huh? Line Interleaved is the "NATIVE" format used by Passive Displays using a FPR (FILM PATTERN RETARDER) screen.
Any other stereoscopic format that is put into it, "MUST" be converted to Line Interleaved "prior" to being displayed.
[quote="ramps"]So that ''Optomized for Nvidia GeForce'' for passive screens means that it gives less 3D effects than 3DTV and real active 3D vision?[/quote]
3DTV Play only outputs frame packed. Nvidia only allows 24Hz at 1080P. When this is input into a passive display, it must be converted prior to being shown.
No idea what you mean by less effects, it's still 3D.
huh? Line Interleaved is the "NATIVE" format used by Passive Displays using a FPR (FILM PATTERN RETARDER) screen.
Any other stereoscopic format that is put into it, "MUST" be converted to Line Interleaved "prior" to being displayed.
ramps said:So that ''Optomized for Nvidia GeForce'' for passive screens means that it gives less 3D effects than 3DTV and real active 3D vision?
3DTV Play only outputs frame packed. Nvidia only allows 24Hz at 1080P. When this is input into a passive display, it must be converted prior to being shown.
No idea what you mean by less effects, it's still 3D.
You didn't understand me. I asked does nvidia blocks features on Optomized for Nvidia GeForce for passive drivers and because that you get less 3D effects with that than 3DTV and 3D vision for active.
You didn't understand me. I asked does nvidia blocks features on Optomized for Nvidia GeForce for passive drivers and because that you get less 3D effects with that than 3DTV and 3D vision for active.
Text that is not stereoized, will only show on every other line.
This can be a problem if playing a MMO where you use chat that is rendered in 2D.
You should go to a retail outlet where you can make some self observations.
There is no difference in 3d effect/deepth between active and passive. What could give difference in deepth perception is the size of the screen.
With passive 3d you get two images of 1920x540 one for each eye. However from own expererience I can tell you that the loss in resolution is not as perceptible if you don't sit to close to the screen. The brain fills the gaps.
3rd thing is that now with passive you can go higher resolution than active 3d over hdmi 2.0
There is no difference in 3d effect/deepth between active and passive. What could give difference in deepth perception is the size of the screen.
With passive 3d you get two images of 1920x540 one for each eye. However from own expererience I can tell you that the loss in resolution is not as perceptible if you don't sit to close to the screen. The brain fills the gaps.
3rd thing is that now with passive you can go higher resolution than active 3d over hdmi 2.0
Intel i7 8086K
Gigabyte GTX 1080Ti Aorus Extreme
DDR4 2x8gb 3200mhz Cl14
TV LG OLED65E6V
Windows 10 64bits
Yeah but passive UHD takes 2x(3840x2160) gpu power and even 2D 3840x2160 have problems with 980ti sli. Seems like right now passive UHD is only better for upscaling 3D movies and for gaming active is still better.
Yeah but passive UHD takes 2x(3840x2160) gpu power and even 2D 3840x2160 have problems with 980ti sli. Seems like right now passive UHD is only better for upscaling 3D movies and for gaming active is still better.
Umm, yah, newer more demanding games will require lowering settings.
But a lot of older games can be played at max settings.
Do the math for 3D Vision surround at 1920x1080@120Hz x 3, you're only adding in one additional screen when using 4K..
And umm no, upscaling sucks for the most part. The best 4K content currently is via a PC, whether it be gaming or anything else that allows true 4K images.
Umm, yah, newer more demanding games will require lowering settings.
But a lot of older games can be played at max settings.
Do the math for 3D Vision surround at 1920x1080@120Hz x 3, you're only adding in one additional screen when using 4K..
And umm no, upscaling sucks for the most part. The best 4K content currently is via a PC, whether it be gaming or anything else that allows true 4K images.
Since Nvidia isn't doing anything, here is the transcript of my NVIDIA Support Request: "3DTV Play Support for 4K [Incident: 160202-000100]"
[code][05:52:56 AM]Hi, my name is Rajath. How may I help you?
[05:53:13 AM]Rajath: Hello Mathieu
[05:53:44 AM]Mathieu Hervais: Hi, I own a 4K UHD Active 3D TV display capable of SBS and TB 3D at 1920x2160 resolution per eye
[05:53:58 AM]Mathieu Hervais: yet the 3DTV play software even though I am connected through hdmi 2.0
[05:54:31 AM]Mathieu Hervais: is limited to 720p@60fps (which is awful on UHD displays) or 1080p@24fps
[05:55:17 AM]Mathieu Hervais: do you know if/when the 3DTV play software will be updated to support hdmi 2.0 standards and Side by Side, Top Bottom 3D modes?
