Nvidia launched its 3D Vision technology back in January of 2009, giving consumer-level 3D gaming the biggest endorsement it had ever received. The company's proprietary combination of 120 Hz active glasses, licensed monitors, and in-house driver solution enabled early adopters with all of the puzzle pieces needed on the hardware side. The only missing piece was software, and Nvidia's infamous ISV relations team went right to work on getting 3D Vision considered as games were being developed. To this day, 3D Vision is not perfect. But it's unquestionably the more comprehensive end-to-end solution for 3D gaming currently available.
AMD didn’t counter with an alternative until almost two years later, in October of 2010. The introduction of its Radeon HD 6800-series cards was accompanied by AMD’s HD3D initiative, a vastly different approach to 3D on the PC: instead of a proprietary system, AMD provides driver hooks to software developers and leaves 3D displays and glasses to third-party providers. Because of its more open environment, we've had to wait a lot longer for HD3D to become a viable angle. After all, other companies had to provide all of the hardware and software to support it. But now, roughly a year later, 120 Hz DisplayPort monitors are on the market, enabling a meaningful comparison.

We should also mention Intel’s HD Graphics 2000/3000 engines, built into all of the Sandy Bridge-based CPUs. Thanks to a lot of fixed-function decode hardware, Intel does a surprisingly good job playing back Blu-ray 3D content. The main focus of this article is serious stereoscopic gaming, though, and the HD Graphics hardware is far too weak to handle such a taxing workload. If you're a home theater enthusiast interested only in Blu-ray 3D, be aware that the Intel option is wholly capable.
We’re not getting into the fundamentals of stereoscopic 3D because we've covered that in a number of stories already. However, if you do want more information, you can start with Build Your Own: Wall-Sized 3D Gaming, Just Like Theaters Do It.
A Quick Comparison
The best way to illustrate the differences between Nvidia’s 3D Vision and AMD’s HD3D is with a chart:
| Nvidia 3D Vision | AMD HD3D | |
|---|---|---|
| Graphics Hardware: | Various GeForce cards (click here to see list) | AMD Radeon HD 5000 or higher (Radeon HD 6000 series required for hardware-accelerated Blu-ray 3D playback) |
| Supported Displays: | 3D Vision Monitors over DVI-D (60 FPS/1080p) 3D-ready TVs over HDMI (24 FPS/1080p or 60 FPS/720p) | 3D-ready 120 Hz monitors over DisplayPort (60 FPS/1080p) 3D-ready TVs over HDMI (24 FPS/1080p or 60 FPS/720p) |
| Glasses: | 3D Vision: 120 Hz Active 3D Vision Glasses 3D-ready TV over HDMI: Active or Passive (depends on the display) | Active or Passive (depends on the display) |
| Game Software: | 3D Vision monitor: GeForce Driver 3D-ready TV over HDMI: 3DTV Play | Depends on application: TriDef or iZ3D drivers for games, although two titles currently come with native HD3D support |
| Blu-ray 3D Software: | ArcSoft TotalMedia Theatre, Cyberlink PowerDVD, and Corel WinDVD for Blu-ray 3D movies | |
| Multi-card support: | Yes (SLI) | No (CrossFire not yet supported) |
| Multi-monitor 3D support: | Yes (with SLI) | Yes (single-card only) |
Open Or Closed?
Based on the chart, there don't seem to be too many differences between what 3D Vision and HD3D can do. Practically, the division comes down to this: when you’re looking to build a 3D-capable gaming system, Nvidia's approach is simpler because you're only looking for one proprietary certification, 3D Vision. You need a 3D Vision kit with active glasses, a 3D Vision-ready GeForce graphics card, and a 3D Vision-ready monitor. You can even look for 3D Vision-ready game titles if you want to make sure you’ll have a good 3D experience (although the number of validated 3D Vision-ready games is pretty small). On a side note, you can use multiple cards in SLI to boost performance, and that's a nice option to have since stereoscopic 3D effectively halves frame rates, often demanding more potent graphics hardware.
With an AMD HD3D-based solution, you buy an AMD Radeon HD 5000 or 6000 graphics card, a TriDef or iZ3D 3D middleware game driver (or both), and a 3D-ready 120 Hz DisplayPort monitor with companion 3D glasses. There doesn’t seem to be an official TriDef or iZ3D game certification, so you’ll have to do a little research using reviews like this one. Unfortunately, there aren't many stories out there that tell you which games work and how well.
Games with native HD3D support do not require middleware, but there are only two examples: Deus Ex: Human Revolution and DiRT3. The next game claimed to include native HD3D support will be Battlefield 3. AMD Radeon cards cannot yet be used in CrossFire to boost stereoscopic 3D performance, so that’s another thing to bear in mind if you don't already own a board potent enough to withstand a significant hit to its frame rates in your favorite title.
The situation isn't all bad for AMD's HD3D technology. You can still get an excellent 3D experience from this solution. In some games, it's even able to outshine Nvidia's 3D Vision implementation. The aforementioned approach to enabling 3D dictates the effectiveness of each initiative, though. 3D Vision is the proprietary Apple-like solution with tightly controlled components, while HD3D is closer to a PC model, with standards that separate component providers must follow. Neither approach is right or wrong. But each has its own advantages and limitations.
