Graphics card selection For 3d
So I've been looking at upgrading to 3D gaming but can't find any information on what graphic cards are actually powerful enough to run 3D. I'd say the lowest resolution I want to play at is 1280 or even 1080. I'm looking for a single card configuration because of my motherboard.

Is something like a 560Ti good enough?

Thanks for any info!
So I've been looking at upgrading to 3D gaming but can't find any information on what graphic cards are actually powerful enough to run 3D. I'd say the lowest resolution I want to play at is 1280 or even 1080. I'm looking for a single card configuration because of my motherboard.



Is something like a 560Ti good enough?



Thanks for any info!

#1
Posted 02/02/2012 02:05 AM   
[quote name='piethief' date='02 February 2012 - 02:05 AM' timestamp='1328148340' post='1363940']
So I've been looking at upgrading to 3D gaming but can't find any information on what graphic cards are actually powerful enough to run 3D. I'd say the lowest resolution I want to play at is 1280 or even 1080. I'm looking for a single card configuration because of my motherboard.

Is something like a 560Ti good enough?

Thanks for any info!
[/quote]

1280 or 1080? I think you mean 720p or 1080p. Anywho. For single card I'd recommend a 580 unfortunately for single card for 1080p. 560ti will be enough for 720p. You may be able to squeak by on your 560ti on some modern games made this year on 1080p but not all and its def. not future proof. If you are curious what fps you will have in any game. Get fraps. Find your fps in whatever resolution you want to play. Then divide by 1/2. That will give you what your fps will be like.

If you are going 720p only I recommend a good dlp projector. They are very good(pixel dense, no crosstalk,no ghosting) I sit around 4 feet from an 80" screen no pixelation.
[quote name='piethief' date='02 February 2012 - 02:05 AM' timestamp='1328148340' post='1363940']

So I've been looking at upgrading to 3D gaming but can't find any information on what graphic cards are actually powerful enough to run 3D. I'd say the lowest resolution I want to play at is 1280 or even 1080. I'm looking for a single card configuration because of my motherboard.



Is something like a 560Ti good enough?



Thanks for any info!





1280 or 1080? I think you mean 720p or 1080p. Anywho. For single card I'd recommend a 580 unfortunately for single card for 1080p. 560ti will be enough for 720p. You may be able to squeak by on your 560ti on some modern games made this year on 1080p but not all and its def. not future proof. If you are curious what fps you will have in any game. Get fraps. Find your fps in whatever resolution you want to play. Then divide by 1/2. That will give you what your fps will be like.



If you are going 720p only I recommend a good dlp projector. They are very good(pixel dense, no crosstalk,no ghosting) I sit around 4 feet from an 80" screen no pixelation.

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 02/02/2012 03:04 AM   
GTX 480 will do everything you want it to and you will pay a little less since it's last year's card. I have yet to find anything to slow it down. You get what you pay for, if you want to save some money, to me, if the card lags during some events, then I have wasted my money. Pay a little more and be done with it.
GTX 480 will do everything you want it to and you will pay a little less since it's last year's card. I have yet to find anything to slow it down. You get what you pay for, if you want to save some money, to me, if the card lags during some events, then I have wasted my money. Pay a little more and be done with it.

Intel Core i7 X 980 3.33GHz @ 3.3 GHz

eVGA X58 Classified 4-Way SLI motherboard

HAF-X Case, Corsair H80 CPU Liquid Cooler

12GB System RAM

EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480

KingWin Mach 1 ATX 1220-Watt Power Supply

Western Digital VelociRaptor 10000 RPM hdd

#3
Posted 02/02/2012 04:58 AM   
Yuck, rather than a GTX 480, it's better to get a GTX 570 which pretty much has the same performance as a GTX 480 but uses much less power, produces less heat, and is quieter thanks to its vapor chamber cooling. And if that's still a bit too expensive, there's the GTX 560 Ti 448 Core edition which is quite different from and faster than a regular GTX 560 Ti. The GTX 560 Ti 448 Core uses the same GPU as the GTX 570 but with some circuitry disabled (or not working) but when overclocked, it can match a non-overclocked GTX 570. The only potential problem with the GTX 560 Ti 448 Core is that only the 290 series beta drivers support it, and unfortunately the 290 drivers are a mixed bag at the moment.
Yuck, rather than a GTX 480, it's better to get a GTX 570 which pretty much has the same performance as a GTX 480 but uses much less power, produces less heat, and is quieter thanks to its vapor chamber cooling. And if that's still a bit too expensive, there's the GTX 560 Ti 448 Core edition which is quite different from and faster than a regular GTX 560 Ti. The GTX 560 Ti 448 Core uses the same GPU as the GTX 570 but with some circuitry disabled (or not working) but when overclocked, it can match a non-overclocked GTX 570. The only potential problem with the GTX 560 Ti 448 Core is that only the 290 series beta drivers support it, and unfortunately the 290 drivers are a mixed bag at the moment.

CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K @4.5GHz
Mainboard: MSI Z170M MORTAR
Graphics: ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1080 AMP Edition @1783MHz
RAM: 2 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 2666MHz C16
OS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Version 1803 (OS Build 17134.648)
PSU: Seasonic Eco 600W SS-600BT Active PFC T3
Monitor: ASUS VX239H 23" AH-IPS Full HD Monitor

#4
Posted 02/02/2012 07:51 AM   
3D is a vRAM hog. As such, it'd be ideal to get a GTX 580 3GB, even for simple 1080p gaming, because from what I've heard from several members here, 3D often goes above & beyond 1.4GB+ of vRAM usage, meaning pretty much any card other than a GTX 580 3GB isn't going to handle it well, depending on the games you're going to play.

That's of course assuming max settings. If you're willing to turn stuff down to run it smoothly, a GTX 560 Ti 448 Core is a great alternative, and extremely powerful, just a bit skimpy on the vRAM.
3D is a vRAM hog. As such, it'd be ideal to get a GTX 580 3GB, even for simple 1080p gaming, because from what I've heard from several members here, 3D often goes above & beyond 1.4GB+ of vRAM usage, meaning pretty much any card other than a GTX 580 3GB isn't going to handle it well, depending on the games you're going to play.



That's of course assuming max settings. If you're willing to turn stuff down to run it smoothly, a GTX 560 Ti 448 Core is a great alternative, and extremely powerful, just a bit skimpy on the vRAM.

CPU: i7 3930k @ 4.2GHz 1.21V ~ Motherboard: Asus RoG Rampage IV Extreme
RAM: G.Skill Sniper Gaming Series (4x4GB @ 2133MHz, 9-11-10-28-2T 1.65V)
GPUs: 1x R9 280X Vapor-X (Games/F@H), 1x R9 290 Core Edition (F@H), 1x R9 290X Core Edition (F@H)
PSU: LEPA G 1600W (Hate it, don't buy it) ~ Case: Enermax Fulmo GT
SSDs/HDDs: Corsair Force3 240GB, Corsair Force3 90GB, 1x Seagate Momentus XT 750GB
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate ~ Display: Sony Bravia 52" LED LCD HDTV
Laptops: Alienware M18x (2013, GTX 560M SLi) & Alienware M14x (2014, GTX 765M)

#5
Posted 02/02/2012 08:37 AM   
I purchased a GTX 580 3GB and it was definitely needed for a cutting edge title like Batman: Arkham City. Upgraded from running two GTS 450s in SLI. They were adequate, but starting to lag behind with titles released in 2011. I don't regret the purchase, but I'm a graphics whore. I wouldn't recommend anything less than a 580 1GB, and as Honey Badger said, better to go with a 3GB.

If you want to be able to play brand new games at 1080dpi with reasonable detail levels, you will need to spend $500 or more.

Btw... You can't play 3D in 1280dpi to my knowledge - 1080 or 720 are your choices.
I purchased a GTX 580 3GB and it was definitely needed for a cutting edge title like Batman: Arkham City. Upgraded from running two GTS 450s in SLI. They were adequate, but starting to lag behind with titles released in 2011. I don't regret the purchase, but I'm a graphics whore. I wouldn't recommend anything less than a 580 1GB, and as Honey Badger said, better to go with a 3GB.



If you want to be able to play brand new games at 1080dpi with reasonable detail levels, you will need to spend $500 or more.



Btw... You can't play 3D in 1280dpi to my knowledge - 1080 or 720 are your choices.

|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64

#6
Posted 02/02/2012 01:25 PM   
Running at 720p I should think you'd get a decent experience with a 560Ti. I was running a single GTX470, which isn't much different and most things ran very well in 3d.
Having said that, when I added a 2nd Gtx470, it made a big difference, so basically the number of shaders/ROPs/cores (whatever you wan't to call them) are more important than Vram in most cases, especially for this resolution.
Don't discount older cards (i.e. 480) if you can pick one up cheap enough.
Running at 720p I should think you'd get a decent experience with a 560Ti. I was running a single GTX470, which isn't much different and most things ran very well in 3d.