[05:55:28 AM]Rajath: http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2567
[05:55:51 AM]Rajath: These are the only resolution and refresh rates currently supported by 3DTV play
[05:55:51 AM]Mathieu Hervais: right now it is limited to frame sequencing and checkerboard, checkerboard is not supported by any current display technology (the protocol being way too old)
[05:56:44 AM]Mathieu Hervais: I know, but this was a hdmi 1.3 limitation, the current hdmi standard is 2.0 which has more than enough bandwitdh to get 3D at much higher resolution
[05:57:12 AM]Mathieu Hervais: in fact, the competition, through tridef 3D handles 1920x2160 3D per eye perfectly fine
[05:57:41 AM]Mathieu Hervais: only 3DTV play (through an outdated software limitation) is limited to pretty much nowadays unplayable standards
[05:57:59 AM]Mathieu Hervais: what I am asking is that if there will be any updates regarding this issue, I am not the only one complaining
[05:58:56 AM]Mathieu Hervais: 3DTV play currently is limited to standards issued in 2010, while standards and technology available to consummers these days (in 2016) does much better
[06:00:22 AM]Mathieu Hervais: 1080p@24hz is unplayable because of the extreme input lag it induces while 720p@60hz is unwatchable due to the extremely poor resolution on a 4k panel
[06:00:37 AM]Mathieu Hervais: (we are talking about sizes usually above 50 inches)
[06:02:15 AM]Rajath: I will have your feedback forwarded to the concerned team, Currently 3DTV play is not supported with 4K resolution
[06:03:19 AM]Mathieu Hervais: these limitations were due to the limitations of the hdmi 1.4 standard, the hdmi 2.0 standard allows enough bandwitdh for 4096x2160 at 60fps with full 4:4:4 chroma, that's 18Gbps so a higher bandwitdh than DisplayPort 1.2, that's more than enough for 3D at high resolution
[06:03:21 AM]Mathieu Hervais: thank you
[06:04:00 AM]Rajath: You are welcome, Thank you for your tiem.
[06:04:03 AM]Rajath: **Time
[06:05:07 AM]'Mathieu Hervais' disconnected ('Concluded by End-user').[/code]
As you can see, this is getting ridiculous.
Since Nvidia isn't doing anything, here is the transcript of my NVIDIA Support Request: "3DTV Play Support for 4K [Incident: 160202-000100]"
[05:52:56 AM]Hi, my name is Rajath. How may I help you?
[05:53:13 AM]Rajath: Hello Mathieu
[05:53:44 AM]Mathieu Hervais: Hi, I own a 4K UHD Active 3D TV display capable of SBS and TB 3D at 1920x2160 resolution per eye
[05:53:58 AM]Mathieu Hervais: yet the 3DTV play software even though I am connected through hdmi 2.0
[05:54:31 AM]Mathieu Hervais: is limited to 720p@60fps (which is awful on UHD displays) or 1080p@24fps
[05:55:17 AM]Mathieu Hervais: do you know if/when the 3DTV play software will be updated to support hdmi 2.0 standards and Side by Side, Top Bottom 3D modes?
[05:55:28 AM]Rajath: http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2567
[05:55:51 AM]Rajath: These are the only resolution and refresh rates currently supported by 3DTV play
[05:55:51 AM]Mathieu Hervais: right now it is limited to frame sequencing and checkerboard, checkerboard is not supported by any current display technology (the protocol being way too old)
[05:56:44 AM]Mathieu Hervais: I know, but this was a hdmi 1.3 limitation, the current hdmi standard is 2.0 which has more than enough bandwitdh to get 3D at much higher resolution
[05:57:12 AM]Mathieu Hervais: in fact, the competition, through tridef 3D handles 1920x2160 3D per eye perfectly fine
[05:57:41 AM]Mathieu Hervais: only 3DTV play (through an outdated software limitation) is limited to pretty much nowadays unplayable standards
[05:57:59 AM]Mathieu Hervais: what I am asking is that if there will be any updates regarding this issue, I am not the only one complaining
[05:58:56 AM]Mathieu Hervais: 3DTV play currently is limited to standards issued in 2010, while standards and technology available to consummers these days (in 2016) does much better
[06:00:22 AM]Mathieu Hervais: 1080p@24hz is unplayable because of the extreme input lag it induces while 720p@60hz is unwatchable due to the extremely poor resolution on a 4k panel
[06:00:37 AM]Mathieu Hervais: (we are talking about sizes usually above 50 inches)
[06:02:15 AM]Rajath: I will have your feedback forwarded to the concerned team, Currently 3DTV play is not supported with 4K resolution
[06:03:19 AM]Mathieu Hervais: these limitations were due to the limitations of the hdmi 1.4 standard, the hdmi 2.0 standard allows enough bandwitdh for 4096x2160 at 60fps with full 4:4:4 chroma, that's 18Gbps so a higher bandwitdh than DisplayPort 1.2, that's more than enough for 3D at high resolution
[06:03:21 AM]Mathieu Hervais: thank you
[06:04:00 AM]Rajath: You are welcome, Thank you for your tiem.