Graphics Cards: Choose Your Weapon
Your first decision is to pick out a GeForce or Radeon graphics card. There are a lot of 3D Vision-capable GPUs across the desktop and mobile GeForce portfolio, along with a number of viable Radeon HD 5000- and 6000-series options (though the 5000s cannot accelerate Blu-ray 3D playback, leaving the job up to a fast-enough CPU).
Primarily, your choice should be based on the games you want to play and the 3D solution that works best with those games, so some research is in order. Once you've decided on 3D Vision (GeForce) or HD3D (Radeon), buy the fastest card you can afford. Stereoscopic rendering is very demanding, so a mid-range card that might have served up suitable performance before simply won't cut it. As mentioned, GeForce owners have the flexibility of using multiple cards in SLI mode to add performance; AMD owners don't enjoy the same option, as AMD’s HD3D does not yet support CrossFire. Whichever brand you choose determines whether you need a 3D Vision-compatible monitor that works best with GeForce cards, or a 3D-capable DisplayPort monitor that'll take an input from a Radeon board.
Why Shouldn't I Use A 3D Television For 3D Gaming?
Typically, 3D televisions utilize an HDMI input. The HDMI 1.4a standard cannot accommodate more than 24 FPS (frames per second) at 1920x1080, so Nvidia, AMD, and even Intel share this limitation. That's not usually a problem in home theaters because Blu-ray 3D discs play back at 24 FPS.
When it comes to gaming, though, 24 FPS is decidedly insufficient. It is possible to achieve 60 FPS over HDMI if you drop your resolution to 720p (1280x720). Casual gamers might be willing to make such a compromise, sacrificing the crispness of native 1080p. But serious gamers won't want to do that. They want native resolutions and high frame rates. As a result, you'll have to buy a 120 Hz 3D-ready monitor capable of 60 FPS at 1080p instead.
3D Vision Monitors Vs. AMD HD3D Monitors
Nvidia’s 3D Vision relies on a dual-link DVI connection to pass a 120 Hz signal at 1080p/60 FPS to a certified 3D Vision monitor, and AMD's HD3D employs DisplayPort to pass a 120 Hz 1080p/60 FPS signal. There are not any monitors that can handle both standards (yet), so buyers have to commit to one or the other.
The good news is that monitor pricing is similar, regardless of the direction you go. A 23” 3D monitor sells for about $475 on Newegg right now, whether it's 3D Vision- or HD3D-capable.
Of course, when it comes to 3D, bigger is definitely better. And if you want to get the most out of the technology, a 27" display is an even more interesting proposition.

If you're looking for a 27” 3D Vision-capable solution, Acer offers the HN274H for $680. It comes with a built-in 3D Vision emitter and a single pair of 3D Vision glasses, so a separate 3D Vision kit is not necessary. Because the emitter is integrated into the monitor, this model also works with Radeon HD 5000/6000 cards through the HDMI input. Unfortunately, because HDMI is limited to 24 FPS at 1080p in stereoscopic mode, the Acer screen isn't ideal for gaming on an AMD card.

Radeon owners looking to game in 3D are better served by Samsung’s new 27” monitors with DisplayPort inputs. The S27A950D sells for $700, and the S27A750D is priced at $600. Both models include a single pair of active 3D glasses. While the Samsung S27A750D is the cheapest 27" option for enabling 3D, bear in mind that it requires you also spending extra on a middleware piece of software ($20 for iZ3D and/or $25 for TriDef Ignition).
Nvidia’s 3D Vision is the most well-established 3D solution able to leverage 120 Hz displays to give each of your eyes a smooth 60 frame-per-second experience. The software enabling 3D Vision is so tightly integrated that Nvidia makes it part of the standard GeForce driver package.
If you have a 3D Vision kit, including the emitter and glasses, a 3D Vision-certified monitor, and a 3D Vision-capable GeForce card, you’re good to go. In order to enable stereoscopic gaming, simply open up the Nvidia driver panel and select “Set up stereoscopic 3D” from the left-hand menu. From there, you can set up your 3D display type, test it out, and fine-tune your controls.

Once a game is launched, the 3D Vision On-Screen Display (OSD) gives you information about that game’s compatibility, if it's available from the driver, and suggest the most appropriate settings known to yield the fewest visual artifacts, if any are known. You can turn off the OSD by pressing Ctrl-Alt-Insert.

This is a very convenient all-in-one system for controlling 3D content. Our only criticism is the lack of a menu to show the 3D controls while you’re in-game.
There is no HD3D certification for monitors or glasses. Instead, you simply need to remember that all Radeon HD 5000- and 6000-series cards are compatible, though the boards capable of playing games smoothly in stereoscopic mode are practically limited to the high-end.
You also need a DisplayPort-enabled (or HDMI 1.4a) 3D display with its own ecosystem and glasses.
