Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3D TV for gaming

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
May 14, 2012 8:47:28 AM

3D TV for gaming

I have been thinking of replacing my LCD TV monitor with an LED 3D TV. I use my TV as a PC monitor and TV for PS3 and Nintendo Wii. Starcraft 3D also looks pretty awesome on a huge 3D TV. I am choosing between LG and Vizio. Although LG is a bit more expensive than Vizio, is the few extra hundred dollars worth spending for an LG TV? Need help…

Or should I just choose Sony/Samsung?

More about : gaming

a b x TV
May 14, 2012 10:07:22 AM

Have you actually played StarCraft 2 on a 3D HDTV?

3D HDTVs and 3D monitors do not work the same way. 3D monitors accepts 120Hz input from either Dual DVI (60Hz per DVI), HDMI 1.4a or Displayport. That means they can actually receive up to 120 frames per second and display 120FPS as well. So in 2D mode you can get up to 120FPS assuming your graphics card is powerful enough to do that. In 3D mode that is cut to 60FPS; 60FPS per eye to create 60FPS in 3D.

3D HDTVs operate at "120Hz", but it is not true 120Hz. All HDTVs only accepts 60Hz input where it's using HDMI 1.4a or VGA connections (I don't think HDTVs have DVI connections). All 3D and 120Hz HDTVs have internal processors that creates interpolated frames from two actual frames and are inserted into the output video on the screen so they basically double the number of input frames artificially. This creates input lag. So it is generally recommended to play games in "Game Mode" or 60Hz.

Because 3D and 120Hz HDTVs only accepts 60Hz input, that means each eye receives 30Hz (30 frames) which are combine to create 3D images that is limited to 30FPS. If a 30FPS cap is fine, then go for a 3D HDTV. If you want to be able to see up to 60FPS, then you need to buy a 3D monitor.
m
0
l
a b x TV
May 14, 2012 4:19:07 PM

exactly. to recap.

if you want 3d for pc games you are better off buying a 3d capable 120hz tn panel monitor. personally i'd get something else but if 3d matters to you then this is what you want.

if 2d is fine then you can go with a 60hz television. i prefer sony or samsung but i suppose lg is okay (but the customer service stinks). i'd avoid vizio unless you are on an extremely small budget. avoid 120/240hz televisions if you want to play games, it creates lag.
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 24, 2012 2:45:45 AM

I heard LG and samsung have the best 3D TVs however I don't like active 3D glasses so I just got the LG LM9600. It has dual play mode which is the main reason I got it. It’s the absolute perfect feature for Halo and BF3. You can see separate images on the same screen (no split screen but the entire tv).
m
0
l
May 24, 2012 2:52:23 AM

jaguarskx said:
3D HDTVs operate at "120Hz", but it is not true 120Hz.


You're assuming the original poster was talking about active 3d with shutter glasses. A number of TVs support row-interleaved passive 3d, so they don't need to claim they run at 120Hz.
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 6:37:43 AM

I also wonder what kind of games can be played in 3D TV. I recently bought LG lm760T and I really loved it from the first day. The design, magic remote, dual play mode and other smart features were better than what I had expected. I watched a 3D movie with my family members and it was a great experience.
Now I want to try playing advanced 3D games as well. Is there any suggestions to test my TV for gaming?
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 4:56:45 PM

MauveCloud said:
You're assuming the original poster was talking about active 3d with shutter glasses. A number of TVs support row-interleaved passive 3d, so they don't need to claim they run at 120Hz.


Passive 3D don't need 120hz because they use Vertical and horizontal polarization, so instead of losing half refresh rate when seeing a video. you will be losing half of the resolution, if you are ok with that, than you can go with any Passive 3D solution, but for 3D gaming i would not go for it, you will have trouble finding third party drivers since nvidia 3D vision is not supported. and the quality + ghosting is terrible on games that have a high depth;
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 6:25:11 PM

What trouble finding drivers?
http://www.iz3d.com/driver
Technically, each eye only gets half the resolution, but I think once the brain combines the image, that's less significant. I've actually tried it for a few minutes with my Sceptre E320BV-FHDD, and I don't think the loss of resolution is that big a deal. Also, it uses clockwise and counterclockwise polarization, not vertical and horizontal.
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 8:49:01 PM

MauveCloud said:
What trouble finding drivers?
http://www.iz3d.com/driver
Technically, each eye only gets half the resolution, but I think once the brain combines the image, that's less significant. I've actually tried it for a few minutes with my Sceptre E320BV-FHDD, and I don't think the loss of resolution is that big a deal. Also, it uses clockwise and counterclockwise polarization, not vertical and horizontal.


well of course it is a big deal, the quality is much worst, i already saw both running and the active quality is much better.

