3D vs. 6970M

As we all know here, if you want 3D then you have to take a 460M video card.
But on the other hand, if you want a more powerful GPU then you have to forfeit 3D.

I wanted both, but was forced to make a decision. I choose the 6970M over 3D

I have already placed my order with a 6970M, but now I am having second thoughts about not choosing the 3D model.

In the long run or over time, having the superior high refresh 120Hz panel, and the ability to run games in 3D and Blu-ray movies, will be better than a faster GPU that will fall away soon enough in the rankings?

I am uncertain if I have gone the right way, while I am waiting for my order. Is anyone else feeling the same?

 

Honestly, in the end, it really is irrelevant. Yes, the 6970m will soon not be the "best" gpu, but it will still be a kick gpu capable of playing games at max details. 3D movies and gaming are supposed to be awesome, but you win some you loose some. Personally, I'm waiting for confirmation on if the 485m is a hit or miss with the r3 3D, but either choice is a fine option.

With the 6970m, you will have plenty of gpu power for years to come.

 

Well I was as hesitant as you as to what to choose, the first time I called I told the rep I wanted the 6970, but then I cancelled while still on the phone and called again asking for the 3d model.
The way I see it is get the R3 now with a decent gpu and think about the future where I can upgrade to a better card once I feel the 460m is weak, and benefit from the 120hz display and the 3d capability

 

I am still tied up between 6970 and 3d.
For every person who posts how awesome 3d is , I am able to see one post which talks about 3d giving headaches, not being immersive,etc.
Those with 3d ,Please post how awesome it is, whether you are able to utilize the 3d or does it loose its charm after using it for long time??Does it give you headaches , How many ppl are able to experience the 3d??

 

Until 3d without glasses is released on the laptop market, i think 3D is more of a bonus feature than a necessity

 

I wear glasses, so it is not an option for me. To be honest, the whole technology seems unnecessary, just another gimmick ...

 

3d I can always get with external monitor someday. 5 hour battery life with igp and 6970 is priceless...

 

I really wanted the 3d so I went with 460m. I'm not really too much of a gamer so the fact it can play most games in mid level is fine with me.

Although in future I hope they will give us an option to upgrade the card while keeping the 3d and maybe give us a way to use optimus.

 

I agree with this.
If you're ok with paying nvidia's insane prices, there's nothing stopping you from upgrading to a 485m or better in the future....provided Dell offers bios support (but I'm fairly certain the r3 and 18x are sharing the same bios - meaning it will support 485m in my opinion)

 

Unless you have enormous coke-bottle glasses, several people on the forums have already noted that you can fit the 3d glasses over your own, or if your eyesight isn't too bad, even go without your own glasses. There's always contacts...

I haven't experienced much 3d personally, so I can't launch on a tirade about it. Unless you have had a ton of experience with 3d (forgive me if I'm wrong, you just sound like you haven't used it a ton), calling it gimmicky without fully testing it out is inexcusable. I have my judgement reserved for when I actually get mine and test it out, then I will be able to determine the truth behind the sayings.

 

That is correct your glasses should fit as long as there not really big.

Here is a clip YouTube - NVIDIA 3D Vision Glasses

Watch it from 4:10 and it shows that it can fit.

 

Stating my opinion is not inexcusable. You are right though, I have no real experience with modern 3D. I am just imagining the inconvenience of wearing goggles on top of glasses. Just my opinion.

The technology obviously has its place or there would not be so many companies coming out with products for the market.

 

I stand corrected guys, that video is very informative. The technology seems pretty cool actually and those glasses would fit right over my own.

I hereby recant my "gimmicky" comment!

 

igp and 6970m for 5 hours battery life > 3d in my opinion. Most people don't even want 3d. Blu-ray + a good hd display is still where it's at. I'd recommend the 6970m. If the GTX460 3d option had switchable graphics and gave just as good battery life, I'd be recommending the gtx460 or waiting for the gtx485m.

 

Battery life between the Optimus and 3D rigs isn't that far off as an FYI KipCoo, I can pull down 4 hours when necessary. Most of the Optimus guys are only getting a bit more than that. If someone needs maxiumum battery life while still having a decent gaming rig the 6870 is where it's at.

 

well my choice was based on the assumption that the 485m will be avialable at some point, not interested in battery

 

question, if I download a movie like Avatar as an avi will it be watchable in 3D or is that stripped during the encoding process from the DVD ?

 

The 3d on the R3 works like you are staring into a box. The images dont jump out at you per se. Its more like your screen becomes a moving diorama. Depending on the game, some of it is very layered and gives a roundness to the vehicles, characters, etc.

For Civ V, it was like the menu buttons were on the screen and the action was taking place behind it, like if you were looking down onto the world. It was nicely done to me. However, I tend to play Civ in marathon sessions and I dont think I could stand the glasses for more then 2 hours max. Besides you should take a break after that much time to give your eyes time to rest, adjust.

The shutters in the lenses work really well on some games, and videos, and other times, you can actually see them flickering and it weirds you out and pulls out of the illusion of depth.

Playing Total War 2 Shogun which is a pretty new game, it said it wasnt designed for 3d, but it pulled it off nicely, however there were some issues with the actual battles, like fires which should have been in the distance, sitting out in front of where they need to be, and shadows getting messed up and a bit of ghosting. But they were very minor things.

So if you want to experience 3d, its sorta like getting a box, and cutting out the layers of scene and staggering them at various depths. Some of the 3d blu rays look much better then this effect, but most games I got a chance to play seemed this way.