Additionally, a middleware stereoscopic 3D driver is required in order to play games, except in rare cases where the game is HD3D-certified. There are two middleware drivers available: the IZ3D driver and the TriDef Ignition driver. Since we've had trouble getting the iZ3D driver to work on our test system, we’ll concentrate on the TriDef driver.

The TriDef 3D Ignition software has really evolved since we tried it out in Build Your Own: Wall-Sized 3D Gaming, Just Like Theaters Do It more than a year ago. You still need to start a game from the TriDef 3D Ignition launcher in order for it to work. But the experience is better thought-out now, with a 3D Vision-esque on-screen display that shows up when a game is started. The TriDef driver really nails it with an OSD menu (toggled by hitting the number pad's 0 key) that can be used to change settings, check performance, and take screenshots.

One key ability that the TriDef Ignition software offers is a "Virtual 3D" mode. Instead of rendering each eye independently, Virtual 3D renders one eye, and then applies information from the depth buffer to create the 3D effect. Don’t be fooled by the word "‘virtual;" the result has the same apparent depth result as a stereoscopic image with the added benefit that any visual artifact caused by rendering two different camera positions is usually eliminated.
On top of often-improved visuals, Virtual 3D may also yield better performance, too. The caveat is that the driver has to extrapolate certain parts of the image between views. This is undetectable in most games, but it can cause a noticeable blurring effect on the edge of objects in other titles. It's also important to note that the TriDef driver works poorly when anti-aliasing is turned on, so it's best to leave AA disabled.
Blu-ray 3D software
The smoothest stereoscopic experience on the PC right now is Blu-ray 3D playback, which functions almost identically, regardless of whether you're using a Radeon, GeForce, or even HD Graphics engine able to accelerate the feature in hardware.
Arcsoft, Cyberlink, and Corel all sell Blu-ray 3D playback software that doesn’t require any middleware; it just works right out of the box with very little hassle. We’ve tested ArcSoft’s TotalMedia Theatre and CyberLink’s PowerDVD in our labs, finding the experience surprisingly simple and consistent, no matter what graphics card you use.
We’re not testing performance this time around. Instead, we want to concentrate on the quality of the 3D picture you're presented, and the overall journey to get there. Having said that, our test system boasts a Core i5-2500K processor overclocked to 4 GHz. We're using AMD’s Radeon HD 6970 for HD3D testing and Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 570 for 3D Vision. If a game runs too slowly on this enthusiast-oriented system, we’ll let you know.
The goal is to answer questions like: Is the game playable in 3D? Are there anomalies or artifacts? If there are, can they be dealt with via manually-configurable settings, or are they inescapable? Do those anomalies wreck the 3D experience, or can they be tolerated? We're asking those questions on a game-by-game basis in order to get a thorough feel for how these competing implementations compare to each other.
Test Methodology
We originally considered reporting the MTBS3D certification ratings for this article. MTBS3D.com is an independent 3D certification and advocacy group, which provides an online tool that asks users questions about their 3D game experience. We ended up deciding against this because the rating assigns a significant percentage of its final score to the presence of 3D convergence control. Consequently, a game with flawless 3D reproduction but no convergence control can have a lower score than a game with significant visual anomalies. We don’t think this scoring equation yields ideal results, but we do give MTBS3D props for at least trying to address the state of 3D.
Without an existing stereoscopic rating system that we find acceptable, we’ll simply describe the steps we take to get the best possible image quality from each technology, and whether or not the result is usable and enjoyable.
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| Excellent | This game facilitates a solid 3D experience without distracting anomalies or artifacts |
| Good | This game facilitates a solid 3D experience, enabled by reducing certain quality settings or incurring minor anomalies |
| Not Recommended | This game does not work in stereoscopic mode, or it functions so poorly as to be practically unplayable |
Test Display Considerations
We’re testing two displays: a 40” Samsung 7000-series 3D-capable TV and a 27” Acer HN274H 3D Vision monitor. The 3D Vision-certified Acer HN274H is perfect for demonstrating 3D Vision at 1080p/120 Hz. Since it also supports HDMI 1.4a, AMD’s HD3D works at 1080p/24 FPS or 720p/60 FPS. The Samsung television is also used to show how AMD HD3D and 3D Vision cope with games and Blu-ray 3D over HDMI, and while it’s limited to 1080p/24 FPS and 720p/60 FPS, this is a likely scenario for home theatre PC users.
Unfortunately, we aren’t able to test one of the Samsung 3D-capable DisplayPort monitors that allow Radeon cards to push 1080p/60 FPS. Simply, we weren't able to get our hands on one in time for a story that required a significant lead time and lots of testing. That display would have let us put HD3D to the test without the debilitating limitation of running at 1080p/24 FPS over HDMI.
In order to keep things fair, though, since the Samsung screens are available now, we're not putting the emphasis on performance. Again, we're more concerned with usability and how games look after they've been run through each company's respective technology. We’ll follow this piece up with a performance-oriented story once our Samsung display shows up.
Because we had to test AMD’s 3D solution over HDMI, we learned some valuable information: in DirectX 9 mode, the TriDef driver scales output to the desktop resolution. That's not an issue in games based on the DirectX 11 API. However, it's something you'll need to know if you're playing a DX 9 title over HDMI. In order to achieve 720p/60 FPS, set your desktop to 1280x720 first.