About the polarization there are 2 ways of doing so, LINEAR and CIRCULARLY most of passive 3D systems use linear if i'm not mistaken wich is Vertical and horizontal on CIRCULARLY POLARIZATION you will have clockwise and counterclockwise polarization.

About the drivers what i mean is that the compatibility with games, isn't the same as nvidia, so you may need to use more than one driver for playing different games.
m
0
l
June 28, 2012 1:49:01 AM

I just got the new LG2743 IPS 3D LED Monitor. I got it for 450 USD. I must say I love it. Difference between LG and Samsung is that LG IPS monitors have a unique screen that is harder than usual and almost looks like super thin plastic that gives off a small reflection. The colors are dimmer. Samsung on the other hand known for their bright strong colors and contrast. I personally like less bright settings for my monitor, and the LG is comfortable for the eyes since its a big monitor to use as a desktop. Have not tried the 3D properly yet because I just realized Nvidia 3DTV Play doesn't support monitors less than 32". If you want I can post some pictures up.

And yes they run passie 3D. What you do is you just press the button and it makes things 3D. Tried playing starcraft and diablo in 3D and it was pretty good.
m
0
l
a b x TV
June 28, 2012 11:28:38 AM

i'll have to go with ricardois here...

even a true 3d effect (not like the fake paper over paper effect of 3d movies) is not worth a reduction of 50% in your resolution. at least not to me. the only way this might be acceptable is if using a 2560x1920 monitor.

@chanshin

what you are talking about is the coating they put on the screens. often the glossy finishes are more bright and vibrant but reflect quite a bit of glare into your eyes. anti glare finishes often have a sparkly finish to them which might irritate some people and the colors are more subdued. matte finishes dont have an anti glare coating or a glossy coating to increase color vibrancy. of all the types of panel finishes this takes the cake for being the best. trouble is you might have trouble finding plain matte finishes.
m
0
l
June 29, 2012 5:24:23 AM

@ssddxx

Cool. From what I was told LG is known for that while Samsung has the vibrant color. To me its easier on the eyes with with that finish because colors are not so vibrant. Samsung brightness is a bit too much for me, I often put it at 75 brightness. I just got Max Payne 3 and ran 3D and it was the most awesome experience, never expected it to look so good especially I am not a huge fan of 3rd person shooter, but the 3D makes 3rd person alot more fun
m
0
l
July 2, 2012 8:48:39 AM

I prefer LG 3D TV for gaming because it has 120 Hz refresh rate and the picture quality is nice. The fact that it uses passive 3D definitely is an advantage tho.
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 3:15:52 AM

ssddx said:
i'll have to go with ricardois here...

even a true 3d effect (not like the fake paper over paper effect of 3d movies) is not worth a reduction of 50% in your resolution. at least not to me. the only way this might be acceptable is if using a 2560x1920 monitor.

@chanshin

what you are talking about is the coating they put on the screens. often the glossy finishes are more bright and vibrant but reflect quite a bit of glare into your eyes. anti glare finishes often have a sparkly finish to them which might irritate some people and the colors are more subdued. matte finishes dont have an anti glare coating or a glossy coating to increase color vibrancy. of all the types of panel finishes this takes the cake for being the best. trouble is you might have trouble finding plain matte finishes.

=======================================================

Gotta go with you and ricardois.

Just went through 3 separate 3d TV purchases/exchanges of active/passive and plasma/led TVs for movies and pc gaming.


Plasma TV: - dark movie scenes especially in 1080p 3D are damn near invisible even with window shades - returned TV

Passive Glasses: - I like the cheap and light 15-20 gm glasses but:

Vertical resolution going to 540p sucks.
EVEN WORSE is the lack of an interlace solution NEEDED for those 540 gross dark horizontal lines. And NO!, my landlord and me agree, they DON'T disappear with one, two or even three eyes open! Marketing bullshit! = Returned TV.

Until you're far enough from the TV that you can't resolve 540 lines anymore, the same distance as an old fashioned 1950's style 525-line TV! Sucks!

But that's where a lot of people watch their TV from because of store propaganda. And since they mainly watch 720p TV, those 540 lines from passive glasses are close to acceptable.

