Is NVIDIA Marketing Pushing GeForce 3D Vision Too Hard?

Going Deeper With Neil

LR: Do the other 3D tereoscopic gaming solutions take a performance hit as well? If so, what is the difference in performance?

All stereoscopic 3D solutions will be impacted by performance because by definition, a stereoscopic 3D image requires a unique rendering for a left and right camera view. Your findings of 50% to 60% performance loss is consistent with the other solutions on the market, and you will find pluses and minuses with different video games.

The concept of rating stereoscopic 3D FPS performance is very new and has not been an issue for most S-3D gamers. This technology is about playing a game in reasonable comfort while being able to absorb a whole new visual experience. Play Prince of Persia or Elder Scrolls IV in S-3D, and you will see what I mean. FPS will be the last thing on your mind.

If the S-3D solution can accomplish a healthy 25 to 35 frames per second, the gamer will be happy. Competitive gaming may be different, but stereoscopic 3D gamers like to look around more. Mind you, I play better competitively in S-3D mode because I’m more connected with the game.

LR: So you are saying that a 40-50% reduction in performance is expected, but more than that (like our benchmarks showed) is too much?

It’s not about being right or wrong. Did you know that most console games are rendered at 30 frames per second? The spec calls for 60, but most game developers are happy with 30.

According to your review of the NVIDIA solution with Left 4 Dead, your minimum FPS rating was 36.8FPS. While NVIDIA has room to optimize, this isn’t bad at all. You had the AA cranked up to the max too.

For me, 25 to 35 FPS is very reasonable for gaming. Other gamers need to determine what threshold they need to have fun with, and do a backwards calculation from there.

Also, you are going to find that some of these settings aren’t as critical once in S-3D mode. Anti-aliasing is a good example because the alternating images between your eyes through the shutter glasses has a similar smoothing effect. You could probably get away with 4AA.

LR: NVIDIA says that GeForce 3D Vision is supported by 350+ game titles… Since iZ3D and DDD have had 3D gaming products out for two years now, how many games do they support and do they rely on hooks in drivers?

Ok. This is a loaded question, so I need to give a brief 3D gaming history lesson.

First, it’s the other way around. NVIDIA had a ten year head start by supporting countless stereoscopic 3D solutions on the market including LCD shutter glasses, head mounted displays, 3D monitors, projectors…everything. What happened was in 2007 they took a licensed agreement approach with a manufacturing partner named Zalman for their interlaced 3D monitor display. In turn, all the other solutions had to find new driver support, and we now have three core driver makers that include NVIDIA, iZ3D, and DDD.

MTBS has always been supportive of NVIDIA’s licensing move because we appreciate their need to make an income, but the end users were incredibly upset, and this has haunted NVIDIA ever since. Read through their forums, and you will see positive threads get interrupted by angry customers. To NVIDIA’s credit, the customers are angry because they liked the drivers!

To respond to this, NVIDIA has been more proactive than they were in the past. They have been posting on MTBS and NVIDIA forums, they have been participating at events, and they are working hard to make their solution successful on all levels. If they keep these efforts up, NVIDIA will easily overcome this hurdle.

So, just because NVIDIA released their own branded LCD shutter glasses with refreshed software support, don’t assume that they missed a head start! No company has been in the S-3D gaming industry as long as NVIDIA.

Now I can answer your question:

NVIDIA’s 350+ game titles is more a customer service feature than a statement of compatibility. Go through the list. Some of them are OpenGL games which are not supported by their driver because they don’t have an OpenGL mode yet (e.g. Doom, Prey). Others are very old and reflect their previous driver solution. Many games just don’t add up to the compatibility that is being expected.

For example, Call of Duty 4 is listed as “excellent”, but even with NVIDIA’s recommended settings, the post processing makes the 3D experience flicker on and off. “Spore” is also rated as “Excellent”, but it suffers from inconsistent camera angles and depth settings. There isn’t enough consistency here.

In my opinion, this is more a list of acknowledged games and expectations than a testament of compatibility, but it was a very good idea for NVIDIA to do this from a customer service point of view.

Let me be clear about something, though. When NVIDIA does it right, they do an awesome job. FarCry 2 and Unreal Tournament 3 are very good examples. More testing needs to be done, but I have had success playing some games at higher settings than what NVIDIA recommends. NVIDIA also has a big DirectX 10 benefit too. We are seeing far more frequent drivers update too, so the compatibility we are getting today, is going to be better tomorrow.

As for the other solutions, hook or no hook, the only thing that matters is the games work. Play Call of Duty 4 with iZ3D drivers with all settings on full, and you will see. While iZ3D has a similar range of support, they are only publicizing the modern titles. I’m limited to what I can discuss, but iZ3D is also developing a new type of architecture which isn’t hook based, and everyone is eager to see what they come up with. They also work with both ATI and NVIDIA GPUs. Did you know that AMD and iZ3D went on a joint press tour?

DDD is another driver solution worth mentioning. They originally supported a handful of titles, but have launched a generic driver support angle similar to iZ3D and NVIDIA.

I can’t say which solution has more compatibility because we are still testing NVIDIA’s offering, but the first thing I would look for are any restrictions on what settings you can turn on and off in the game. iZ3D still has the big advantage here, but everyone’s products are enhancing very quickly. Did you know game developers are starting to implement native stereoscopic 3D support?

Now! Let me share something else as it relates to this. It is clear that the quality expectations between manufacturers are inconsistent. Until this is settled, there is a risk of poor customer experiences because of mixed messages of what to expect.

This is why MTBS was founded in the first place. To independently test games, determine expectations, certify and benefit game developers for implementing proper S-3D support, and ultimately build leverage for our industry to succeed. When I say industry, I mean NVIDIA, iZ3D, TDVision Corp., game developers, and additional driver and display manufacturers that help things along. 2009 is going to be a positive year in this regard.

LR: Of all the 3D solutions on the market, what impressed you the most and which do you think has the best chance of becoming mainstream, if any?

It’s not a matter of a single solution going mainstream or winning over the rest. That’s like asking if an ATI Radeon HD 4870X2 graphics card will be here in five years compared to an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295. Even now, these already available S-3D technologies are going through updates and changes to get better and better.