAM too which can make the game feel sluggish even if the FPS meter is nice and high.

I haven't played BF3 in some time, but I remember when a lot of us were playing and testing, my pair of GTX 480s with everything set to Ultra except for Shadows (high or medium) and MSAA set to 2x, I would get between 40 and 60 FPS. The game engine had a nasty habit of plateauing at Vsync straps and it didn't seem like anything in the Fermi generation could overcome it.

Kepler kinda blew all of that up, just ran BF3 much more efficiently and easily eclipsed 60FPS with a single GPU in 2D. Basically doubling that rendering power for 3D and you should be able to get 60FPS per eye. I personally still played BF3 MP in 2D, didn't want to give up the frames and got consistently 60+ FPS with a pair of 480s. I finished the campaign and even the co-op missions in 3D, but the bounce between 40-60FPS was motion-sickness inducing at times.


Does that mean 120fps in 3d would look like 60fps and 60fps would look like 30fps?

I know in 2D 60fps vs 30fps there is a big difference in smoothness.

like you said the game has a tendency to lock out at 60fps in 3D. Does that mean I will have 30fps performance?

(same question asked 2 different ways)

#11
Posted 03/16/2013 03:26 AM   
No. In 3D you see framerate as normal, just not above 60FPS, because the screen is drawing an image for each eye alternatively.
No. In 3D you see framerate as normal, just not above 60FPS, because the screen is drawing an image for each eye alternatively.

#12
Posted 03/16/2013 03:39 AM   
Roger
Roger

#13
Posted 03/16/2013 04:26 AM   
Frames are displayed very different when using shutter glasses. Passive 3D is much closer to normal 2D behavior with both eyes being able to see the image at once. 60fps active 3D is fairly simple as the game is fast enough to produce a new image faster than every 8ish ms. The images are rendered for alternating eyes and displayed vsynced producing a good 3D experience together with the shutter glasses. 30fps 3D would display each frame pair during four monitor frames. I assume there are a few frames rendering in the pipeline. It would be very awkward if they evey displayed the following sequence. old left -> old right -> new left -> old right Because of this I assume both frames have to be considered finished by 3D Vision for a switch to occur. It is also quite clear when viewing fraps in 3D that 3D does not clip to fractions like normal Vsync which should imply that frames are normally rendered as quickly as possible and never waiting for vsync. How Battlefield 3 handles the vsync implied in 3D is probably configurable but clearly different from standard 3D Vision behaviour. My single 580 is decent in bf3 but there are obviosly faster solutions. I never designed my computer for SLI so I'm currently admiring the Titan from afar. When you aim for a computer that is silent most of the time while running you make trade-offs.
Frames are displayed very different when using shutter glasses.

Passive 3D is much closer to normal 2D behavior with both eyes being able to see the image at once.

60fps active 3D is fairly simple as the game is fast enough to produce a new image faster than every 8ish ms. The images are rendered for alternating eyes and displayed vsynced producing
a good 3D experience together with the shutter glasses.

30fps 3D would display each frame pair during four monitor frames.

I assume there are a few frames rendering in the pipeline.

It would be very awkward if they evey displayed the following sequence.
old left -> old right -> new left -> old right

Because of this I assume both frames have to be considered finished by 3D Vision for a switch to occur.

It is also quite clear when viewing fraps in 3D that 3D does not clip to fractions like normal Vsync which should imply that frames are normally rendered as quickly as possible and never waiting for vsync.

How Battlefield 3 handles the vsync implied in 3D is probably configurable but clearly different from standard 3D Vision behaviour.

My single 580 is decent in bf3 but there are obviosly faster solutions.
I never designed my computer for SLI so I'm currently admiring the Titan from afar.

When you aim for a computer that is silent most of the time while running you make trade-offs.

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

#14
Posted 03/16/2013 06:18 PM   
Scroll To Top