120Hz and 3D.. just a bunch of BS?

[moonbogg]

But do they NEED to run at 120fps or is there a benefit to anything over 60 fps?

Good point. No, they don't need to run at 120. Personally for me, the magic FPS zone starts at 80 and above. 80 feels more solid and smooth than 60. From there it only gets smoother. The largest benefit that I have seen is from panning around, and thats huge. Hell, thats the biggest reason I went to 120hz. Panning around is where you really feel that 60hz lag, and yes, panning indoors is much more clear and easier to distinguish a solder from that post hes crouching next to in the dark.

 

[lopri]

I think so. 120 Hz, maybe, but I never believed in 3D in the living rooms or in the office. Until the day comes when glasses are no longer necessary, I don't see 3D going mainstream other than temporary fads.

I was skeptical from the beginning. I wasn't sure why it was catching on at all, when it looked just like IMAX movies that existed for decades. I thought I might be missing something, but that wasn't the case.

Most of the folks around me who bought a 3D TV set uses it to brag.. to their nephews and nieces. They rarely bother to watch 3D movies/programming, and even then they will not bear the eye strain for more than 30 minutes or so.

 

[SirPauly]

Imho,

3d stereo simply makes sense to offer the choice for flexibility for the consumer -- not necessarily just be main-stream or force 3d stereo over a 2d plane. To have the flexibility to watch a favorite 3d movie or play a favorite game in 3d stereo doesn't suck -- one can always play or watch in 2d if one chooses.

Eventually, there may be just a flexibility option for 3d stereo without any premiums, moving forward.

Sure, it would be wonderful to have 3d stereo with quality without glasses but when? How will the quality actually be? What costs? While one waits for 3d stereo innovation without glasses or head wear -- at least there are choices from display manufacturers, GPU companies like AMD and nVidia and third party companies like DDD, etc. -- that offer choice.

Even the Oculus Rift is making some noise with 3d stereo, which may be very compelling:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game

 

[yours truly]

I've had my vg278he for a few months now and aside from the terrible backlight bleed it's great! My original plan was to get an NEC PA301W and use that as my primary display and the Asus purely for gaming but tbh the U2410 it's replacing is back in its box, ready to given to my bro as a hand me down. I'm quite happy to wait for 120hz+ IPS however long that takes and I'm quite an impatient person.

I don't understand why people say 27" is too big for 1080. Sure if it lean right up to the screen it's not ideal but seating 1.5-2 feet from it, it's fine.

Now, trying to maintain 144fps in BF3, coming from ultra settings ~60fps is a different matter but I have definitely upped my game.

 

[kami]

While I agree 3d is a gimmick for games, 120hz is not. The difference between a regular monitor and my Asus VG278h is night and day. 60hz monitors almost look like they are smearing during motion.

 

[blackened23]

I think so. 120 Hz, maybe, but I never believed in 3D in the living rooms or in the office. Until the day comes when glasses are no longer necessary, I don't see 3D going mainstream other than temporary fads.

I was skeptical from the beginning. I wasn't sure why it was catching on at all, when it looked just like IMAX movies that existed for decades. I thought I might be missing something, but that wasn't the case.

Most of the folks around me who bought a 3D TV set uses it to brag.. to their nephews and nieces. They rarely bother to watch 3D movies/programming, and even then they will not bear the eye strain for more than 30 minutes or so.

I think the main thing about 3d vision is that there are too many barriers to entry. You need special glasses which cost 150$ or so (correct me if i'm wrong on price), a special monitor, and then you need to tweak quite a bit to get some games to work properly. I think this is the main reason a lot of people don't bother with 3d vision or whatever.

Granted, some people really like it. It's another option which is never a bad thing.

 

[wand3r3r]

While I only tried BFBC2 with lower resolution/settings, it was amazing in 3D! The quality of the picture left a lot to desire with the settings I tried, but it was just incredible to have another aspect added to the game. I was playing in the maps with houses and feeling the true sense of depth was nothing short of amazing.

I was so impressed that I absolutely can't wait for it to become mainstream and once they get all the wrinkles worked out. There were major drawbacks such as the sights being off which is a known issue in 3D. In the end it wasn't fast enough for a fps (too weak of a card for the resolution and couldn't maintain 120 fps).

The only videos that I found to really feel the depth in was cartoons or places where there were rooms and large objects within a reasonably close distance. In wide open spaces the depth just isn't there, it almost has to be exaggerated with close ups and lots of big objects.

In order for it to be anything more then a fad I agree with the others.
No glasses is a definite must. The drivers and integration into games seems to leave something to be desired. There are some serious usability issues.

 

[moonbogg]

FPS games are not great in 3D I have found, but racing games are fantastic. Try Burnout Paradise in 3D. Thats just awesome and it works just about perfect. Also, for a racing game, 3D doesn't interfere with the how the game plays in my experience.

