Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

3D gaming

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 12, 2010 8:59:42 PM

Looking to upgrade my PC to run 3D games.
I have this motherboard:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
I also have this processor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I want to buy this Nvidia card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
And I want this monitor:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Along with 4gb of SDRAM, will my existing hardware support the 3D gaming rig I'm proposing?

More about : gaming

August 12, 2010 9:10:23 PM

looks like it
Score
0
August 12, 2010 9:25:30 PM

jefe323 said:
looks like it


Thank you for your response. I was just worried that my mb/cpu might not have what it takes to smoothly push 3D gaming.
Score
0
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 12, 2010 9:29:32 PM

You might want to OC your CPU a bit as it will hold back the 480 is most cases.
Score
0
August 12, 2010 9:51:32 PM

Timop said:
You might want to OC your CPU a bit as it will hold back the 480 is most cases.


Regrettably, I know very little about overclocking. Some of the threads on this site could lead one to believe that overclocking might be an unhealthy practice. Any truth to that?
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 12, 2010 10:05:02 PM

terminalsigh said:
Regrettably, I know very little about overclocking. Some of the threads on this site could lead one to believe that overclocking might be an unhealthy practice. Any truth to that?

What do you mean by "unhealthy"
Overclocking does reduce the life of your processor if you don't watch the temps carefully and could potentially damage it of you go a little to over with the volts.

However, when you are careful and dont aim too high, you shouldnt break anything. But it is a risky process so be warned.

However, the original Phenoms OC horribly, you'll be lucky if you hit 2.8Ghz, sell it and get something like an Athlon X4 635 for $100.
Score
0
August 12, 2010 11:05:50 PM

Timop said:
What do you mean by "unhealthy"
Overclocking does reduce the life of your processor if you don't watch the temps carefully and could potentially damage it of you go a little to over with the volts.

However, when you are careful and dont aim too high, you shouldnt break anything. But it is a risky process so be warned.

However, the original Phenoms OC horribly, you'll be lucky if you hit 2.8Ghz, sell it and get something like an Athlon X4 635 for $100.


Well, by unhealthy I mean possibly damaging to the hardware. You did answer my concerns there. Was hoping to stay under the $1100 mark with this rig, which may be possible with the CPU you mentioned. Would the Athlon need overclocking?
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 12, 2010 11:23:22 PM

terminalsigh said:
Well, by unhealthy I mean possibly damaging to the hardware. You did answer my concerns there. Was hoping to stay under the $1100 mark with this rig, which may be possible with the CPU you mentioned. Would the Athlon need overclocking?

It would benefit, but it wont hold the 480 back nearly as much as your old one.

However, getting a GTX480 on a budget isn't the smartest thing to to, heres a GTX470 for $290, performs 20% worse for $200 less, and you could OC it with ease. The risks of OCing an GPU is far lower than the CPU. Get that and a Phenom II X4 955 would be a much better idea.
Score
0
August 16, 2010 1:50:07 PM

Timop said:
It would benefit, but it wont hold the 480 back nearly as much as your old one.

However, getting a GTX480 on a budget isn't the smartest thing to to, heres a GTX470 for $290, performs 20% worse for $200 less, and you could OC it with ease. The risks of OCing an GPU is far lower than the CPU. Get that and a Phenom II X4 955 would be a much better idea.



The 470 sounds formidable in comparison to the 480. I found this EVGA superclocked version of the 470.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Next to the 470 you recommended, would you say this one is worth the $40-50 extra? I've also seen people talking about using two 470s to run 3D games. Is that overkill?
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 16, 2010 2:08:36 PM

terminalsigh said:
The 470 sounds formidable in comparison to the 480. I found this EVGA superclocked version of the 470.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Next to the 470 you recommended, would you say this one is worth the $40-50 extra? I've also seen people talking about using two 470s to run 3D games. Is that overkill?

Honestly I would get the ASUS and OC it yourself, its really easy, just get Rivatuner/ Afterburner/ Precision and turn up the dials.
If you like Lifetime warranties, heres an EVGA for $300: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... .

A single 470 is powerful, but may not run select modern games (Crysis/Metro 2033) at maximum settings even in 2D(nor a GTX480 actually) However, your Motherboard does not support SLI and AMD based SLI boards aren't really worth the money IMO. So just try it out with a single 470 and OC to see it it meets your demands.

However, if you're set on buying a SLI board, consider 2 GTX460s, performs better than a GTX480 for ~$380.

Score
0
August 16, 2010 2:45:52 PM

Agree'd with everything, the only evga Superclocked worth getting is the Superclocked(+), because it comes with a backplate and the highflow bracket.

Other then that, you'll want a faster CPU, because yours will bottleneck a 470/480, and when gaming in 3d, you effectively half your fps, so you want them to be running tip top in the first place. If your in the states ordering from EVGA directly is usually pretty cheap and they almost always have free shipping too.

Good pick on the monitor, it's super nice.
Score
0
August 16, 2010 4:22:06 PM

Timop said:
Honestly I would get the ASUS and OC it yourself, its really easy, just get Rivatuner/ Afterburner/ Precision and turn up the dials.