When you're using 3D Vision in conjunction with a 3D television that requires an HDMI input, Nvidia’s 3DTV play software has to be installed. This software is free to folks who’ve purchased a 3D Vision kit with a USB emitter, but costs $40 if you plan to use a 3D-enabled TV and a proprietary glasses system.
Finally, we noticed visual anomalies in some cases when v-sync was not enabled, particularly at 1080p/24 FPS over an HDMI connection. While tearing anomalies caused by low refresh rates can have unpleasant consequences on a 2D monitor, we found it actually distorted the depth effect on a 3D monitor, resulting in a visually unpleasant experience. This problem is solved by enabling v-sync. Unfortunately, a handful of games suffer from significant input lag at 1080p/24 FPS with v-sync enabled.
Cross-View 3D Demo Images
We'd like to show everyone how these games look in stereoscopic 3D. There is a way to experience 3D depth without spending any cash on a 3D monitor, and it's called “cross-viewing.”
The picture below is a cross-view image; the left side is for your right eye and the right side is for your left eye. A good way to allow your eyes to focus on the stereoscopic result is to hold your finger about half-way between the screen and your eyes. Focus on your finger and move it toward or away from the display until three identically-sized images appear behind it (instead of two). Then, shift your focus to the center image and move your finger out of the way. If you do it properly, you'll see three images: a clear 3D image in the center and blurry 2D images on each side. It's easier for some folks to achieve this effect by increasing the distance between your eyes and the monitor. Not everyone will have success with cross-viewing, but it is a nice option for folks who can experience it.
If you can't wrap your eyes around cross-viewing, these images can still be used to point out any anomalies between right- and left-perspective views.
| Test Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Processor | Intel Core i5-2500K (Sandy Bridge) Overclocked to 4 GHz, 6 MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings enabled, Turbo Boost disabled |
| Motherboard | MSI P67A-GD65, Intel P67 Chipset |
| Memory | OCZ DDR3-2000, 2 x 2 GB, at 1338 MT/s, CL 9-9-9-20-1T |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital Caviar Black 750 GB, 7200 RPM, 32 MB Cache, SATA 3Gb/s Samsung 470 Series SSD 256 GB, SATA 3Gb/s |
| Graphics Cards | Nvidia GeForce GTX 570 (for 3D Vision) AMD Radeon HD 6970 (for AMD HD3D) |
| Displays | Acer HN274H, 27" 3D Vision (DVI) and HD3D (HDMI 1.4a) compatible Samsung 7000 Series, 40" 1080p LED HDTV 3D (HDMI 1.4a) compatible |
| Power Supply | Seasonic X760 SS-760KM: ATX12V v2.3, EPS12V, 80 PLUS Gold |
| CPU Cooler | Cooler Master Hyper TX 2 |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Operating System | Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Graphics Driver | GeForce: 280.19 Beta, AMD Catalyst 11.8 Pre-release |
| Stereoscopic Driver | TriDef 3D 4.6 |
| Games | |
| StarCraft II | version 1.3.6.19269 |
| Civilization V Demo | version 1.0.0.1 |
| World of Warcraft | version 4.2.0.2506 |
| Lord Of the Rings Online | version 1.27.0.1 |
| Star Trek Online | version 2011.6.7.308 |
| Bulletstorm | version 1.0.7147.0 |
| Crysis 2 | version 1.9.0.0 |
| Just Cause 2 | version 1.0.0.2 |
| Lost Planet 2 | version 1.0.1.129 |
| Aliens vs. Predator | version 1.0.0.0 |
| Left 4 Dead 2 | version 2.0.8.5 |
| Metro 2033 | version 1.0.0.1 |
| F1 2010 | version 1.1.1.129 |
| Need 4 Speed: Hot Pursuit | version 1.0.0.0 |
| Mass Effect 2 | version 1.1.0.15 |
| Dragon Age 2 Demo | version 1.1.0.18 |
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | version 1.0.579.0 |
| DiRT 3 | version 0.1.0.11 |
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D gameplay result, but slight anomalies in cut scenes
Using the TriDef ignition driver, StarCraft II renders flawlessly in actual gameplay. There are, however, some shadow anomalies in the cut scenes.
While the game natively supports 3D Vision with convergence and separation controls, those settings are not accessible when running AMD’s HD3D. The TriDef Ignition convergence control works fine, though.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
Nvidia 3D Vision: Does an excellent job in this title
From what we’ve seen, Nvidia’s solution appears to work nearly perfectly, despite a warning from the 3D Vision OSD that suggests some objects and effects might be affected by visual anomalies. The only issue we experienced was that 3D character portraits showed the edge of the character instead of the center. But this is only a minor annoyance that disappears when 2D portraits are selected in the game settings.