[06:04:03 AM]Rajath: **Time
[06:05:07 AM]'Mathieu Hervais' disconnected ('Concluded by End-user').
[quote="bo3b"]Still not sure why 4K has any serious draw for people. If it's TV distance the extra pixels aren't visible, and it just makes your hardware struggle.
If it's monitor distance, I can understand the desire for > 1080p. For WatchDogs in particular though- there is no chance that I'd want to play that in CM when we have a true-3D fix for it. Trading off halos and text glitching for higher resolution is not particularly interesting.
Xizer's video there is using Tridef CM. [/quote]
So this....
I appreciate resolution, cannot bare to play anything below 1080p but it really becomes a case of diminishing returns. 4k simply cannot compete with a correctly supported and configured 3d vision game running at 1440p, hell even 1080p.
Also half the time as things stand the game does not even have the graphic assets to support 4k. Making the only real benefit not having to use (at least so much) anti aliasing and making your hardware struggle.
CM mode is something I put up with when there is nothing else.
bo3b said:Still not sure why 4K has any serious draw for people. If it's TV distance the extra pixels aren't visible, and it just makes your hardware struggle.
If it's monitor distance, I can understand the desire for > 1080p. For WatchDogs in particular though- there is no chance that I'd want to play that in CM when we have a true-3D fix for it. Trading off halos and text glitching for higher resolution is not particularly interesting.
Xizer's video there is using Tridef CM.
So this....
I appreciate resolution, cannot bare to play anything below 1080p but it really becomes a case of diminishing returns. 4k simply cannot compete with a correctly supported and configured 3d vision game running at 1440p, hell even 1080p.
Also half the time as things stand the game does not even have the graphic assets to support 4k. Making the only real benefit not having to use (at least so much) anti aliasing and making your hardware struggle.
CM mode is something I put up with when there is nothing else.
i7-4790K CPU 4.8Ghz stable overclock.
16 GB RAM Corsair
EVGA 1080TI SLI
Samsung SSD 840Pro
ASUS Z97-WS
3D Surround ASUS Rog Swift PG278Q(R), 2x PG278Q (yes it works)
Obutto R3volution.
Windows 10 pro 64x (Windows 7 Dual boot)
[quote="mathieulh"]
As you can see, this is getting ridiculous.[/quote]
No offense, but what do you expect? CS is outsourced to India and they simply read from a script. Their entire focus is to frustrate you into giving up (and saving the mother company money). I'm surprised they even had a link to offer you (off their script). It's an utter waste of time contacting CS for something like this.
No offense, but what do you expect? CS is outsourced to India and they simply read from a script. Their entire focus is to frustrate you into giving up (and saving the mother company money). I'm surprised they even had a link to offer you (off their script). It's an utter waste of time contacting CS for something like this.
Just out of interest, how hard would it be for nvidia to implement this?
Is it literally just removing a the resolution limit or will it take a lot more work?
If it's a simple fix it really shows you how much nvidia takes care of their customers.
The amount of money they make and their lack of dedication to their own tech says a lot about the company as a whole!
They couldn't care less! How many years have people been asking for this?
Just out of interest, how hard would it be for nvidia to implement this?
Is it literally just removing a the resolution limit or will it take a lot more work?
If it's a simple fix it really shows you how much nvidia takes care of their customers.
The amount of money they make and their lack of dedication to their own tech says a lot about the company as a whole!
They couldn't care less! How many years have people been asking for this?
I wish NVidia would update 3DTV play but here is the problem UHD active 3D TVs can only display UHD 3D content by using side by side or Top to bottom.
On my Samsung 55HU9000 these are the only 2 modes available for UHD 3D content.
and with the LG UHD TV you can use a EDID override get 4K 3D content.
3DTV Play and 3D Vision sell Nvidia GPUs, especially with the stereoscopic compatibility patches available from the community.
Unfortunately for Nvidia, there's also a lot of people that buy Radeon GPUs because the 720P@60 that 3DTV Play offers looks terrible on most displays. So there's nothing holding them back except for community fixes that many are not aware of.
