Nvidia 3D Vision Vs. AMD HD3D: 18 Games, Evaluated

by
112 Comments

F1 2010

AMD HD3D and the TriDef Ignition Driver:

Good 3D result with Virtual 3D mode

We found that the default F1 2010 TriDef Ignition profile wasn't as good as the default profile with Virtual 3D modeWe found that the default F1 2010 TriDef Ignition profile wasn't as good as the default profile 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

The screenshot looks good, but during actual game play Nvidia's 3D Vision often displays distracting artifactsThe screenshot looks good, but during actual game play Nvidia's 3D Vision often displays distracting artifacts

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.

Previous Next
Summary
  1. The State Of 3D Gaming
  2. Displays, Software, And Settings
  3. Test System And Benchmark Setup
  4. StarCraft II
  5. Civilization V
  6. World Of Warcraft
  7. Lord Of The Rings Online
  8. Star Trek Online
  9. Bulletstorm
  10. Crysis 2
  11. Just Cause 2
  12. Lost Planet 2
  13. Aliens Vs. Predator
  14. Left 4 Dead 2
  15. Metro 2033
  16. F1 2010
  17. Need 4 Speed: Hot Pursuit
  18. Mass Effect 2
  19. Dragon Age 2
  20. Deus Ex: Human Revolution
  21. DiRT 3
  22. Two Compelling 3D Solutions With Strengths And Weaknesses
About the author
Don Woligroski
Read more
This thread is closed for comments
112 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • renick
    nvidia 3d vision is best in all............
  • Kamab
    Except for the ones where it's not recommended. Good thing I have one on this rig! Now I just got to shell out some cash for some 3D Tech.
  • the_krasno
    3D is over hyped in my opinion, it will be some more time before games can correctly exploit it.
  • falchard
    Everytime nVidia pushes out a proprietary format they shoot themselves in the foot. They just can't make it marketable with such a low market share. You need something like Microsofts 90% market share to think about making a closed standard.
    Anyone notice the bevel on the Samsung model. That beautiful for multi-monitor.
  • Scanlia
    Great comprehensive review! Loved it.
  • alyoshka
    Nice one, and really long awaited.
  • i tried Tridef in EVE online, absolutely stunning. :)
  • SteelCity1981
    Quote:
    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


    Time for Bulldozer!!!
  • assassin123
    i loved it great review keep it up
  • RazberyBandit
    Would it kill Tom's to use high-resolution pop-up pics? It's nearly impossible to discern any differences in detail or artifacts when comparing such low-resolution images. C'mon...1024 x 317? Seriously?
  • shin0bi272
    I thought we just had a report a month ago that 3d stuff was bad for your brain. shouldnt we be waiting to see if there's any real permanent damage from this tech before we jump right in and start using it?
  • bradleyg5
    you jerks messed up the cross view images. why did you include empty black space between the frames. the need to touch, the further apart and the larger the images the harder it is. I can do it fine with the pictures on Wikipedia but these ones are impossible.
  • hyteck9
    The unwritten message here is that this is all totally unacceptable. If I had shelled out major cash for 3D hardware, and then discovered only some 3D games are playable... I'd be yelling "shenanigans" from the highest mountain top. WHAT YEAR IS THIS? Nobody puts up with this "incompatable" crap anymore... its not 1980. Kudo's to Nvidia for trying to lock down polished experiences. Shame on any Game Software vendor that uses the 3D logo and doesn't deliver the goods. that is "False Advertising" as far as I am concerned and they better put a leash on it before they get sued. It sounds like Nvidia has a framework that succeeds when licensed, and game companies shy away from it due to its cost and/or red tape. Fine... Then don't release a 3D game!!! Sheesh. The more broken 3D crap Vendors put on the market, the more people will assume 3D itself is broken, which clearly isn't the case. Stop ruining the reputation of 3D by releasing half-ass'd titles please!
  • hyteck9
    Props to BulletStorm and Metro 2033 for being the only titles that simply "worked" on both Nvidia and AMD soltuions.. They have provem it "can" be done and everyone else should hang their head in shame.
  • drwho1
    Still not interested on 3D, nice article though.
  • pro-gamer
    wow! man whats a battle between nvidia and amd
    in my opinion both are great......
  • here is a misarable pro-Intel campaign. Those reporters dedicate the article to AMD and Nvidia and they consider necessary to remind about Intel. Why? How much money you get for this hidden campaign pro Intel?
  • cleeve
    Quote:
    here is a misarable pro-Intel campaign. Those reporters dedicate the article to AMD and Nvidia and they consider necessary to remind about Intel. Why? How much money you get for this hidden campaign pro Intel?


