3D vision SLI vs. non-SLI performance Is there a advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems?
4 / 7
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110047' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:02 AM']All you guys have to do is giving up fullHD, its no more than a bad habit, it was necessary, cause LCD looked crap at "non insanity" resolutions, unlike CRT for example, and it still looks crap in movement. Give me PDP, CRT , DLP 720p over LCD 1080p , ANY DAY.
...or do you think your fullHD LCD looks better than a HDready Pioneer Kuro ? 'R you mad? Stop overtaxing gfx cards with crappy displays.[/quote]
Sorry but dropping resolution and taking a step backward in that regard isn't a viable option for many people. I know some people think its an acceptable solution to cut rendered pixels in half over the same screen-space, but for most it results in a very noticeable drop in image quality that makes the benefits of 3D questionable. On LCDs, there's the compounded issue of running at non-native resolutions, which reduces image quality even more with a blurry non-native image. Dropping down to 720p when I record FRAPs videos in 3D looks like crap, and while it does run better without a doubt, I probably wouldn't game in 720p in 3D if given the choice, I'd probably just play at 1080p @ 120Hz without S3D.
720p is a great compromise for entry-level 3D builds, but for those who don't want to compromise on the IQ increase from years of increased resolutions in games, its at least 1080p or bust. You can see this in numerous comments on those who want to "wait for 1200p or 1600p IPS 3D capable monitors". Also, not sure why you're recommending HD Ready Pioneer Kuros when they're not even compatible with 3D Vision atm? I'm sure once 3DTV Play is released, 720p 3D 3DTVs will become a more viable option and choice for those on the fence, but until then I can definitively say a 1080p 120Hz LCD is the better
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110048' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:08 AM']May be , may be, it was quite a feat they did, implementing 3d surround with pure software frame lock, unlike that eyefinity crap, that has hardware frame lock afaik.[/quote]
Ya the funny part of course is that Nvidia was criticized for its "software" solution while ATI was lauded for its hardware solution when the requirement for 2xGPUs for Nvidia Surround was announced. In the end Nvidia's software solution is probably the biggest reason Nvidia scales so well in SLI compared to EyeFinity, which scales extremely poorly in multi-GPU, multi-monitor configs.
Still, I think there's still some problems with their frame lock in S3D with SLI, as I've noticed the amount of tearing caused by partial frames being displayed has increased in more recent driver updates. Forcing Vsync on in either the game or in the driver, or both can reduce/eliminate the tearing, but not always which tells me the stereo 3D frame lock isn't being applied correctly or consistently.
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110047' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:02 AM']All you guys have to do is giving up fullHD, its no more than a bad habit, it was necessary, cause LCD looked crap at "non insanity" resolutions, unlike CRT for example, and it still looks crap in movement. Give me PDP, CRT , DLP 720p over LCD 1080p , ANY DAY.
...or do you think your fullHD LCD looks better than a HDready Pioneer Kuro ? 'R you mad? Stop overtaxing gfx cards with crappy displays.
Sorry but dropping resolution and taking a step backward in that regard isn't a viable option for many people. I know some people think its an acceptable solution to cut rendered pixels in half over the same screen-space, but for most it results in a very noticeable drop in image quality that makes the benefits of 3D questionable. On LCDs, there's the compounded issue of running at non-native resolutions, which reduces image quality even more with a blurry non-native image. Dropping down to 720p when I record FRAPs videos in 3D looks like crap, and while it does run better without a doubt, I probably wouldn't game in 720p in 3D if given the choice, I'd probably just play at 1080p @ 120Hz without S3D.
720p is a great compromise for entry-level 3D builds, but for those who don't want to compromise on the IQ increase from years of increased resolutions in games, its at least 1080p or bust. You can see this in numerous comments on those who want to "wait for 1200p or 1600p IPS 3D capable monitors". Also, not sure why you're recommending HD Ready Pioneer Kuros when they're not even compatible with 3D Vision atm? I'm sure once 3DTV Play is released, 720p 3D 3DTVs will become a more viable option and choice for those on the fence, but until then I can definitively say a 1080p 120Hz LCD is the better
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110048' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:08 AM']May be , may be, it was quite a feat they did, implementing 3d surround with pure software frame lock, unlike that eyefinity crap, that has hardware frame lock afaik.
Ya the funny part of course is that Nvidia was criticized for its "software" solution while ATI was lauded for its hardware solution when the requirement for 2xGPUs for Nvidia Surround was announced. In the end Nvidia's software solution is probably the biggest reason Nvidia scales so well in SLI compared to EyeFinity, which scales extremely poorly in multi-GPU, multi-monitor configs.