I personally can't comprehend why Nvidia would concede this advantage to AMD for so many years. AMD also supported 4K displays in 2D, long before NVidia did. It makes you wonder what exactly they are thinking/doing.
3DTV Play and 3D Vision sell Nvidia GPUs, especially with the stereoscopic compatibility patches available from the community.
Unfortunately for Nvidia, there's also a lot of people that buy Radeon GPUs because the 720P@60 that 3DTV Play offers looks terrible on most displays. So there's nothing holding them back except for community fixes that many are not aware of.
I personally can't comprehend why Nvidia would concede this advantage to AMD for so many years. AMD also supported 4K displays in 2D, long before NVidia did. It makes you wonder what exactly they are thinking/doing.
Any other stereoscopic format that is put into it, "MUST" be converted to Line Interleaved "prior" to being displayed.
3DTV Play only outputs frame packed. Nvidia only allows 24Hz at 1080P. When this is input into a passive display, it must be converted prior to being shown.
No idea what you mean by less effects, it's still 3D.
This can be a problem if playing a MMO where you use chat that is rendered in 2D.
You should go to a retail outlet where you can make some self observations.
With passive 3d you get two images of 1920x540 one for each eye. However from own expererience I can tell you that the loss in resolution is not as perceptible if you don't sit to close to the screen. The brain fills the gaps.
3rd thing is that now with passive you can go higher resolution than active 3d over hdmi 2.0
Intel i7 8086K
Gigabyte GTX 1080Ti Aorus Extreme
DDR4 2x8gb 3200mhz Cl14
TV LG OLED65E6V
Windows 10 64bits
But a lot of older games can be played at max settings.
Do the math for 3D Vision surround at 1920x1080@120Hz x 3, you're only adding in one additional screen when using 4K..
And umm no, upscaling sucks for the most part. The best 4K content currently is via a PC, whether it be gaming or anything else that allows true 4K images.
As you can see, this is getting ridiculous.
Alienware 17 R3 GTX 980M (internal GPU)
RAM: 32GB
Storage: 4*512GB SSD
Display: Samsung UE55JU7500 (55 inches 4096x2160 capable display , 3840x2160 native resolution @ chroma 4:4:4 over HDMI 2.0)
Alienware Graphics Amplifier + GTX1080 connected to the above configuration (external GPU)
So this....
I appreciate resolution, cannot bare to play anything below 1080p but it really becomes a case of diminishing returns. 4k simply cannot compete with a correctly supported and configured 3d vision game running at 1440p, hell even 1080p.
Also half the time as things stand the game does not even have the graphic assets to support 4k. Making the only real benefit not having to use (at least so much) anti aliasing and making your hardware struggle.
CM mode is something I put up with when there is nothing else.
i7-4790K CPU 4.8Ghz stable overclock.
16 GB RAM Corsair
EVGA 1080TI SLI
Samsung SSD 840Pro
ASUS Z97-WS
3D Surround ASUS Rog Swift PG278Q(R), 2x PG278Q (yes it works)
Obutto R3volution.
Windows 10 pro 64x (Windows 7 Dual boot)
No offense, but what do you expect? CS is outsourced to India and they simply read from a script. Their entire focus is to frustrate you into giving up (and saving the mother company money). I'm surprised they even had a link to offer you (off their script). It's an utter waste of time contacting CS for something like this.
Is it literally just removing a the resolution limit or will it take a lot more work?
If it's a simple fix it really shows you how much nvidia takes care of their customers.
The amount of money they make and their lack of dedication to their own tech says a lot about the company as a whole!
They couldn't care less! How many years have people been asking for this?
On my Samsung 55HU9000 these are the only 2 modes available for UHD 3D content.
and with the LG UHD TV you can use a EDID override get 4K 3D content.
Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7 32GB Ram i9-9900K GigaByte Aorus Extreme Gaming 2080TI (single) Game Blaster Z Windows 10 X64 build #17763.195 Define R6 Blackout Case Corsair H110i GTX Sandisk 1TB (OS) SanDisk 2TB SSD (Games) Seagate EXOs 8 and 12 TB drives Samsung UN46c7000 HD TV Samsung UN55HU9000 UHD TVCurrently using ACER PASSIVE EDID override on 3D TVs LG 55
Unfortunately for Nvidia, there's also a lot of people that buy Radeon GPUs because the 720P@60 that 3DTV Play offers looks terrible on most displays. So there's nothing holding them back except for community fixes that many are not aware of.
I personally can't comprehend why Nvidia would concede this advantage to AMD for so many years. AMD also supported 4K displays in 2D, long before NVidia did. It makes you wonder what exactly they are thinking/doing.