 

[SirPauly]

Imho,

One can add depth -- and a ton of it --- but the setting that is under-rated and not discussed too much is convergence - finding the right balance of depth and convergence for an individual is key!

Standing at the end of a cliff and looking at a vast canyon is really neat and realistic.

An example:

I was climbing Sky Scrapers in Just Cause 2 with the grappling hook and as I did get higher and higher -- looking down -- really did get a sense of acrophobia -- I know it wasn't real but it looked real and felt uneasy. Ridiculous how realistic the feel of height was.

 

[tweakboy]

Yes because you get 5ms to 12ms response.

So, FPS with vsync on,, it will not be smooth and instant there will be mouse lag....

 

[videogames101]

I can't use 60hz monitors for gaming anymore, it's just become too noticable compared to my asus 120hz

 

[Timecop1967]

I'm running the Planar SA2311W 3d monitor. Can you set the refresh rates to 120hz on the new Radeon boards 7970 or 7950s? I'm in the market for a new video card......my current one Nvidia 460gtx allows me to set at 120hz but not sure on the Radeons as I haven't owned one for a long time.

 

[SirPauly]

Just desire to offer another area that isn't raised too much: With stereo 3d, specifically shutters, each eye is seeing the same identical image but shifted. Not only is depth created by the blending; but the shifting and blending helps with aliasing as well ---tough to quantify but close to a x2 full scene super-sampled, imho.

 

[flopper]

I'm running the Planar SA2311W 3d monitor. Can you set the refresh rates to 120hz on the new Radeon boards 7970 or 7950s? I'm in the market for a new video card......my current one Nvidia 460gtx allows me to set at 120hz but not sure on the Radeons as I haven't owned one for a long time.

yes.
why would there be any difference?

 

[Timecop1967]

Some of the older threads I came across stated that 3rd party drivers were needed to support anything higher than 60hz on the Radeon cards and that Catalyst Control panel didn't support 3d. But that might have changed with the newer cards. I'm assuming that if the card has Dual Link DVI should be good to go with the higher refresh rates and 3d.

 

[GotNoRice]

Some of the older threads I came across stated that 3rd party drivers were needed to support anything higher than 60hz on the Radeon cards and that Catalyst Control panel didn't support 3d. But that might have changed with the newer cards. I'm assuming that if the card has Dual Link DVI should be good to go with the higher refresh rates and 3d.

The few times I tested my secondary computer, that is running 2x 4870x2 with my Samsung 120hz monitor, it was able to do 60hz & 100hz but not 120hz for some reason. 100hz wasn't bad, but really not sure why it didn't want to work at 120hz. The cards are limited to the 12.6 legacy driver however, unknown if newer drivers on newer cards have the same issue.

 

[kaihonsou]

I might be buying a old LCD Acer monitor thats 1920x1200 @ 75Hz. Can you see any difference at 75Hz? Its going for very cheap and it will at least for me settle the issue of IPS V TN @ 120Hz.

 

[Meka690]

i prefer 3d passive over 3d active. i own a 55'' LG 3d LW5600,, what a can say! amazing gaming and movies experience!

 

[lkailburn]

so what are some recommended 120hz monitors out there? something in the 24" range

 

[Borealis7]

i said it once and i'll say it again: Samsung S23A700D, 23" 120Hz, LED, TN, deal with it.

you better not make me repeat myself

 

[Ben90]

i said it once and i'll say it again: Samsung S23A700D, 23" 120Hz, LED, TN, deal with it.

you better not make me repeat myself

For those of you concerned about input delay, this is a terrible monitor.

 

[blackened23]

Has anyone tried the 120hz 1440p catleaps? I'm thinking about trying it out as a second display or even perhaps going surround, but i'm somewhat wary of the nebulous warranty terms for catleaps. It is, however, the only monitor offering 120hz at 1440p. This is just my opinion but 1080p is junk to me and is a no go -- but if I can get 120hz at x1440, that is tempting.

Any comments from users of a 120hz catleap would be appreciated!

 

[VulgarDisplay]

For those of you concerned about input delay, this is a terrible monitor.

What? I have the SA750D, and there is no input lag at all for me. It's far better than my old xl2370 which was supposed to have less than 1ms of delay. The SA750D actually made me better at twitch shooters and I was already ridiculously good.

 

[Borealis7]

For those of you concerned about input delay, this is a terrible monitor.

i'm not so |-|@Rdc0r3 that i notice these things. right now, i'm enjoying Borderlands 2 and indoors i get marvelous framerates, smooth as butter.

 

[Ben90]

i'm not so |-|@Rdc0r3 that i notice these things. right now, i'm enjoying Borderlands 2 and indoors i get marvelous framerates, smooth as butter.

So if any 120Hz is going to make you happy, you are just confusing people when you go around touting the one you bought as the best monitor in the world.