Still, I think there's still some problems with their frame lock in S3D with SLI, as I've noticed the amount of tearing caused by partial frames being displayed has increased in more recent driver updates. Forcing Vsync on in either the game or in the driver, or both can reduce/eliminate the tearing, but not always which tells me the stereo 3D frame lock isn't being applied correctly or consistently.
[quote name='JimmyBrain' post='1110060' date='Aug 29 2010, 05:24 AM']Sure, SLi is beneficial if you plan to do high-end gaming with excellent graphics while employing 3D-Vision and it's a must if you intend on doing it in 3D-Surround (and for anything that involves rendering across one or more monitors for 3D Vision). But I have a question:
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?[/quote]
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
[quote name='JimmyBrain' post='1110060' date='Aug 29 2010, 05:24 AM']Sure, SLi is beneficial if you plan to do high-end gaming with excellent graphics while employing 3D-Vision and it's a must if you intend on doing it in 3D-Surround (and for anything that involves rendering across one or more monitors for 3D Vision). But I have a question:
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
[quote name='JimmyBrain' post='1110060' date='Aug 29 2010, 05:24 AM']Sure, SLi is beneficial if you plan to do high-end gaming with excellent graphics while employing 3D-Vision and it's a must if you intend on doing it in 3D-Surround (and for anything that involves rendering across one or more monitors for 3D Vision). But I have a question:
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?[/quote]
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
[quote name='JimmyBrain' post='1110060' date='Aug 29 2010, 05:24 AM']Sure, SLi is beneficial if you plan to do high-end gaming with excellent graphics while employing 3D-Vision and it's a must if you intend on doing it in 3D-Surround (and for anything that involves rendering across one or more monitors for 3D Vision). But I have a question:
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
DLP pixels > plasma , lcd pixels
[img]http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/images/stories/feature_reviews/technical_articles/2003-07-lcd-dlp-pixel-fill-factor-diagram.gif[/img] DLP takes away less than 10% screen area , and LCD/plasma accounts for over 40%.
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
DLP pixels > plasma , lcd pixels
[img]http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/images/stories/feature_reviews/technical_articles/2003-07-lcd-dlp-pixel-fill-factor-diagram.gif[/img] DLP takes away less than 10% screen area , and LCD/plasma accounts for over 40%.
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
lol I would be amazed if you were able to notice the difference in fill factor and not notice the fact you're missing color for every other pixel in a checkerboard pattern. I see far more complaints about blurriness with DLPs running checkerboard than I do with LCDs running native resolution. There are clearly trade-offs to both technologies.
lol I would be amazed if you were able to notice the difference in fill factor and not notice the fact you're missing color for every other pixel in a checkerboard pattern. I see far more complaints about blurriness with DLPs running checkerboard than I do with LCDs running native resolution. There are clearly trade-offs to both technologies.
lol I would be amazed if you were able to notice the difference in fill factor and not notice the fact you're missing color for every other pixel in a checkerboard pattern. I see far more complaints about blurriness with DLPs running checkerboard than I do with LCDs running native resolution. There are clearly trade-offs to both technologies.
lol I would be amazed if you were able to notice the difference in fill factor and not notice the fact you're missing color for every other pixel in a checkerboard pattern. I see far more complaints about blurriness with DLPs running checkerboard than I do with LCDs running native resolution. There are clearly trade-offs to both technologies.
720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110668' date='Aug 30 2010, 05:39 PM']720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.[/quote]
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110668' date='Aug 30 2010, 05:39 PM']720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110668' date='Aug 30 2010, 05:39 PM']720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.[/quote]
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110668' date='Aug 30 2010, 05:39 PM']720p pj-s arent checkerboard dude. Indeed, that' d suck more than LCD's. :blink:
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
[quote name='videopho' post='1110547' date='Aug 30 2010, 02:05 PM']I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.[/quote]
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
[quote name='videopho' post='1110547' date='Aug 30 2010, 02:05 PM']I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
[quote name='videopho' post='1110547' date='Aug 30 2010, 02:05 PM']I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.[/quote]
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
[quote name='videopho' post='1110547' date='Aug 30 2010, 02:05 PM']I opted to go for one single card or a 480 to be exact primarily it's in a htpc with heat & noise is a big consideration.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
...or do you think your fullHD LCD looks better than a HDready Pioneer Kuro ? 'R you mad? Stop overtaxing gfx cards with crappy displays.[/quote]
Sorry but dropping resolution and taking a step backward in that regard isn't a viable option for many people. I know some people think its an acceptable solution to cut rendered pixels in half over the same screen-space, but for most it results in a very noticeable drop in image quality that makes the benefits of 3D questionable. On LCDs, there's the compounded issue of running at non-native resolutions, which reduces image quality even more with a blurry non-native image. Dropping down to 720p when I record FRAPs videos in 3D looks like crap, and while it does run better without a doubt, I probably wouldn't game in 720p in 3D if given the choice, I'd probably just play at 1080p @ 120Hz without S3D.