Speaking of settings, StarCraft II has its own separation and convergence controls just for 3D Vision.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D result in DirectX 9; DirectX 11 does not work
The TriDef driver does an excellent job in DirectX 9
This game works very nicely with the TriDef driver in normal 3D mode as long as the game is rendered using DirectX 9. DirectX 11 does not work at all. Frankly, the DirectX 11 enhancements aren’t particularly significant in this game (they're mainly used to improve performance, rather than augment visual quality), so you probably won’t notice a difference.
If you try to use TriDef's Virtual 3D mode instead, you'll end up with a depth-oriented anomalies.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
Nvidia's 3D Vision works equally well in DirectX 9 or 11
This game appears to work flawlessly with Nvidia’s 3D Vision. There’s not much else to say, which we consider to be a good thing.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
This popular MMO looks very good using TriDef's default mode, except for some artifacts on reflective water. This can be eliminated by enabling the TriDef Virtual 3D mode, resulting in very good 3D output.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result with slight setting reduction
While the 3D Vision result is almost perfect, there are notable artifacts in reflective water, which are quite a bit more distracting that the ones we experienced using the TriDef driver. Happily, this problem can be eliminated by lowering water detail. Like Blizzard’s StarCraft II, World of Warcraft also supports 3D Vision convergence and separation controls in the game options.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D result in DirectX 9 with TriDef setting adjustment; DirectX 11 is problematic
The TriDef driver does an excellent job in DirectX 9 with a TriDef setting adjustment
In DirectX 11 mode, TriDef's default stereoscopic mode doesn’t do anything. While Virtual 3D works in DirectX 11, it affects the interface with depth information from the objects behind it, resulting in unpleasant output.
Happily, this problem does not occur in DirectX 9. There is a slight problem with the depth of the skybox, but it can be eliminated through the TriDef OSD controls by setting the focus mode to one. As with most modern titles, DirectX 9 mode is almost indistinguishable, quality-wise, from DirectX 11, so the trade-off isn't particularly upsetting.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result with slight setting reduction
Nvidia's 3D Vision handles LOTRO better than it used to, probably thanks to an updated profile
The first time we tried this game with 3D Vision, the result was somewhat disappointing. But with the new 280-series drivers, Nvidia seems to have added a new profile for this game that addresses a number of problems. With SSAO and glow mapping turned off in the settings, the game delivers a very good 3D experience.
Lord Of the Rings Online uses the same 3D engine as Dungeons & Dragons Online, and we’ve found that both games react similarly to the 3D Vision and TriDef Ignition drivers.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with lowered details or with Virtual 3D mode
The TriDef normal mode shows no shadows
The TriDef normal mode also removes shadows from ground areas
As with space, Virtual 3D mode allows for full shadows but suffers from the same interface artifacts
Star Trek Online support was fixed in the new 4.6 TriDef Ignition release. There are two ways to run this game using the TriDef driver, but neither is problem-free. In normal mode, the shadow detail is automatically reduced to avoid artifacts, yielding a good result. Unfortunately, you lose the added depth that only proper shadows can add.
Shadows function perfectly in Virtual 3D mode so long as anti-aliasing is disabled. However, the interface is affected by the depth buffer, causing some visual anomalies. Both methods are playable, but users are left to decide which trade-off they find more palatable.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Good 3D result with lowered details
3D Vision displays anomalies with shadows, anti-aliasing, and bloom in this game. Most of these details can be disabled without issue. However, reducing shadows to the minimum setting really hurts the visual impact of this title, as it does in the TriDef driver's normal mode.
Cryptic recently announced that Star Trek Online is converting to a free-to-play model later this year, in case you're interested in trying this game out.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D result
The TriDef driver delivers an excellent result in Bulletstorm
Bulletstorm appears to work flawlessly with the TriDef driver in normal or Virtual 3D mode. We did note that Virtual 3D mode crashes with anti-aliasing enabled. But the TriDef driver generally doesn’t work well with this feature turned on anyway.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
Nvidia's 3D Vision also provides an excellent 3D experience
This game also works flawlessly with the 3D Vision driver.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Not Recommended
The TriDef Virtual 3D mode works well, but note that the HUD is distorted by the depth buffer
This game displays significant lighting anomalies that make it unplayable in the TriDef driver’s normal mode. In Virtual 3D, however, it looks quite good.
There are two problems with this mode, however: the depth buffer affects the HUD, and looking down a scope or open sights results in significant blurring on the target area. This is a real detriment when you’re trying to aim to effectively take down targets from distance. This problem can’t be ignored, despite an otherwise-good 3D result.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
Crysis 2 delivers an absolutely unimpeachable 3D experience with 3D Vision
Crysis 2 with 3D Vision is the poster child for stereoscopic gaming. The title looks stunning and, as far as we can tell, it works perfectly. The 3D effect adds a lot to a game that already boasts some of the best PC-based graphics available. Some enthusiasts have complained that this game's method of stereoscopic rendering isn't 'true' 3D as it's created using the depth buffer, a method similar to the TriDef Virtual 3D mode. Regardless, it looks fantastic to our eyes.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Not recommended
The TriDef drivers don’t seem to work with this game in normal mode. And, in Virtual 3D, we see a lot of really strange anomalies that we don't see in any other game. The player's avatar is most affected. Therefore, we have to consider this one unplayable using the TriDef Ignition driver.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
This 3D Vision-certified game looks fantastic in 3D.
