Meant to be Seen

hi all

First of all i would like to thank to creators of this forum it was an endless source of info on 3d for me and apperantly for many others.

Here is my question:

Is it possible to play 3d games using my ati 6850 with an Lg cinema3dtv 1080p@60hz

thx

Well its not possible to play games at 1080P 60Hz with ANY TV. So, sorry, the answer is "no".

But, on the bright side, it should still work at 720P, and you can watch 3D Blu-Ray at 1080P (since this is at 24Hz).
However, even then, it won't be full HD since your TV is FPR meaning that image is interlaced. So you only get half resolution per eye.

Still should look OK, though.

Thank you very much for the quick answer Cyber

In that case 720p gaming means 360p per eye:S I guess ill wait to buy a a750d
from sansung:)

cybereality wrote:Well its not possible to play games at 1080P 60Hz with ANY TV. So, sorry, the answer is "no".

But, on the bright side, it should still work at 720P, and you can watch 3D Blu-Ray at 1080P (since this is at 24Hz).
However, even then, it won't be full HD since your TV is FPR meaning that image is interlaced. So you only get half resolution per eye.

Still should look OK, though.

you CAN, however, play at 1080p60Hz if your PC can output row-interleaved (IZ3D and DDD drivers support this). This is not the ATI HD3D format and is not a true 1080p per eye, but does provide higher resolution on a passive display compared to 720p frame packing.

As cyber and bgnome says.

1080p/60hz 3d looks nothing like 2d 1080p/60hz even when using a active 3dtv.
And on a passive set there is alot of res lost aswell as something that looks like horizontal aliasing but its just the way interleaved 3d looks.
1080p sbs has a softer image than 1080p interleaved and allthough interleaved looks sharper it shows the horizontal aliasing alittle more.
Neither are true 1080p 3d though allthough 1080p/60hz 3d is a hell of alot better than 720p frame packing 3d ect.

It's sad to see my sli 570's working flat out for 1080p/60hz 3d when the image is nowhere near as nice looking as 2d 1080p .

I just got a 6970 card the other day and hooked it up to my 55" LG 55lw5300. Using the interleaved horizontal (optimized) I played Counter Strike, Oblivion, Farcry 2, and Tomb Raider Underworld. All in 1080p/60hz. The 3D was awesome. this is the first time I've done 3D gaming in about 6 years. I have to remount the heatsink on the video card so it's out of commision for a couple of days but I'll let you know how it goes.
John

so it's been awhile using the LG passive TV and all i can say is "this is awesome" For the last two weeks I've been playing Skyrim 4 feet from a 55" 3D screen using the IZ3D drivers. Other than the fog over water in the AM I have yet to fine any issues with it. With the 6970 card i can run it with ultra settings at 1080p, 4xAA, and 8xAnsio. The frame rate hangs at about mid 50's with drops to upper 30's. I would be willing to argue that it is visually as good as shutter glasses at 120hz.
I tried the 720 ATI/AMD frame packet method. What a waste. I can't even imagine why that would be an available option unless AMD is trying to kill off 3D gaming.
John

Doon1 wrote:so it's been awhile using the LG passive TV and all i can say is "this is awesome" For the last two weeks I've been playing Skyrim 4 feet from a 55" 3D screen using the IZ3D drivers. Other than the fog over water in the AM I have yet to fine any issues with it. With the 6970 card i can run it with ultra settings at 1080p, 4xAA, and 8xAnsio. The frame rate hangs at about mid 50's with drops to upper 30's. I would be willing to argue that it is visually as good as shutter glasses at 120hz.
I tried the 720 ATI/AMD frame packet method. What a waste. I can't even imagine why that would be an available option unless AMD is trying to kill off 3D gaming.
John

my opinion is that the 720 frame packing method is an excuse for current gen consoles to be able to run 3d at acceptable framerates. since pc gaming nowadays is dominated by console ports, this has a side effect of limiting our options to lower resolutions than we are capable of. i don't complain much though, since it allows me to run current gen games on my gtx 460 in 3d fairly well.

720P frame-packing is going to look worse on passive displays since it has to first take a 720P image and upscale it to 1080P, then throw away half the resolution due to interlacing.

cybereality wrote: then throw away half the resolution due to interlacing.

I understand what you're saying about interlacing. When interlacing had to be used on the earlier model ATI cards using E-Dimensional glasses or their equivalent, the effect pretty much sucked. This was due to the fact that not only did you have the vertical split but there was the frame sequential shutter glasses to contend with as well. the thing that makes passive so much better is that you're getting the whole 1080 lines on every refresh of the screen.
I still have my old shutter glasses up in the attic. I've used them both on Nvidia (progressive) and 3Dfx (interlaced) cards. I had a Asus 23" Nvidia 120Hz setup for a few weeks last year. I can comfortably say that this passive set-up is a better visual experience for me than any other of the set-ups. I have not had the opportunity to try the second generation Nvidia offering yet. I hope to get a chance to in the near future.