720p is a great compromise for entry-level 3D builds, but for those who don't want to compromise on the IQ increase from years of increased resolutions in games, its at least 1080p or bust. You can see this in numerous comments on those who want to "wait for 1200p or 1600p IPS 3D capable monitors". Also, not sure why you're recommending HD Ready Pioneer Kuros when they're not even compatible with 3D Vision atm? I'm sure once 3DTV Play is released, 720p 3D 3DTVs will become a more viable option and choice for those on the fence, but until then I can definitively say a 1080p 120Hz LCD is the better
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110048' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:08 AM']May be , may be, it was quite a feat they did, implementing 3d surround with pure software frame lock, unlike that eyefinity crap, that has hardware frame lock afaik.[/quote]
Ya the funny part of course is that Nvidia was criticized for its "software" solution while ATI was lauded for its hardware solution when the requirement for 2xGPUs for Nvidia Surround was announced. In the end Nvidia's software solution is probably the biggest reason Nvidia scales so well in SLI compared to EyeFinity, which scales extremely poorly in multi-GPU, multi-monitor configs.
Still, I think there's still some problems with their frame lock in S3D with SLI, as I've noticed the amount of tearing caused by partial frames being displayed has increased in more recent driver updates. Forcing Vsync on in either the game or in the driver, or both can reduce/eliminate the tearing, but not always which tells me the stereo 3D frame lock isn't being applied correctly or consistently.
...or do you think your fullHD LCD looks better than a HDready Pioneer Kuro ? 'R you mad? Stop overtaxing gfx cards with crappy displays.
Sorry but dropping resolution and taking a step backward in that regard isn't a viable option for many people. I know some people think its an acceptable solution to cut rendered pixels in half over the same screen-space, but for most it results in a very noticeable drop in image quality that makes the benefits of 3D questionable. On LCDs, there's the compounded issue of running at non-native resolutions, which reduces image quality even more with a blurry non-native image. Dropping down to 720p when I record FRAPs videos in 3D looks like crap, and while it does run better without a doubt, I probably wouldn't game in 720p in 3D if given the choice, I'd probably just play at 1080p @ 120Hz without S3D.
720p is a great compromise for entry-level 3D builds, but for those who don't want to compromise on the IQ increase from years of increased resolutions in games, its at least 1080p or bust. You can see this in numerous comments on those who want to "wait for 1200p or 1600p IPS 3D capable monitors". Also, not sure why you're recommending HD Ready Pioneer Kuros when they're not even compatible with 3D Vision atm? I'm sure once 3DTV Play is released, 720p 3D 3DTVs will become a more viable option and choice for those on the fence, but until then I can definitively say a 1080p 120Hz LCD is the better
[quote name='tritosine' post='1110048' date='Aug 29 2010, 04:08 AM']May be , may be, it was quite a feat they did, implementing 3d surround with pure software frame lock, unlike that eyefinity crap, that has hardware frame lock afaik.
Ya the funny part of course is that Nvidia was criticized for its "software" solution while ATI was lauded for its hardware solution when the requirement for 2xGPUs for Nvidia Surround was announced. In the end Nvidia's software solution is probably the biggest reason Nvidia scales so well in SLI compared to EyeFinity, which scales extremely poorly in multi-GPU, multi-monitor configs.
Still, I think there's still some problems with their frame lock in S3D with SLI, as I've noticed the amount of tearing caused by partial frames being displayed has increased in more recent driver updates. Forcing Vsync on in either the game or in the driver, or both can reduce/eliminate the tearing, but not always which tells me the stereo 3D frame lock isn't being applied correctly or consistently.
-=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
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?[/quote]
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
-=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
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?[/quote]
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
Isn't a single card good enough for everything else NVidia 3D-Vision has to offer (Like 3D Pictures, BD3D etc)?
Yeah whatever the lowest end card that's officially supported for 3D Vision would be good enough for any of the pre-rendered 3D, live events captured in 3D, streaming 3D that's already been processed like Youtube, etc, really no different than watching a movie or Youtube video compared to playing a video game without S3D. Rendering in real-time is performance expensive, and rendering stereo images for S3D is typically 2x as expensive.