Don't believe those store idiots. Judge yourself!
Starting close enough to see screen pixels, back up to where YOU yourself start seeing precious image details disappear and make the decision yourself. It would surprise most people how much they are really missing in 1080p, not so much the photographic realism, but the wide angle aperture it affords. Don't watch life through a straw and end up with "immersion envy".

If you can't see those 540 lines, you don't need a 1080p TV. You don't even need 720p! Stay with the old fashioned 1950's style TV and save your money.
....

And very very light ACTIVE 3D glasses are now available, Panasonic the lightest, but my 29 gram Sony titanium glasses are a far cry from the 75 gram monsters most people are familiar with at the store.
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 3:53:54 AM

maxxx111 said:
But vertical resolution going to 540p sucks.
But even worse is the lack of an interlace solution NEEDED for those 540 gross dark horizontal lines. And NO!, my landlord and me agree, they DON'T disappear with one, two or even three eyes open! Marketing bullshit! = Returned tv.


After spending more time with my passive 3d tv, I have to agree with this now. It's slightly less obvious when looking at scenery, but text looks awful when using row-interleaved 3d (aka FPR).
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 9:26:05 AM

Unfortunate but take heart;

You paid a far better price than I did.
Your glasses are still the best and most comfortable, a primary factor (number 1 if they're not) even though they cost far less.
Text is the least likely to require 3D, and most of what we look at isn't even 3D.

Finally, you're not a nut like me trying to get inside the screen (if only I could).
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 9:37:24 AM

Horizontal Lines in Passive 3D: An issue resulting from, but quite apart from and worse than, the drop from 1080p to 540p vertical resolution.

Normally 540p, or any resolution for that matter, does not require interlacing if there are no gaps between horizontal lines.

The passive 540p image achieves 3D by using separate INTERLEAVING lines for each eye. It should also be INTERLACED, to eliminate the horizontal lines that were created by blocking alternate horizontal lines to each eye. The resulting 1080i would still have a vertical resolution of 540, but look far better without the dark horizontal lines. Just as DUPLICATE INTERLEAVING scans known as INTERLACING was first used on the old CRT TVs to eliminate dark horizontal scan lines.

m
0
l
July 19, 2012 1:21:30 PM

maxxx111 said:
Horizontal Lines in Passive 3D: An issue resulting from, but quite apart from and worse than, the drop from 1080p to 540p vertical resolution.

Normally 540p, or any resolution for that matter, does not require interlacing if there are no gaps between horizontal lines.

The passive 540p image achieves 3D by using separate INTERLEAVING lines for each eye. It should also be INTERLACED, to eliminate the horizontal lines that were created by blocking alternate horizontal lines to each eye. The resulting 1080i would still have a vertical resolution of 540, but look far better without the dark horizontal lines. Just as DUPLICATE INTERLEAVING scans known as INTERLACING was first used on the old CRT TVs to eliminate dark horizontal scan lines.


Wouldn't that require alternating either the screen polarizer or the polarization in the glasses? If I'm understanding you correctly, the odd rows would be for the left eye on odd frames and for the right eye on even frames, whereas the even rows would be for the right eye on odd frames and for the left eye on even frames. Is it even possible to do that fast enough with circular polarization? That wouldn't halve the vertical resolution so much as halve the effective refresh rate, but since neither eye would be completely blocked, the flicker would probably be less noticeable compared to shutter glasses.

There is a known way to do passive 3d without dark lines or interlacing, which has been done with the iZ3D monitor: it has two LCD layers, the first with front and rear polarizers to determine how much total light to show for each subpixel, which in 3d mode uses the sum of the desired brightnesses for each eye, per subpixel; the second is in front which has no separate polarizer sheets, but adjusts the polarization angle to determine how much of the light gets to each eye. Drawbacks? 1. only made at 1680x1050 resolution, 2. I'm fairly sure it uses linearly polarized glasses, so tilting your head will lead to crosstalk between eyes.
m
0
l
July 22, 2012 3:03:58 AM

I learn something everyday.

I was actually suggesting interlacing was NOT possible with physically fixed row polarization before I read your response.

I was unaware of IZ3's solution and yes, I believe your suggestion would also work. Screen based switching of course, to keep the advantages of your passive glasses.

Good bit of mental gymnastics is always good for an old pensioner like me.


m
0
l
February 28, 2013 7:21:36 AM

Hey man. Great info. My LG 55LW7600 3DTV is a 240hz "Tru Motion - Back light Scanning Mode" unit but it has a REAL Refresh Rate of Native 120hz.

In the TV's manual it lists my 4'th HDMI port as a HDMI/DVI input. Could I use the Display Port on my Geforce GTX 560-448 GPU to connect a cable to my 120hz 3DTV?