This game appears to work flawlessly with 3D Vision. It delivers an excellent stereoscopic experience.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D result in DirectX 9; DirectX 11 does not work
The TriDef driver does an excellent job in this title as long as the DirectX 9 code path is used
Lost Planet 2 works great in DirectX 9 mode, but we couldn’t get it to work when the game is launched using DirectX 11. Once again, DirectX 11 offers little more than DirectX 9 in this game, though, so we don't consider it too painful of a loss.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D gameplay result, but slight anomalies in cut scenes
3D Vision also does a great job during gameplay, but the cut scenes have some unpleasant anomalies.
During actual gameplay, this title appears to work flawlessly with 3D Vision. But we did notice some visual anomalies during cut scenes. With such great stereoscopic gameplay, we’re surprised that this title is only rated "Fair" by Nvidia's 3D Vision OSD. We think it deserves a slightly better judgement, but perhaps we missed an artifact that only shows up at a certain point in the campaign.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result in DirectX 9 with Virtual 3D mode; DirectX 11 does not work
In DirectX 9, the TriDef driver provides an excellent result with Virtual 3D mode
Aliens vs. Predator works beautifully with the TriDef Ignition driver in DirectX 9 mode, but only with Virtual 3D enabled. We couldn’t get a stereoscopic result at all with the game running in DirectX 11.
Again, in this game, DirectX 11 doesn’t offer much over DirectX 9. Thus, the loss isn't significant.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Not recommended
The Nvidia 3D Vision solution is unplayable in this game
This game displays significant lighting and motion blur anomalies with 3D Vision. While motion blur can be disabled, no combination of settings could get rid of the lighting differences hitting each eye. Thus, we consider this game unplayable with 3D Vision.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
The TriDef driver nails Left 4 Dead 2 with an excellent result in Virtual 3D mode
In standard 3D mode, the TriDef driver demonstrates a number of anomalies (most notably, severe water reflection artifacts). If you want to play a level that contains a significant amount of water, Virtual 3D mode saves the day with a great stereoscopic result, despite subtle depth buffer anomalies.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Good 3D result with lowered details although water artifacts are unavoidable
3D Vision has problems with film grain, the skybox, and water reflections. Film grain can be turned off and the skybox problem can be minimized with a convergence adjustment. But water artifacts can’t be eliminated. These artifacts are very noticeable. Just how big of a problem they turn out to be depends on the scenario you're playing. Some levels have a great deal of water, but many levels have none.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Excellent 3D result
The TriDef driver does another great job in Metro 2033
In standard 3D mode, the TriDef driver appears to work without any problems whatsoever.
Incidentally, the Virtual 3D option seems to be disabled in this title.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Excellent 3D result
3D Vision also provides a fantastic stereoscopic result
Metro 2033 is a 3D Vision-certified title, and it delivers great visuals. The depth-of-field effect must be disabled, but it’s not really missed.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
The default TriDef Ignition profile works well. However, shadows seem muted, you can't access Virtual 3D mode, and the frame rate is a little choppy.
Because of these problems, we swapped the F1 2010 profile out in favor of the generic one and used Virtual 3D mode. This proves to be the better solution, as visuals are great and the frame rate is vastly improved. Unfortunately it's not perfect due to some anomalies caused by the depth buffer, but this isn't noticeable while driving.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Good 3D result with lowered details
3D Vision suffers from shadow, post-processing, and smoke/dust anomalies in F1 2010. The post-process problems are fixed by stepping down from Ultra-High to High detail settings, and shadows must be turned off using the Ultra-Low option. Dust and smoke can be fixed by lowering the particles setting, but we find that it's better to leave it on, as the distraction is minimal.
The loss of shadows doesn't hurt this game much. It looks very good in 3D, but there are still a couple of lighting anomalies that pop up.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
The TriDef solution allows us to leave shadow detail at the highest setting
While normal mode doesn't work in this game, it does run well using the TriDef Ignition driver's Virtual 3D setting.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Not recommended
This game suffers from shadow, light halo, and doubling artifacts when 3D Vision is enabled.
Shadows can be fixed using the lowest quality setting, but they are rendered as blobs instead. The light halo/doubling artifacts are unfortunately unavoidable. This solution is not recommended, as the artifacts are quite distracting.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
The TriDef Ignition driver's Virtual 3D mode provides a fantastic stereoscopic result
In normal mode, the TriDef driver suffers from some targeting and effect anomalies. Those issues disappear through the use of Virtual 3D.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Not recommended
Nvidia's 3D Vision suffers from light halo doubling, depth of field, post-process, shadow, and motion blur problems in this game. Dynamic shadows, high quality bloom, and motion blur can be disabled. Light halo doubling is unavoidable, and during cut scenes, the depth-of-field effect causes problems. As a result, this solution is not recommended.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode
Stereoscopic playback doesn’t seem to work at all in the TriDef driver's normal 3D mode, but in Virtual 3D, the game is rendered almost perfectly, aside for some slight hair anomalies during cut scene playback.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Not recommended
This game suffers from a lot of post-processing problems when using 3D Vision. Most of them seem to disappear when the overall quality level is set to High instead of Very High. But text is often improperly shown in 3D space. The skybox is also offset in each eye. Aside from this, the cut scenes employ a lot of effects that don't work in 3D, and the depth-of-field effect causes a lot of problems. Usually cut scenes don't have a large impact on the user’s 3D gaming experience. But in this BioWare game there are a lot of them. We’d steer clear of this title when using 3D Vision.