Still, the best 3D content available today by far is PC games or videos created using PC games in terms of both quality and quantity. Not even the Hollywood CGI movies compare in quality of 3D experience, although they are the closest compared to the other options available. Simply put, if I couldn't play PC games in 3D, 3D would be a huge waste of money right now imo. This will begin to change as more content becomes available with other forms of media, like the consoles, 3D HDTV channels, 3D Blu-Ray, but as it is now, I'd say its probably something like <1% of available content on the HDTV is 3D where its really the opposite in terms of 3D in the PC space.
-=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
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
3dHTPC...i5-2500k|LianLiC33|GB-Z68XP-UD3|460SLI|psu750TX|8gb@1866|128gSSD|1tbBlack|16TB ext|w7u64|
HT7.3gear...Outlaw990|EmoXPA2-500wpc|Denon175wpc(5)|3dBR-BD300|NHT7.2|Polk0.1|73"DLP|
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
3dHTPC...i5-2500k|LianLiC33|GB-Z68XP-UD3|460SLI|psu750TX|8gb@1866|128gSSD|1tbBlack|16TB ext|w7u64|
HT7.3gear...Outlaw990|EmoXPA2-500wpc|Denon175wpc(5)|3dBR-BD300|NHT7.2|Polk0.1|73"DLP|
[img]http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/images/stories/feature_reviews/technical_articles/2003-07-lcd-dlp-pixel-fill-factor-diagram.gif[/img] DLP takes away less than 10% screen area , and LCD/plasma accounts for over 40%.
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
[img]http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/images/stories/feature_reviews/technical_articles/2003-07-lcd-dlp-pixel-fill-factor-diagram.gif[/img] DLP takes away less than 10% screen area , and LCD/plasma accounts for over 40%.
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
Settle for 921 600 blazing fast, razorsharp pixels instead of 2 073 600 blurry slime ( and washed out colors) ;)
[img]http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pauyBgq4Tqt1GJLijbyYaayR_YuXTlVREgaJO2w7tJdUjbsdPFHJsax_sKpk2G9RTmGicyD4Q81TB05BTMdDL2A/DLP.jpg[/img]
-=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
[img]http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pauyBgq4Tqt1GJLijbyYaayR_YuXTlVREgaJO2w7tJdUjbsdPFHJsax_sKpk2G9RTmGicyD4Q81TB05BTMdDL2A/DLP.jpg[/img]
-=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
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. Its a banwidth trade off, and I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
And yes, fillfactor plays a pretty big role, I dont want to upgrade to fullHD at all !
( Because I dont want to move closer to a 100" screen than 3 meter, but if you are into VR stuff, then maybe its indeed necessary,but I'd rather want 2 projector surround)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.[/quote]
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
-=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
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.[/quote]
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
Its as native as it gets....................... You tought we play checkerboard 720p, ...holy... :huh:
Its only necessary at 1080p, so they can pack 120hz into a 60hz frame. I'd never sacrifice gpu perfomance like that.
/shrug you said DLP, did not make the distinction you were talking about PJs, but at 720p you are for sure getting half resolution regardless, so your diagram still isn't accurate as you would have 8 pixels of data on the LCD compared to 4 pixels with higher fill. Either way if you were going to look at a small sampling of pixels, 8 pixels would undoubtedly look better than 4 pixels, but all of this has been beaten to death years ago with the whole 720p vs. 1080p debate. :)
-=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
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.[/quote]
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
-=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
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.[/quote]
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
In what specific games do we know that a single card vs sli, or in this case 480 vs 460 sli have dis/advantages over?
I heard mentioned some games but no actual games listing.
I play mostly flightsim & FPS.
There's plenty of games that will not give you 60FPS per eye with a single GTX 480. I started off with 3D Vision going 1x280 (other was on RMA) to 2x280. Even 2x280 was not enough for a lot of games to cap FPS at 60 per eye. 1x480 is very similar to 2x280 in 3D Vision performance, sometimes better, sometimes worst and still not able to cap 60FPS per eye in many of the games that the 2x280 struggled with. Here's some that a 2nd would benefit for sure at 1080p in S3D:
AC2
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2, Batman AA and many other UE3 games
Just Cause 2
Prince of Persia 2008
Metro 2033
BFBC2
Mafia 2
Dirt 2
Dawn of War 2
Resident Evil 5
Avatar (DX9, DX10 is same as 1x480 due to scaling problems)
A few others here and there. But basically the 2nd 480 is enough to cap FPS to 60 for both eyes and still has enough headroom leftover to let you turn up AA if you like too. Also, some games above still won't cap at 60FPS per eye due to scaling issues or S3D driver inefficiencies, but the 2nd GPU does help a lot, not quite 100% but maybe more like 50%.
-=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