Nvidia Potential Roadmap Update for 2017: Volta Architecture Could Be Landing As Early As 2H 2017

bru · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:38

Griffildur said:
3D never got to the point VR is at now.

You have Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Samsung, Intel and quite a few others behind it. That never happened with 3D. Plus there are great real world applications for VR not just gaming. So yeah, I think it will catch. What we see now is rough, but second gen should be much better.

Absolute nonsense, 3D was massive and yet it has died a death, just look at just about every TV manufacturer, they had and still just about have a 3D model, nearly every film was released in 3D.
On the gaming front, both AMD and NVidia embraced 3D with NVidia doing dedicated hardware and software and AMD letting a third party (Tridef) deal with it for them. The amount of games that work with 3D is considerably more then what work with VR.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that one is better than the other, or that one will outlast the other, both have been around for a long time and have had massive followings that for 3D has dwindled somewhat. Only time will tell how well this generation of VR will do.

One thing to remember is that both of these technologies have been around for at least 50 years, with them getting better and better, but with one massive drawback. People don't like putting stuff on their heads, be it glasses or a headset. once these technologies can work without the headgear, then they might have a chance.

Seanspeed · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:41

Griffildur said:
3D is amazing, I have to say. I have the 3D setup, kit, monitor etc. there are a few games which support it.

I can even run normal blu rays and enable 3D. I've seen the entire star wars collection in 3D even though the disks were not actually 3D and it was good. It was expensive, but worth it. Too bad it didn't catch up.

Yea, I was impressed with 3D overall and I'm also a bit bummed it didn't catch on better.

That said, I'm 10x more impressed with VR. I will definitely be investing in a VR setup at some point in the near future.

JanM · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:41

bru said:
Absolute nonsense, 3D was massive and yet it has died a death, just look at just about every TV manufacturer, they had and still just about have a 3D model, nearly every film was released in 3D.
On the gaming front, both AMD and NVidia embraced 3D with NVidia doing dedicated hardware and software and AMD letting a third party (Tridef) deal with it for them. The amount of games that work with 3D is considerably more then what work with VR.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that one is better than the other, or that one will outlast the other, both have been around for a long time and have had massive followings that for 3D has dwindled somewhat. Only time will tell how well this generation of VR will do.

One thing to remember is that both of these technologies have been around for at least 50 years, with them getting better and better, but with one massive drawback. People don't like putting stuff on their heads, be it glasses or a headset. once these technologies can work without the headgear, then they might have a chance.

TV's its different though, its not immersive and films are not truly 3 dimensional, people were expecting them to be rather that flat layers as you go into the distance.
Also 3d games for things like 3d vision were not done properly.
We're getting dedicated games for VR, things like experiences are great too. I'm waiting for them to stick a camera to a headset so that I can do some 3D modeling work with it like they have promised with MS Halo.

Griffildur · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:51

bru said:
Absolute nonsense, 3D was massive and yet it has died a death, just look at just about every TV manufacturer, they had and still just about have a 3D model, nearly every film was released in 3D.
On the gaming front, both AMD and NVidia embraced 3D with NVidia doing dedicated hardware and software and AMD letting a third party (Tridef) deal with it for them. The amount of games that work with 3D is considerably more then what work with VR.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that one is better than the other, or that one will outlast the other, both have been around for a long time and have had massive followings that for 3D has dwindled somewhat. Only time will tell how well this generation of VR will do.

One thing to remember is that both of these technologies have been around for at least 50 years, with them getting better and better, but with one massive drawback. People don't like putting stuff on their heads, be it glasses or a headset. once these technologies can work without the headgear, then they might have a chance.

we were talking about 3D for gaming, not TV, it's not quite the same thing. How many people do you know who have a 3D Kit?

Griffildur · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:52

Seanspeed said:
Yea, I was impressed with 3D overall and I'm also a bit bummed it didn't catch on better.

That said, I'm 10x more impressed with VR. I will definitely be investing in a VR setup at some point in the near future.

same here, I will be getting a VR kit. I've seen GearVR and it was amazing, absolutely amazing. I expect a Vive to be much better. Man, I am getting the itch to just buy the damn thing!

Seanspeed · 27 Jul 2016 at 15:54

bru said:
Absolute nonsense, 3D was massive and yet it has died a death, just look at just about every TV manufacturer, they had and still just about have a 3D model, nearly every film was released in 3D.
On the gaming front, both AMD and NVidia embraced 3D with NVidia doing dedicated hardware and software and AMD letting a third party (Tridef) deal with it for them. The amount of games that work with 3D is considerably more then what work with VR.

You know what the difference here is?

3D was being forced on customers by the hardware manufacturers and cinema companies. They were trying to market 3D to us rather than have it be something that was done because of the demand from consumers or even film makers(the ones actually filming, not studio suits).

VR on the other hand was built on grassroots interest. Particularly important was the interest from actual software developers. They are the ones who saw the potential in VR and started making all kinds of early VR apps and experiences to drive a 'customer base' for Oculus development kits, leading to the situation we have today. We might now have Sony and even Samsung and Oculus 'marketing' VR now, but the interest is genuine. Obviously not everybody is a believer, and they still need to be convinced, but the point is that VR is happening because of actual interest, not because mega corps are trying to tell us we need it.

bru said:
One thing to remember is that both of these technologies have been around for at least 50 years, with them getting better and better, but with one massive drawback. People don't like putting stuff on their heads, be it glasses or a headset. once these technologies can work without the headgear, then they might have a chance.