Having said that, when I added a 2nd Gtx470, it made a big difference, so basically the number of shaders/ROPs/cores (whatever you wan't to call them) are more important than Vram in most cases, especially for this resolution.

Don't discount older cards (i.e. 480) if you can pick one up cheap enough.

GTX 1070 SLI, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

#7
Posted 02/02/2012 01:55 PM   
Thank you guys so much for the feed back. I think I will go with a 560ti 448 and transition from the higher resolutions I'm used to. Goodbye 1080p.
Thank you guys so much for the feed back. I think I will go with a 560ti 448 and transition from the higher resolutions I'm used to. Goodbye 1080p.

#8
Posted 02/02/2012 11:48 PM   
[quote name='piethief' date='02 February 2012 - 11:48 PM' timestamp='1328226523' post='1364372']
Thank you guys so much for the feed back. I think I will go with a 560ti 448 and transition from the higher resolutions I'm used to. Goodbye 1080p.
[/quote]

Can't speak for anyone else, given a choice of 720p 3d or 1080p 2d I'd never game at 1080p again. Talking 'p' (progressive) I suppose technically we're talking 3dtvplay, in which case there are many compelling reasons to run at the lower resolution. You may well notice the loss of clarity, but you won't look back :-)
[quote name='piethief' date='02 February 2012 - 11:48 PM' timestamp='1328226523' post='1364372']

Thank you guys so much for the feed back. I think I will go with a 560ti 448 and transition from the higher resolutions I'm used to. Goodbye 1080p.





Can't speak for anyone else, given a choice of 720p 3d or 1080p 2d I'd never game at 1080p again. Talking 'p' (progressive) I suppose technically we're talking 3dtvplay, in which case there are many compelling reasons to run at the lower resolution. You may well notice the loss of clarity, but you won't look back :-)

GTX 1070 SLI, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

#9
Posted 02/03/2012 12:58 AM   
So its down to either a GeForce GTX 570 (Fermi) HD 2560MB or EVGA 012-P3-2068-KR GeForce GTX 560 Ti (Fermi) 448 Cores Classified 1280MB. The 570 is alittle slower but twice the memory. Think its worth the extra 100 bucks?
So its down to either a GeForce GTX 570 (Fermi) HD 2560MB or EVGA 012-P3-2068-KR GeForce GTX 560 Ti (Fermi) 448 Cores Classified 1280MB. The 570 is alittle slower but twice the memory. Think its worth the extra 100 bucks?

#10
Posted 02/03/2012 02:33 AM   
Extra RAM is appreciated nowadays due to how much newer games are using once you enable AA, but I'm not sure a single 570/560 Ti448 will be able to make full use of that VRAM in 3D @ 1080p before it starts bogging down with low fps. I hit 1.5GB regularly and would like more but I'm running SLI which keeps FPS nice and high even with AA. Just something to consider, personally with 1 card I would not bother with the extra RAM version.

What card are you using now? Honestly at this point, if you are in a position to wait, I'd say wait for Kepler. If you had to buy now you'd still get a sweet card at the prices you're looking at, but the performance mid-range Kepler should offer better performance at a similar pricepoint.
Extra RAM is appreciated nowadays due to how much newer games are using once you enable AA, but I'm not sure a single 570/560 Ti448 will be able to make full use of that VRAM in 3D @ 1080p before it starts bogging down with low fps. I hit 1.5GB regularly and would like more but I'm running SLI which keeps FPS nice and high even with AA. Just something to consider, personally with 1 card I would not bother with the extra RAM version.



What card are you using now? Honestly at this point, if you are in a position to wait, I'd say wait for Kepler. If you had to buy now you'd still get a sweet card at the prices you're looking at, but the performance mid-range Kepler should offer better performance at a similar pricepoint.

-=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

#11
Posted 02/03/2012 03:38 AM   
I think Chiz is right. It's a nice theory to 'future proof' by having extra VRAM, but it's not worth sticking a load of VRAM on a lower powered card because it won't have the power to render games at a playable framerate at high resolutions (where the VRAM is needed). The caveat to that is if you do go down the SLI route.