Native AMD HD3D Support:
Good 3D result on the HUD, but no apparent depth in the game world. Could not capture stereoscopic image
This is one of the two games that offers native AMD HD3D support. Stereoscopic mode works fine (except for some subtle lighting artifacts) and is enabled through the in-game settings. But we noticed that the 3D effect is muted, and even when the game’s depth control is maxed out, the output appears flat.
Though we were unable to capture a screenshot in HD3D mode, we used a micrometer to measure the separation of objects in the scene directly on the monitor. This rudimentary test indicates that, regardless of the distance to the player's view, the image for each eye is separated by the same amount. If this is the case, the resulting image isn't truly in stereo. It's simply a flat image that appears to be farther from the viewer. The only part of the game that obviously appears in 3D is the HUD, but the actual game world doesn't appear to have any depth.
We asked the developers for feedback regarding this problem, and received the following response from Eidos Montreal:
"The game is fully 3D in that it renders two eyes separately, using adjusted projection matrices for each eye. However, we have chosen to not have ‘out-of-screen’ effects, and the standard game settings do not have a lot visible in the area close to the player where you can best distinguish near from far.
We have not had a lot of consumer feedback based on this, but we are looking at adding some additional user settings to allow players to customize the 3D experience a bit more in a future patch."
Now, regardless of whether or not a stereoscopic 3D game features "out-of-screen" effects, depth should be easily perceivable behind the screen. We should see a difference in separation between objects that are very close compared to objects that are far away.
If the game is using adjusted projection matrices, perhaps they're simply subtler than we're used to. Nevertheless, we don't understand why we're unable to measure a difference in separation. In any case, additional 3D controls that address this issue would be absolutely fantastic, and we certainly hope that Eidos decides to include them in a patch.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Not recommended; does not work
TriDef ignition will not launch this game in DirectX 11 mode. It did work in DirectX 9 with Virtual 3D mode when we tried the review copy of the game (screenshot above), but we haven't had any luck with the public release.
When it did work, the result seemed flat, just as it does when using the game’s native HD3D support.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Not recommended; does not work, no image to show
This game is unplayable with 3D Vision because lighting effects do not line up with the objects casting light in one eye. Turning off post-processing effects does not fix this problem, and the game is so peppered with light glows that it’s impossible to enjoy with Nvidia's solution.
Native AMD HD3D Support:
Excellent 3D result, but could not capture stereoscopic image
The 3D option doesn't appear in DirectX 9 mode. That makes sense though, since all Radeon cards that support HD3D are DirectX 11-capable.
This game delivers the best-looking native HD3D support that we’ve seen, with great depth and no visual flaws of which to speak. Unfortunately, we couldn’t take a screen shot to demonstrate the result, though it's very similar to the TriDef image below. While this article doesn’t focus on performance, we noticed that it really suffers when DiRT 3 is operating in native stereoscopic HD3D mode.
AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:
Good 3D result in DirectX 9 with Virtual 3D mode; DirectX 11 does not work
The TriDef driver provides an excellent stereoscopic experience
The TriDef Ignition software won't launch this game in DirectX 11 mode, but it does launch if the DirectX 9 code path is forced by tweaking the hardware_settings.cfg file. Normal 3D mode causes horrible artifacts, but Virtual 3D seems to work beautifully. Curiously, the performance is much better here than the game’s native HD3D option.
Nvidia 3D Vision:
Good 3D result with lowered details, but could not capture stereoscopic image
This title has some anomalies with shadows, ambient occlusion, and post-processing effects. If they're set to the lowest-quality option, what comes out the other end is really quite attractive. Some slight lens flare artifacts remain, but they aren't too distracting. There are also some water reflection artifacts. Bodies of water are rare in this game, though, so we don't consider this much of a problem.