While VR has technically been around for a while, even ignoring that the quality of VR headsets and rendering were *woeful* back in the 90's(the last time there was buzz around VR), it's really only now that VR at home is viable and 'affordable'.

And again, 3D's failure was not due to needing to wear glasses.

Kano · 27 Jul 2016 at 16:31

interesting!

Gregster · 27 Jul 2016 at 16:56

I still have my 3D kit bit not touched it since getting a DK2 and then the CV1. I was really impressed with how good 3D was in truth but something about 3D films just doesn't really work for me. I am a Imax regular and much prefer a 2D Imax film to 3D for some reason.

Greebo · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:00

Griffildur said:
we were talking about 3D for gaming, not TV, it's not quite the same thing. How many people do you know who have a 3D Kit?

Point is 3d for tv was massive but it has died a death.

Greebo · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:03

Gregster said:
I still have my 3D kit bit not touched it since getting a DK2 and then the CV1. I was really impressed with how good 3D was in truth but something about 3D films just doesn't really work for me. I am a Imax regular and much prefer a 2D Imax film to 3D for some reason.

The right film on a giant 3d imax screen is a thing of beauty. Seeing the ships in star wars coming out over the seats and almost been able to touch them was amazing.

By far the best 3d film IMO was AVatar. That was really enhanced.

SOme movies just do 3d for the sake of it and would have been better in 2d though.

nashathedog · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:06

Griffildur said:
agreed and personally I think the future of VR is not what we see now, for me VR will be a thing of beauty, no cables, no crazy weights on your face. We will get there eventually

You mean the Holodeck, Sadly it won't be in any of our lifetimes but who know maybe our grankids grankids will see the beginning of such tech. Your right though this current head weight set up is not a long term way to game.

nashathedog · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:07

Greebo said:
The right film on a giant 3d imax screen is a thing of beauty. Seeing the ships in star wars coming out over the seats and almost been able to touch them was amazing.

By far the best 3d film IMO was AVatar. That was really enhanced.

SOme movies just do 3d for the sake of it and would have been better in 2d though.

Who remembers Jaws 3 in 3d. There was only two 3d moments that I remember, one where he almost pokes your eye out with the washing line post and one where the shark blows up.

Griffildur · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:16

Greebo said:
Point is 3d for tv was massive but it has died a death.

has it? no one told me ... I still watch 3d movies, still buy 3d blu rays ...

Gregster · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:34

Greebo said:
The right film on a giant 3d imax screen is a thing of beauty. Seeing the ships in star wars coming out over the seats and almost been able to touch them was amazing.

By far the best 3d film IMO was AVatar. That was really enhanced.

SOme movies just do 3d for the sake of it and would have been better in 2d though.

Avatar was an exception to the rule and worked very well but Star wars didn't really do it for me (might just be me). I have seen a number lately from Batman Vs Superman (that was a complete waste in 3D) and Captain America (another waste). Some scenes look really good and work well but for the most, I would rather not bother. More like Avatar and a real winner and it looks sweet on my 3DTV as well.

Blackbadger · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:44

http://www.realorfake3d.com/

Check here before watching a 3d film, 90% of the time a fake 3d film is bad. 90% of the time a real 3D film works very well.

3D done in post production is just to hard and time consuming (costly) to do properly, so mostly it isn't done properly.

Griffildur · 27 Jul 2016 at 17:45

Gregster said:
Avatar was an exception to the rule and worked very well but Star wars didn't really do it for me (might just be me). I have seen a number lately from Batman Vs Superman (that was a complete waste in 3D) and Captain America (another waste). Some scenes look really good and work well but for the most, I would rather not bother. More like Avatar and a real winner and it looks sweet on my 3DTV as well.

days of future past was not bad. Hobbit was decent as well.

Greebo · 27 Jul 2016 at 18:07

Griffildur said:
has it? no one told me ... I still watch 3d movies, still buy 3d blu rays ...

The fact that there was just 12 "real" 3d films released in 2016 and 15 in 2015 compared to the 40 - 50 released in previous years shows that its slowly dying.

Wont be long before they dont bother releasing any in 3d

Greebo · 27 Jul 2016 at 18:09

Gregster said:
Avatar was an exception to the rule and worked very well but Star wars didn't really do it for me (might just be me). I have seen a number lately from Batman Vs Superman (that was a complete waste in 3D) and Captain America (another waste). Some scenes look really good and work well but for the most, I would rather not bother. More like Avatar and a real winner and it looks sweet on my 3DTV as well.

Agreed about star wars though, there was only 4 or 5 times you even noticed the 3d but when you did it was impressive. Guess it explains a lot that it was post production.

Doom112 · 27 Jul 2016 at 18:20

Too much horse power from both AMD and Nvidia is awesome ,however, pc will still be suffering from a low quality Console ports.

I hope with Volta at least 4K 60fps on Ultra settings become standard.

Gregster · 27 Jul 2016 at 20:39

Doom112 said:
Too much horse power from both AMD and Nvidia is awesome ,however, pc will still be suffering from a low quality Console ports.

I hope with Volta at least 4K 60fps on Ultra settings become standard.

Hopefully AMD can get the power down for Vega or Greenland and give Volta a fair match. It is quite a worry when you see the 480 uses more than the 1070 and performs substantially worse.