I did a quick mock up of what it feels like, so you can see what I am saying. For me it was like looking into the monitor and there were layers seperated and stacked on top of each other so you saw depth. Hopefully my quick paint brush image isnt too terrible.

Some of the preview images included with the r3 were that of Devil May Cry where the coat and depth of character and feild, and fight scene were extremely well done, the arc of the sword, was this clear slice through the air.

There was also a preview image of a car, wrecking and you could see into the car and it was almost like you could reach into your screen and grab it like a model car.

They showed another car in what looks to be a racing scene on a bridge and you can really make out the depth on the bridge and the tail lights really seemed to pop on the back of the car.

I downloaded some demos from nvidia and they really bogged my machine down at first, but they played and gave a feeling where 3d could go. It was neat, but I am not completely sold on it.

However if there was the ability to switch graphic cards in the 3d bundle, I would have kept my 3d bundle. I see alot of potential in movies and some games for the 3d to add a new twist.

Its different then playing on your xbox or ps3, or a normal game, and it gives you something new to experience.

I just think currently, they arent really taking advantage of it to add to the games and make them pop, but I predict that to change and develop as they continue to embrace the 3d tech.

I also wear glasses and the 3d glasses fit over my glasses just fine. They hold a charge pretty long as well.

 

After reading this thread, had these few thoughts.

Funny how folks without 3D have such strong opinions?

The 460m plays all current games (with perhaps two exceptions) on ultra settings at the highest resolution just fine.

Anyone who thinks the 3D is incapable of jumping out of the screen in your face has not seen the nVidia demo that comes with the control panel.

If benchmarking and being ever more futureproof (except for 3D titles) are vital for you, then get the AMD product.

 

Sorry to rag about you on your opinion. A lot of people been checking 3d, but it does have some value even if you have to go with the 460m. Plus, unless you're a diehard benchmarker, it would still be cool to show off to friends

 

I had the r3 3d bundle. The images don't jump out at you, it more like you are staring down into a 3d box. The images can come up to the screen, but that is where the reach their limit. Popping out of the screen, while cute in marketing
adverts isn't really how 3d looks. It more about multiple layers. As long as the borders remain, the amount of push the image can do is constrained by the screen.

I think the machine ran really well on the 460 and handled shogun 2 on max settings in 3d and non 3d as well and ran smoothly. A few things in 3d on the game were off but they were minor.

I think if you are a movie buff who likes a different and cool way to watch movies, 3d is awesome on the r3 and if you want to also refresh your games trying them in 3d will give your eyes something new to see.

If you like 3d the 3d bundle is an excellent way to go. The screen is gorgeous.

3d also darkens the image a bit because of the glasses. So it's a good thing the r3 screen is bright.

 

I have the r3 3d and my new r3 I ordered is with the 6970. I gave 3d a shot for a few hours and for the first month I didnt touch it. In my opinion, if you are 'good' at any competitive game you like (for me wow, cs, tft) 3d IS a gimmick and I would never use it. Maybe gaming for fun and sucking etc and not caring about winning 3d will be fine. I find mouse accuracy etc is way off with 3d. I did like the 120hz panel I'll admit but for the last 15 years I never compained once about the 60hz lcds I used on my desktop so I figured why should I start now. The response time on both lcds is very fast which imo matters more than 120 vs 60. The 460 is capable but in 3d mode and at max settings it struggles. I find the glasses ugly and just a nuisance to put on etc. Until developers design more games with 3d in mind im not going to bother with it.

120hz + 480/485 = win
for now 6970 is the easy win in my book.

 

Not a problem at all. It really is a cool technology I just don't think I would benefit from it. I hope I'll be happy with the 6970 and the 60Hz screen. Had AW offered the 3D package with 485m I would probably have gone with that. One of my goals is to have a system that will play games at the best rates for the longest period of time.

I hope the 60Hz screen looks as good with the ATI card. I asked a couple of days ago if it would make any difference having the 120Hz screen versus the 60Hz screen with regards to image quality. I got a single reply aying it would hardly be noticable. No I am not even sure if the ATI card would work with the higher refresh rate screen.

Sorry to get so far off topic.

 

Design more games ?? lol almost every title released is 3D for the last 12 months and more, and to bad if you change your mind at some point cos it would be a costly upgrade, for now I can play anything in 2D if I want but I have the option right there for 3D also, if you want 4 hours battery instead of 3 then go the ATi route but personally I don't like the ATi environment, 485m and I'll have the ultimate package which I believe will be available soon.

 

You can probably also downclock the 460m as well if your just browsing the internet on the go...hmmmm...

 

The cyrsis 2 mutiplayer demo looks pretty cool in 3D if anyone is interested in trying it. Hopefully its an idication of how all the nvidia '3D ready' ( mostly optimized or whatever) games will look like going forward.

 

If it's available soon then I'll sell mine and buy the r3 with the 485/120 and sell the glasses. Will Cost less than upgrading.

 

This stereo graphics is not that new, I was using this same technology before 2003,
I used a pair from i-glasses.com and the nvidia stero driver that has been around for along time. I used to play quake 3 areana, unreal tourn, and those games back then, they no longer work with this set up although it is the same, just now the glasses are wireless, the older ones I still have use a wire and they are broken. I got the 3d cause I loved it then and I do still love it now with the newer games.

But its not something new, it has been passed around in many forms, it is however less buggy but still not perfect.