nVidia 3D Surround and 256 release driver updates

[Rroff]

Official updates on the status of these 2

http://blogs.nvidia.com/ntersect/2010/05/3d-vision-surround-driver-launch-timeline.html

The fact is we are not ready yet – the surround driver needs some final improvements... Our new target for 3D Vision Surround is the end of June.... Our first 256 based driver is planned to post to nvidia.com on May 24th and will enable new SLI setup controls and improve performance on several key applications for GTX 400 GPUs.

Expect 15-20% performance increases on GTX400 GPUs in several recent game titles amongst other enhancements.

 

[RavenXXX2]

Expect 15-20% performance increases on GTX400 GPUs in several recent game titles amongst other enhancements.

Link?

So you buy a fermi in March that's advertising the fact it has 3D vision surround yet you won't be able to use this feature for three months after release..

 

[Rroff]

15-20% is nVidia's normal party line for each major driver release

 

[drunkenmaster]

Am I missing the part in the link that claims 15-20% performance improvement? As with AMD drivers, this will simply be a fix to any games where SLI is working incredibly badly, well thats the "usual" situation when either company claim large performance boosts.

I actually didn't know that 3d surround wasn't working, considering in their press release info they had 3d surround ticked off for Nvidia, and claimed surround support while claiming AMD didn't have it.

Is it just 3d surround support, or 3d in general not working yet? Last I saw 3d performance was absymal(as it would be no doubt on AMD, halfing the frames essentially with a HUGE overhead aswell), which is why I'm in no rush to go after a screen/gpu setup to play it. We're several generations away from 3x 1920x1080 screens in surround and using decent AA/AF AND 3d on top of that. Till then, I'm not fussed in the slightest.

 

[Rroff]

Am I missing the part in the link that claims 15-20% performance improvement? As with AMD drivers, this will simply be a fix to any games where SLI is working incredibly badly, well thats the "usual" situation when either company claim large performance boosts.

This is what I hear from people using the pre-release versions in development - not just SLI fixes.

I actually didn't know that 3d surround wasn't working, considering in their press release info they had 3d surround ticked off for Nvidia, and claimed surround support while claiming AMD didn't have it.

Is it just 3d surround support, or 3d in general not working yet? Last I saw 3d performance was absymal(as it would be no doubt on AMD, halfing the frames essentially with a HUGE overhead aswell), which is why I'm in no rush to go after a screen/gpu setup to play it. We're several generations away from 3x 1920x1080 screens in surround and using decent AA/AF AND 3d on top of that. Till then, I'm not fussed in the slightest.

3D Vision works fine, multi-monitor surround has some unresolved QA to iron out but is otherwise working.

Stereo 3D Performance is not abysmal. There is no HUGE overhead. Tho granted 3x 1920x1080 panels needs quite a bit of horse power. As an example heaven benchmark 2.0 gives averages of 67.4fps in normal 3D and 34fps in stereo 3D (so about half which is to be expected).

 

[Rroff]

Link?

So you buy a fermi in March that's advertising the fact it has 3D vision surround yet you won't be able to use this feature for three months after release..

Heres a link for you http://blogs.nvidia.com/.a/6a00d834515fca69e20133ee418ddb970b-pi

 

[Greebo]

Heres a link for you http://blogs.nvidia.com/.a/6a00d834515fca69e20133ee418ddb970b-pi

roflmao

AMD do it as well so not just knocking Nvidia here

But the 15% average gain is for 11 games at 2560 x 1600 with 32xCSAA in SLI only

Now that means nothing to the average gamer as it probable means getting 11.5 fps whereas before you were getting 10 fps.

Then you look at the individual increases on each game for non SLI. They have used different resolutions and aa with every game and you would obviously show the results which gave the best gain.Hence Far Cry 2 with a 9% gain at 2560 x 1600 and 8xaa/16xaf suggests to me that at other resolutions the gain is smaller?

The average gain is 9% but again that is not true as most people will either game at 1920 x 1200 or 2560 x 1600, not both.

So I reckon for the normal gamer you might see an average of 5% from these drivers.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[Rroff]

lol

As per the actual thread for these drivers I'm seeing gains of around 4-9% depending on application and settings from my GTX260 SLI.

The point was tho, I wasn't just (entirely) pulling numbers out my ass I did have a proper source for the fact that there would be 15-20% gains in several applications.