[quote name='Adz 3000' post='1008584' date='Feb 26 2010, 02:08 PM']Well if Nvidia could conjor up a "3D Vison card" i'd buy it.
I suppose it would be a bit like having a pyhx card /shock.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':shock:' />
it's called a 3d graphics card by Nvidia. that's your S3D card.
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
[quote name='b4thman' post='1008559' date='Feb 26 2010, 01:24 PM']I have no idea, but it is difficult to believe that the only save in the 2nd rendering pass is the same loading textures. In some games the framerate lost in 3D is by far lower than 50%, and it seem to indicate that there are other calculations not needed to re-processed,... or maybe only mean that 2nd rendering only affect seriously the GPU, and not CPU calculations.[/quote]
the frame rates produced takes into fact all calculations needed to be performed by the CPU + the time to render the image. no need to redo the calculations you just need to reder the second view for the same time.
simple example. Say a bullet hit a target at time 1. Calculations need to be done to determine if the bullet actually hits the target, how it hits the target, where it hits the target and the effect of it hitting the target.(The game engine does it's stuff) Only then can a 3d image of area be taken and sent to the GPU for rendering and then the right eye image can be calculated fro mthe 3d input and rendered (we get the right screen) to get the left screen we just need to take the same input 3d image (3d coordinates present) and calculate and then render the left image. The Game engine does not have to do any additional work for the second screen. Thus that's why the frame rate drop will be less than 50% quite alot of times.
the GPU may be doing double the work, but the entire system, ie the CPU may not.
Let's say it takes 2seconds to do the cpu calculations and 1 second for the gpu to calculate the 2d image from the 3d data then it takes 3 seconds to produce 1 frame. or a frame rate of 1/3=0.333 frames per second
in 3d it would take the same 2 second to do the cpu calculations, 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d right screen and another 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d left screen. 4 seconds for 1 frame thus 1/4 = 0.25 frames per second.
these are all asumptions in the exact numbers.
If a game can do 300fps without S3D it will only do 60fps per eye in S3D which looks like only 20% performance compared to non S3D but in fact is closer to 40% sicne it's still doing 120fps total. Again I don't know the cost of the GPU work in terms of time.
just some ideas here.
[quote name='b4thman' post='1008559' date='Feb 26 2010, 01:24 PM']I have no idea, but it is difficult to believe that the only save in the 2nd rendering pass is the same loading textures. In some games the framerate lost in 3D is by far lower than 50%, and it seem to indicate that there are other calculations not needed to re-processed,... or maybe only mean that 2nd rendering only affect seriously the GPU, and not CPU calculations.
the frame rates produced takes into fact all calculations needed to be performed by the CPU + the time to render the image. no need to redo the calculations you just need to reder the second view for the same time.
simple example. Say a bullet hit a target at time 1. Calculations need to be done to determine if the bullet actually hits the target, how it hits the target, where it hits the target and the effect of it hitting the target.(The game engine does it's stuff) Only then can a 3d image of area be taken and sent to the GPU for rendering and then the right eye image can be calculated fro mthe 3d input and rendered (we get the right screen) to get the left screen we just need to take the same input 3d image (3d coordinates present) and calculate and then render the left image. The Game engine does not have to do any additional work for the second screen. Thus that's why the frame rate drop will be less than 50% quite alot of times.
the GPU may be doing double the work, but the entire system, ie the CPU may not.
Let's say it takes 2seconds to do the cpu calculations and 1 second for the gpu to calculate the 2d image from the 3d data then it takes 3 seconds to produce 1 frame. or a frame rate of 1/3=0.333 frames per second
in 3d it would take the same 2 second to do the cpu calculations, 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d right screen and another 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d left screen. 4 seconds for 1 frame thus 1/4 = 0.25 frames per second.
these are all asumptions in the exact numbers.
If a game can do 300fps without S3D it will only do 60fps per eye in S3D which looks like only 20% performance compared to non S3D but in fact is closer to 40% sicne it's still doing 120fps total. Again I don't know the cost of the GPU work in terms of time.
just some ideas here.
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
I suppose it would be a bit like having a pyhx card
it's called a 3d graphics card by Nvidia. that's your S3D card.
I suppose it would be a bit like having a pyhx card
it's called a 3d graphics card by Nvidia. that's your S3D card.
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
the frame rates produced takes into fact all calculations needed to be performed by the CPU + the time to render the image. no need to redo the calculations you just need to reder the second view for the same time.
simple example. Say a bullet hit a target at time 1. Calculations need to be done to determine if the bullet actually hits the target, how it hits the target, where it hits the target and the effect of it hitting the target.(The game engine does it's stuff) Only then can a 3d image of area be taken and sent to the GPU for rendering and then the right eye image can be calculated fro mthe 3d input and rendered (we get the right screen) to get the left screen we just need to take the same input 3d image (3d coordinates present) and calculate and then render the left image. The Game engine does not have to do any additional work for the second screen. Thus that's why the frame rate drop will be less than 50% quite alot of times.
the GPU may be doing double the work, but the entire system, ie the CPU may not.
Let's say it takes 2seconds to do the cpu calculations and 1 second for the gpu to calculate the 2d image from the 3d data then it takes 3 seconds to produce 1 frame. or a frame rate of 1/3=0.333 frames per second
in 3d it would take the same 2 second to do the cpu calculations, 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d right screen and another 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d left screen. 4 seconds for 1 frame thus 1/4 = 0.25 frames per second.
these are all asumptions in the exact numbers.
If a game can do 300fps without S3D it will only do 60fps per eye in S3D which looks like only 20% performance compared to non S3D but in fact is closer to 40% sicne it's still doing 120fps total. Again I don't know the cost of the GPU work in terms of time.
just some ideas here.
the frame rates produced takes into fact all calculations needed to be performed by the CPU + the time to render the image. no need to redo the calculations you just need to reder the second view for the same time.
simple example. Say a bullet hit a target at time 1. Calculations need to be done to determine if the bullet actually hits the target, how it hits the target, where it hits the target and the effect of it hitting the target.(The game engine does it's stuff) Only then can a 3d image of area be taken and sent to the GPU for rendering and then the right eye image can be calculated fro mthe 3d input and rendered (we get the right screen) to get the left screen we just need to take the same input 3d image (3d coordinates present) and calculate and then render the left image. The Game engine does not have to do any additional work for the second screen. Thus that's why the frame rate drop will be less than 50% quite alot of times.
the GPU may be doing double the work, but the entire system, ie the CPU may not.
Let's say it takes 2seconds to do the cpu calculations and 1 second for the gpu to calculate the 2d image from the 3d data then it takes 3 seconds to produce 1 frame. or a frame rate of 1/3=0.333 frames per second
in 3d it would take the same 2 second to do the cpu calculations, 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d right screen and another 1 second to go from 3d data to 2d left screen. 4 seconds for 1 frame thus 1/4 = 0.25 frames per second.
these are all asumptions in the exact numbers.
If a game can do 300fps without S3D it will only do 60fps per eye in S3D which looks like only 20% performance compared to non S3D but in fact is closer to 40% sicne it's still doing 120fps total. Again I don't know the cost of the GPU work in terms of time.
just some ideas here.
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