Checked out the ASUS website and it didn't mention any sort of 3D capability, but since it says its based on NVidia's engine, I'm guessing the 3D bit doesn't need mentioning from ASUS. As far as the games I'm hoping to play, Crysis and Metro would be great, but I've already written them off as being too intense for whatever my hardware might be. I'd be content with Fallout3, the Modern Warfare titles and whatever else that hopefully wouldn't bog down my system too horribly.

Not planning on switching out the motherboard for SLI unless its super necessary. It also just occurred to me that I can sell off my old computer parts to help fund the new parts. Not sure if there's a lucrative market on ebay for used comp parts, but they're all still in great working condition so its worth a shot.
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 16, 2010 4:27:57 PM

terminalsigh said:
Checked out the ASUS website and it didn't mention any sort of 3D capability, but since it says its based on NVidia's engine, I'm guessing the 3D bit doesn't need mentioning from ASUS. As far as the games I'm hoping to play, Crysis and Metro would be great, but I've already written them off as being too intense for whatever my hardware might be. I'd be content with Fallout3, the Modern Warfare titles and whatever else that hopefully wouldn't bog down my system too horribly.

Not planning on switching out the motherboard for SLI unless its super necessary. It also just occurred to me that I can sell off my old computer parts to help fund the new parts. Not sure if there's a lucrative market on ebay for used comp parts, but they're all still in great working condition so its worth a shot.

All Nvidia GTX series cards have 3D capability, in fact some other weaker models too.
Score
0
August 16, 2010 4:34:18 PM

Petey1013 said:
Agree'd with everything, the only evga Superclocked worth getting is the Superclocked(+), because it comes with a backplate and the highflow bracket.

Other then that, you'll want a faster CPU, because yours will bottleneck a 470/480, and when gaming in 3d, you effectively half your fps, so you want them to be running tip top in the first place. If your in the states ordering from EVGA directly is usually pretty cheap and they almost always have free shipping too.

Good pick on the monitor, it's super nice.


Yeah, I think I'd be hard pressed to find a better monitor for that price. Also probably the only part I'm looking to buy that I won't have to worry about in terms of performance.

It'll be hard to choose which vidcard to get. I had looked at the EVGA SC+ and it did sound promising. I may consider splurging on a nice CPU so I'll be able to worry less about the overall 3D experience. One thing I am worried about is the low fps. Would that not create an uncomfortable strobe effect with the alternating shutter glasses?
Score
0
August 16, 2010 5:25:43 PM

Timop said:
All Nvidia GTX series cards have 3D capability, in fact some other weaker models too.

It sounds like 3D pc gaming has been around for a while? I've read by some that the technology is in its infancy and is now is perhaps not the time to be investing in it. A self-defeating argument IMO, since the tech needs consumers to take a chance on it if R&D is expected to yield new and amazing results. I think Nvidia is smart for marketing their 3D cards to be versatile (i.e. 2D/3D capable). That leaves more room for growth in the 3D market, at least as far as pc's go. The 3DTV market seems both more expensive and less adaptive in comparison.
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 16, 2010 5:35:09 PM

terminalsigh said:
It sounds like 3D pc gaming has been around for a while? I've read by some that the technology is in its infancy and is now is perhaps not the time to be investing in it. A self-defeating argument IMO, since the tech needs consumers to take a chance on it if R&D is expected yield new and amazing results. I think Nvidia is smart for marketing their 3D cards to be versatile (i.e. 2D/3D capable). That leaves more room for growth in the 3D market, at least as far as pc's go. The 3DTV market seems both more expensive and less adaptive in comparison.

Nvidia 3D been around for quite a while now and nothing much has changed, just that Nvidia launched the 3D surround a while back that got it back to the spotlight.

Though to point out something, any video card can technically do "3D", its nothing different from "2D" cards. The technology is mainly in the software, screens and glasses.
Score
0
August 16, 2010 6:00:03 PM

Timop said:
Nvidia 3D been around for quite a while now and nothing much has changed, just that Nvidia launched the 3D surround a while back that got it back to the spotlight.

Though to point out something, any video card can technically do "3D", its nothing different from "2D" cards. The technology is mainly in the software, screens and glasses.

So theoretically I could run poorly rendered 3D with my current setup, special drivers a new monitor? Not that I'd want to run poorly rendered 3D. I also doubt the existence of a 3D driver for my vidcard. Sorry if I'm simply repeating what you already said.
Score
0

Best solution

a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 16, 2010 6:03:50 PM

terminalsigh said:
So theoretically I could run poorly rendered 3D with my current setup, special drivers a new monitor? Not that I'd want to run poorly rendered 3D. I also doubt the existence of a 3D driver for my vidcard.

I don't know what you mean by poorly rendered 3D.
Though if you mean running 3D on an non-Nvidia card, it is theoretically possible, as long as there are drivers avaliable.

There are third party 3D alternatives out there however, like this: http://www.iz3d.com/
Share
August 16, 2010 7:11:10 PM

Timop said:
I don't know what you mean by poorly rendered 3D.
Though if you mean running 3D on an non-Nvidia card, it is theoretically possible, as long as there are drivers avaliable.