Basically VRAM is used to cache textures + store the frambuffer (I believe). Most games don't have particularly high res textures because they're aimed at the lowest common denominator, so generally, VRAM usage only increases dramatically at higher resolutions and/or with extra levels of AA.

Also, as far as I understand it, there is no particular need for extra VRAM to game in 3D, whereas you do need twice the actual fillrate. There might be a slight VRAM overhead in 3d, but it's probably negligible compared to the other factors I've mentioned.
I think Chiz is right. It's a nice theory to 'future proof' by having extra VRAM, but it's not worth sticking a load of VRAM on a lower powered card because it won't have the power to render games at a playable framerate at high resolutions (where the VRAM is needed). The caveat to that is if you do go down the SLI route.



Basically VRAM is used to cache textures + store the frambuffer (I believe). Most games don't have particularly high res textures because they're aimed at the lowest common denominator, so generally, VRAM usage only increases dramatically at higher resolutions and/or with extra levels of AA.



Also, as far as I understand it, there is no particular need for extra VRAM to game in 3D, whereas you do need twice the actual fillrate. There might be a slight VRAM overhead in 3d, but it's probably negligible compared to the other factors I've mentioned.

GTX 1070 SLI, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

#12
Posted 02/03/2012 12:17 PM   
For a single card in 3D Vision, a more powerful gpu is better than more vram.
If you wanted 2 graphics cards in SLI and wanted to max all graphics settings, then ok, choose more vram.

1280MB vram is enough to max (or almost max) almost all dx9 games in 3D at 1080p.
For dx10,dx11 games, maybe you will use only 4-8xAA.
With my overclocked GTX 580, I rarely use max AA because fps is too low at max graphics settings.
I also turn off depth of field (which I dont even like) and other gpu heavy settings.
There is no need to play games with every setting on at max.

SLI GTX 570 vs GTX 570 2.5GB (5760x1080 in 3D)
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/47608-effect-gpu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance-6.html

SLI GTX 580 vs GTX 580 3GB (5760x1080 in 3D)
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/47608-effect-gpu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance-4.html

My first choice = used GTX 480, but only if the price is low.
my second choice = wait for kepler
My third choice = GTX 560 Ti 448 cores
My fourth choice = GTX 580 (expensive but good card for overclocking)

One GTX 570 2560MB will not have enough gpu processing power to use 2000MB+ vram and run 60fps in 3D at 1920x1080 (on one 120Hz 3D monitor).
For a single card in 3D Vision, a more powerful gpu is better than more vram.

If you wanted 2 graphics cards in SLI and wanted to max all graphics settings, then ok, choose more vram.



1280MB vram is enough to max (or almost max) almost all dx9 games in 3D at 1080p.

For dx10,dx11 games, maybe you will use only 4-8xAA.

With my overclocked GTX 580, I rarely use max AA because fps is too low at max graphics settings.

I also turn off depth of field (which I dont even like) and other gpu heavy settings.

There is no need to play games with every setting on at max.



SLI GTX 570 vs GTX 570 2.5GB (5760x1080 in 3D)

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/47608-effect-gpu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance-6.html



SLI GTX 580 vs GTX 580 3GB (5760x1080 in 3D)

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/47608-effect-gpu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance-4.html



My first choice = used GTX 480, but only if the price is low.

my second choice = wait for kepler

My third choice = GTX 560 Ti 448 cores

My fourth choice = GTX 580 (expensive but good card for overclocking)



One GTX 570 2560MB will not have enough gpu processing power to use 2000MB+ vram and run 60fps in 3D at 1920x1080 (on one 120Hz 3D monitor).

Thief 1/2/gold in 3D
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/523535/3d-vision/thief-1-2-and-system-shock-2-perfect-3d-with-unofficial-patch-1-19
http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/Partol/album/509eb580a3e067153c000020/

[Acer GD245HQ - 1920x1080 120Hz] [Nvidia 3D Vision]
[MSI H81M-P33 with Pentium G3258 @ 4.4GHz and Zalman CNPS5X}[Transcend 2x2GB DDR3]
[Asus GTX 750 Ti @ 1350MHz] [Intel SSD 330 - 240GB]
[Creative Titanium HD + Beyerdynamic DT 880 (250ohm) headphones] [Windows 7 64bit]

#13
Posted 02/03/2012 01:15 PM   
Scroll To Top