Home > News
3D screen without glasses: follow-up
Florent Alzieu
June 29, 2009 11:37 am
June 29, 2009 11:37 am
After the publication of our news 3D screen without glasses: we've tried them, Olivier Dellicour from Spatial View reacted to the news and in particular to our remark about performances in gamesThe phrase in question is the following: "Even the most powerful current configurations won’t be enough to calculate the images needed for a game that requires significant graphics resources, which means this device is pretty much limited to use with video". According to Dellicourt, this phrase is not representative of reality because, firstly, the screen is used by several gamers including him and the current driver is certified for around forty games. He does recognise that there is a drop in performance but says that this is not as significant as we report in our news.
We asked him to give us some more detail on this point. As there are no official benches the results given by the company are those obtained by CanardPC. According to these, there are 3 to 4 times fewer images processed in Direct X and 5 times fewer in Open GL.
In addition to these results we also received a link to an article on the German site Computerbase.de, who carried out performance tests with an NVIDIA 8800 GT card on the following games: Need for Speed: Most Wanted, UT2004 and Call of Duty 4. The details we want to highlight are those for Call of Duty 4. The graph (if I’ve understood properly, not having much recent German) gives results for 6 second periods for the 2D and 3D modes. The number of images per second falls on average from 45 to a little less than 20. Compterbase.de’s opinion is the following: even with these old titles, you’ll need a powerful setup.
These results do put our own report into context. Saying that the Wazabee 3Dee screen is impossible to use for gaming is wrong: you can use it with a powerful setup. However, I know that these conditions would discourage me. As a relatively demanding gamer, I’m not prepared to see performances fall by between 2 and 5 times, even at the price of not having 3D. Much more powerful cards will be needed or a less demanding solution in terms of image processing.
Previous story / Next story :
- 29/06New test: NVIDIA GeForce 3D Vision
- 29/06Adobe tries to save Flash for mobile
- 29/06Graphics acceleration for Flash from NVIDIA
- Current story - 3D screen without glasses: follow-up
- 27/06GPS Test: TomTom XL Live
- 27/06New test: Apple iPhone 3G S. Move over 3G?
- 25/06TomTom Navigator free on the iPhone at the end of July!
Check out all of our High Tech offers: TV, Computing, Camera, Gaming, Telephony, Blu-Ray DVD on Pixmania

- 25/063D screen without glasses: we've tried it
- 06/08Where we're at with 3D: at the cinema and at home
- 29/06New test: NVIDIA GeForce 3D Vision
- 24/06Two iPhone accessories tested: 3D and audio
- 30/01New Test: legendary new screen, the Samsung 2233rz, 120 Hz in 3D
- 21/10ViewSonic VX2268wm on test--is it a rival for Samsung's 3D screen?
- 28/09First ever 3D digital camera, the Fuji W1, is in our lab!
- 25/093D on laptops as of October?
- 15/09Early 3D monitor from Zalman drops in price
- 14/09An early 3D TV from JVC: $9153
- 14/093D TVs: Panasonic take the first set






Product Face-Offs