There are third party 3D alternatives out there however, like this: http://www.iz3d.com/

I just mean 3D with extremely low fps. Seems like it would really aggravating to view overly choppy motion in any game.

The monitor you linked me too is remarkable. Read a lot of reviews on newegg, and for the most part it sounds like a great investment. Another plus is that my vidcard meets IZ3D's minimum recommendations. Have you had any personal experience with this monitor?
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 16, 2010 8:17:50 PM

terminalsigh said:
I just mean 3D with extremely low fps. Seems like it would really aggravating to view overly choppy motion in any game.

The monitor you linked me too is remarkable. Read a lot of reviews on newegg, and for the most part it sounds like a great investment. Another plus is that my vidcard meets IZ3D's minimum recommendations. Have you had any personal experience with this monitor?

Well, low fps with 2D is aggravating also.

Personally have no experience with the iZ3D, though my experiences with Nvidia 3D is only based on a couple Demos also :kaola:  .
But the way the iZ3D monitor works is by combining 2 monitors in one, then using polarized lenses to make each eye only see one monitor, the eyestrain should still there, and according to reviews 2D quality isn't the best. Also you lose the ability to use more than 1 monitors.
Score
0
August 16, 2010 8:38:43 PM

Timop said:
Well, low fps with 2D is aggravating also.

Personally have no experience with the iZ3D, though my experiences with Nvidia 3D is only based on a couple Demos also :kaola:  .
But the way the iZ3D monitor works is by combining 2 monitors in one, then using polarized lenses to make each eye only see one monitor, the eyestrain should still there, and according to reviews 2D quality isn't the best. Also you lose the ability to use more than 1 monitors.


I hear you on the low fps aggravation with 2D.

The setup I have right now is a desktop connected to a 47" lcd tv. I would set up the iz3D as a second monitor, though I would need to switch the dvi cables around whenever jumping from one monitor to the other. I plan to keep the 47" for all my 2D usage and just use the iz3D for gaming. The only problem I might have is the relation between my dolby setup and the placement of the iz3D in the room. The only place I'd have for the monitor is on a side desk, which would throw the L/R sound orientation totally off. Actually, I'm not sure I'd even be able to use my surround sound system at all because the monitor would require the use of both of my dvi ports. I do have a separate soundcard, but I do not believe it will connect to my dolby receiver. Currently I have my computer running surround sound through a dvi-to-hdmi adapter connected to an hdmi port on the receiver. This is a problem.

I guess my only real option would be to hook up a pair of headphones to the soundcard and change settings to route the sound through there. That way I also wouldn't need to worry about L/R orientation.
Score
0
August 26, 2010 2:08:28 PM

Best answer selected by terminalsigh.
Score
0
August 26, 2010 2:43:07 PM

Timop said:
Well, low fps with 2D is aggravating also.

Personally have no experience with the iZ3D, though my experiences with Nvidia 3D is only based on a couple Demos also :kaola:  .
But the way the iZ3D monitor works is by combining 2 monitors in one, then using polarized lenses to make each eye only see one monitor, the eyestrain should still there, and according to reviews 2D quality isn't the best. Also you lose the ability to use more than 1 monitors.


I went ahead and got the iZ3D monitor from newegg bundled along with a Gigabyte Geforce GTX460. So far I am very impressed. There is a bit of ghosting here and there, but the software allows for Auto-focus, which is a godsend at times. The biggest challenge, and this may be the same with shutter3D, is calibrating the proper amount of separation and conversion. Different games feel better with different settings, so I am constantly recalibrating. I did, however, start taking notes so that I can keep a record of what works best with each game. I've played a number a games including Star Wars: Battlefront2, Halo Combat Evolved, Left4Dead, Fallout3, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl. Oddly enough, the lag in frames/sec is most noticeable in Halo during big gunfights. Even with the occasional lag, Halo is definitely one of the better looking games in 3D. Left4Dead looks and moves beautifully with the in-game graphics boosed, probably the best of all that I've played so far in this format. Fallout3 was looking a little choppy, and that's without boosting the in-game graphics, so that worries me about that game. Star Wars: Battlefront2 was considerably nice, considering how much older the game is. The space battles leave a bit to be desired in terms of depth perception; feels like it needs its own calibration setting, which isn't practical. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. looks to have good potential, but the separation/conversion is a headache to set. All the other games allow for subtle changes in separation, but with S.T.A.L.K.E.R., fine tuning the 3D simply isn't an option.

I'm very excited to try this monitor out on games like Batman Arkham Asylum, Resident Evil4, and Starcraft2.

The 2D performance doesn't seem too bad on this monitor, but I'm also not planning on doing any photoshop on it. The monitor is very bright and handles detail well. I'm guessing gradient color and contrast is where it is lacking.

I still haven't been able to connect my pc to my 47" tv via HDMI the way I had with my previous video card. Not sure how to go about setting it up, which bothers me. I put in an order for a pair of 5.1 surround headphones, so that'll be good for gaming sound.
Score
0
a c 172 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
August 26, 2010 2:49:19 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!