    So for you it'd be responsible journalism if we noticed a problem with hardware and buried it so our readers wouldn't find out?

    Or are you saying we shouldn't report negative findings we notice from any product? Or do you mean just AMD?

    From where I'm sitting, what you're suggesting isn't even handed and fair journalism...
  • cleeve
    569996 said:
    you jerks messed up the cross view images. why did you include empty black space between the frames. the need to touch, the further apart and the larger the images the harder it is. I can do it fine with the pictures on Wikipedia but these ones are impossible.


    No. The borders are there to help you focus. If the images were touching, your eyes would pick out the discrepancy on the edge and make crossviewing more difficult.

    And what's with "jerks"...? Was name calling really necessary? :)
  • cleeve
    289541 said:
    3D is over hyped in my opinion, it will be some more time before games can correctly exploit it.


    Hype: maybe.

    But as far as games that correctly exploit it, they are already out there. There are some game titles that have superb stereoscopic support already.
  • thrasher32
    Um, I love the idea of 3D games, but there is no way on God's Green Earth that I'll be spending $400-$800 for a 3D monitor.

    So, see ya in 5 years, 3D gaming.
  • TeraMedia
    According to the HDMI 1.4a spec, one of the "secondary" formats is 1920 x 1080 at 60 Hz, with a "Frame-Pack" encoding. This means two full 1080p frames, both at 60 Hz. So if the source (GPU) and sink (HDTV) both support that format, then a aystem should be able to use it.

    Don W claims that HDMI supports only up to 24 Hz at Full 1080p, but that is an oversimplification. That said, I'd sure like to have a few words with whoever on the HDMI group decided that such a format shouldn't be given more importance. Implementation of any secondary format by source or sink is optional. I'm guessing that the primary formats (which include 1080p24 Frame-Pack, among others) were chosen because they all fit within the slower speed-caps of older HDMI cables. HDMI should have required that all 1.4a-compliant sources be able to generate 1080p60 Frame Pack, but they didn't. Thank you HDMI.
  • cleeve
    TeramediaAccording to the HDMI 1.4a spec, one of the "secondary" formats is 1920 x 1080 at 60 Hz, with a "Frame-Pack" encoding. This means two full 1080p frames, both at 60 Hz. So if the source (GPU) and sink (HDTV) both support that format, then a aystem should be able to use it.


    I wasn't able to get 60 Hz to work, so it's probably not a practical solution at this time and I therefore didn't cover it.

    If I can ever get it to work I'll certainly report so. :)
  • bystander
    I'm curious if you can use a dual link DVI to Displayport converter to allow for HD3D at 1080p on more monitors. Has anyone ever tested this?

    I'd also mention, one of the biggest advantage on the Nvidia side, is SLI support. With the increased demands, this is a pretty big advantage.
Display more comments
Most Popular
  1. Intel vPro: Three Generations Of Remote Management
  2. MSI Reveals Voice-Activated Motherboards at IDF
  3. GeForce GTX 580M SLI Vs. Radeon HD 6990M CrossFire
The Latest On Tom's Hardware
Edition
Subscribe to our newsletter
Company
Resources
Other Purch sites
  • © 2019 Purch All Rights Reserved.