Before we draw any conclusions, let’s see how 3D Vision and HD3D stack up when it comes to usability:
| Game | Nvidia 3D Vision | AMD HD3D & TriDef Ignition | Native HD3D Support |
|---|---|---|---|
| StarCraft II | Excellent 3D result | Excellent 3D gameplay result, but slight anomalies in cut scenes | |
| Civilization V | Excellent 3D result | Excellent 3D result in DirectX 9; DirectX 11 does not work | |
| Bulletstorm | Excellent 3D result | Excellent 3D result | |
| Crysis 2 | Excellent 3D result | Not Recommended | |
| Just Cause 2 | Excellent 3D result | Not Recommended | |
| Lost Planet 2 | Excellent 3D gameplay result, but slight anomalies in cut scenes | Excellent 3D Result in DirectX 9; DirectX 11 does not work | |
| Aliens vs. Predator | Not Recommended | Good 3D result in DirectX 9 with Virtual 3D mode; DirectX 11 does not work | |
| Left 4 Dead 2 | Good 3D result with lowered details although water artifacts are unavoidable | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| F1 2010 | Good 3D result with lowered details | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| Need 4 Speed: Hot Pursuit | Not Recommended | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| DiRT 3 | Good 3D result with lowered details | Good 3D result in DirectX 9 with Virtual 3D mode; DirectX 11 does not work | Excellent 3D result |
| World of Warcraft | Excellent 3D result with slight setting reduction | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| Lord Of The Rings Online | Excellent 3D result with slight setting reduction | Excellent 3D result in DirectX 9 with TriDef setting adjustment; DirectX 11 is problematic | |
| Star Trek Online | Good 3D result with lowered details | Good 3D result with lowered details or with Virtual 3D mode | |
| Mass Effect 2 | Not Recommended | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| Dragon Age 2 | Not Recommended | Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode | |
| Metro 2033 | Excellent 3D result | Excellent 3D result | |
| Deus Ex: Human Revolution | Not Recommended | Not Recommended | Good 3D result on the HUD, but no apparent depth in the game world |
This chart gives a fairly good impression of how 3D Vision and AMD HD3D/TriDef Ignition stack up. In general, Nvidia’s solution is simpler to use, but sometimes requires in-game settings to be compromised to minimize artifacts. On the other hand, TriDef Ignition is often capable of doing its job with in-game effects left on. However, it requires more tweaking to tune. When that happens, you'll find yourself messing with the launcher and settings, sometimes shifting down to DirectX 9 for compatibility reasons.
From a visual quality standpoint, given the choice between de-tuning detail like shadows or reverting to DirectX 9, we’d choose the older API every time. DirectX 10/11 effects are still relatively subtle. Because of this, we’re fans of TriDef’s Virtual 3D mode, as it generally allows us to leave shadows and lighting effects at their highest settings, even if it does require stepping back to DirectX 9.
Virtual 3D mode isn't perfect, though; because the depth buffer is given priority, interface elements like HUDs and menus are often distorted by the geometry behind them. Objects near the camera (like a weapon in a first-person shooter) are usually surrounded in a blurry halo of pixels, a result of the driver extrapolating a 3D image from a 2D frame. In some cases, this halo is almost impossible to see. In others, it's quite distracting. Because of these problems, the Virtual 3D mode never earns an excellent rating, but it almost always deserves a good one. Despite its issues, this mode can become the best 3D solution in some titles, as 3D Vision sometimes encounters even more distracting anomalies.
On the other hand, Nvidia’s 3D Vision is easier to work with, and it delivers a smoother experience in a more tightly controlled package. There’s less to worry about when using 3D Vision, it is more consistent, and there is a fair number of AAA titles that boast excellent 3D Vision support: World of Warcraft, StarCraft II, and Crysis 2, are but a few. Nvidia's stereoscopic option scored twice as many excellent ratings as the competition. Then again, the TriDef solution was only unplayable with three of the 18 games we tested, while 3D Vision displayed significant problems with five of the games.
The bottom line is that both options can be viable from a visual quality standpoint, but it depends on the game. AMD's HD3D might not offer as polished of an experience as Nvidia's 3D Vision, but it has certainly reached the point where we consider it a valid alternative.
Of course, we can't deliver a blanket recommendation because everything changes on a game-by-game basis. If you want to play Crysis 2 in 3D, you'll want to use 3D Vision. If you want to play Deus Ex: Human Revolution in 3D, HD3D is your solution of choice. Having said that, we should mention that TriDef 3D Ignition unofficially supports Nvidia graphics cards, and we were able to get it to work with the GeForce GTX 570 over HDMI when 3DTV Play was installed. Nvidia was both surprised and dismayed that the TriDef driver worked with their graphics cards when we went to them for feedback. So, without the company's official blessing, we’re not confident that the TriDef driver will ever consistently work with GeForce cards.
Now We Know About Visual Quality, But What About Performance?
If you're putting together a 3D gaming rig, it's best to skip low-end hardware entirely and go with a high-end CPU and graphics card. During preliminary testing, we noticed that a decent Phenom II X4 had some trouble providing smooth frame rates, and mid-level graphics cards were cut down to their knees. Using a Core i5-2500K overclocked to 4 GHz and a Radeon HD 6970 or GeForce GTX 570, we experienced much more acceptable frame rates (aside for DiRT 3 in native HD3D mode). The moral of this story is that you can't go cheap if you plan to game in stereoscopic mode.
That's a seat-of-the-pants assessment though, and we can't deliver a more definitive recommendation until we get our hands on a 3D-capable DisplayPort monitor that will allow us to fairly pit Nvidia's 3D Vision against AMD's HD3D on even turf at 1080p/60 FPS. Until then, we hope this cursory evaluation of 18 different games gives you a much better idea of what you can expect from competing stereoscopic standards.