Would I achieve TRUE 120Hz 1920x1080p game play? 60hz Per eye? It seems that Display Port supports 120hz and HDMI Does Not. Is there anyway i can get my 55 inch 120/240hz 3DTV to perform 1920x1080p 60hz?

I guess I could Live with 1920x1080p 60hz Checkerboard. my LG supports that. Do you know what I am asking about?
m
0
l
February 28, 2013 7:22:21 AM

Hey man. Great info. My LG 55LW7600 3DTV is a 240hz "Tru Motion - Back light Scanning Mode" unit but it has a REAL Refresh Rate of Native 120hz.

In the TV's manual it lists my 4'th HDMI port as a HDMI/DVI input. Could I use the Display Port on my Geforce GTX 560-448 GPU to connect a cable to my 120hz 3DTV?

Would I achieve TRUE 120Hz 1920x1080p game play? 60hz Per eye? It seems that Display Port supports 120hz and HDMI Does Not. Is there anyway i can get my 55 inch 120/240hz 3DTV to perform 1920x1080p 60hz?

I guess I could Live with 1920x1080p 60hz Checkerboard. my LG supports that. Do you know what I am asking about?
m
0
l
February 28, 2013 12:34:52 PM

I can't find specifications for that exact model, but some things to check in the manual:
1. Does that 4th HDMI port specify what version of HDMI it supports? If not, safest to assume it's HDMI 1.0, which doesn't have enough bandwidth for 1920x1080p120
2. What's the specified response time? 120hz shutter glasses switch eyes every 8.3 ms, so if the specified response time is 6 ms or higher, I'd expect severe crosstalk between eyes, ruining the 3D effect. What you really want is worst-case response time under 4 ms, but manufacturers only provide average or best-case response time, and almost never make it clear which they use, how many shades of gray they tested between, and generally don't take RTC overshoot into account.
3. are you certain it checkerboards the passive 3d instead of just alternating horizontal lines?
m
0
l
February 28, 2013 1:45:34 PM

The TV is 2012 model. it has HDMI 1.4a.

Its response time is between 1ms-2ms probably more like 4ms-5ms.

This is a passive 3DTV. Reports say that Passive is best for having the least amount of crosstalk, at the cost of displaying half the image onto each eye.

Checkerboard is supported in PC-HDMI-DTV format list in the manual. As are these modes :


2D to 3D
Side by Side(Half)
Side by Side(Full)
Top & Bottom
Checker Board
Single Frame Sequential
Row Interleaving
Column Interleaving
Frame Packing
Line Alternative
MPO(Photo)

This LG 3DTV should give me some options for 3DTV formats.

I just want to figure out how to get TRUE 1920x1080p @120hz TOTAL for both eyes. Can the Display Port on my GPU help me? The LG 3DTV only has a HDMI port listed as "HDMI/DVI" input. So would this be my answer to achieve 120hz INPUT format to my 3DTV?
m
0
l
February 28, 2013 2:26:22 PM

I'm a little confused. Do you want shutter-glasses 3d with 120hz per eye (240hz total), or just 120hz non-3d?

If the latter, that might be possible with a special high-speed hdmi cable if your video card also supports hdmi 1.3 or newer. Alternatively, you could try a DVI to HDMI or displayport to hdmi adapter, but make sure the adapter supports hdmi 1.3 or newer. Even with that, there's no guarantee it'll work, because the specifications only require support for up to 2560x1600p75 or 4096x2160p24 - I find no requirement for it support 1920x1080p120.

As far as those different modes, that's just different ways of taking the 3d signal as input. The actual display of 3d will be converted to the same mode (most likely row-interleaved) regardless of which input mode is used, because the front polarization is usually fixed.

P.S. You probably should have started a new thread instead of adding to a several-months-dormant thread.
m
0
l
February 28, 2013 2:43:39 PM

I called Nvidia. They said that the best you can get on a 3DTV is 1920x1080p @ 60hz Checkerboard. Strange.

I wonder if you can use advanced settings like AA to improve the unscaled Checkerboard image?

One guy turned on his "TruMotion" option for is LG LED and said that the 3D looked smoother and seemed to be better. Lots of tricks i suppose.

Still I rather be doing 3D on a 55 inch LED TV V.S. Smaller 20-27 inch DVI-D capable 120hz Displays. I can live with 30hz for games and getting 60hz with 1920x1080(unscaled) Checkerboard will probably be great
m
0
l
!