WEBVTT

00:00:07.240 --> 00:00:15.879
3D Vision one of NVIDIA's Marquee technology so to go along with the

00:00:11.840 --> 00:00:18.760
GeForce GTX 680 launch here I've got my

00:00:15.879 --> 00:00:22.160
Galaxy GeForce GTX 680 I can remove the glasses so you guys can see what the

00:00:20.880 --> 00:00:26.679
card looks like if you haven't already seen my regular performance review or my

00:00:24.039 --> 00:00:30.880
unboxing and the focus of this video is going to be on 3D Vision so what

00:00:29.240 --> 00:00:35.520
differentiates 3D Vision from its competitors first and foremost is the

00:00:32.960 --> 00:00:40.920
fact that it uses the NVIDIA ecosystem so you get a 3D Vision certified display

00:00:38.800 --> 00:00:46.079
in this case I'm using the vg236h monitor from ASUS honestly if you're

00:00:43.680 --> 00:00:49.320
buying a 3D Vision setup today I would definitely recommend going with one of

00:00:47.480 --> 00:00:55.520
the newer monitors with light boost whether it's the BenQ 2420t or the ASUS

00:00:52.680 --> 00:00:58.519
27 in I can't remember the model of it but it has light boost light boost makes

00:00:57.280 --> 00:01:03.480
all the difference in the world whether you're using Gen 2 glasses the ones that

00:01:00.399 --> 00:01:06.360
look like this or generation one glasses

00:01:03.480 --> 00:01:10.920
it definitely reduces headaches reduces cross talk between the two images and

00:01:08.240 --> 00:01:15.080
provides a much brighter more immersive 3D experience so there's Advantage

00:01:13.759 --> 00:01:19.320
number one is you got the NVIDIA ecosystem that is the NVIDIA graphics

00:01:16.920 --> 00:01:23.960
card the NVIDIA certified Monitor and the NVIDIA glasses means that everything

00:01:21.280 --> 00:01:28.119
works together there's no guess work involved there seems to be a lot of

00:01:25.360 --> 00:01:33.000
confusion about AMD's hd3d and that is for good reason I've tried on a couple

00:01:29.680 --> 00:01:36.880
occas occasions to get AMD hd3d working

00:01:33.000 --> 00:01:38.840
correctly and it can be a bit of a bear

00:01:36.880 --> 00:01:42.600
so for one it only works correctly over DisplayPort meaning there's only I

00:01:40.119 --> 00:01:47.759
think about two monitors on the market that supported out of the box and number

00:01:44.880 --> 00:01:53.200
two is you have to get 3D inserting middleware whereas NVIDIA is actually

00:01:50.479 --> 00:01:57.600
doing the work of putting in the driver profiles uh putting in the setup Wizard

00:01:55.799 --> 00:02:02.320
and getting you going in a fairly seamless manner

00:02:00.399 --> 00:02:06.240
so what are we comparing since we can't compare any AMD cards because it'd be

00:02:04.200 --> 00:02:11.920
hard to do apples to apples I want to compare the latest generation gtx680

00:02:08.679 --> 00:02:14.879
against its last generation equivalent

00:02:11.920 --> 00:02:19.080
the GTX 580 I also want to compare it against the GTX 570 just so you guys

00:02:17.040 --> 00:02:25.480
have another point of reference and finally against the GTX 590 that is the

00:02:23.360 --> 00:02:30.560
ruler of the roost from the last generation that is basically dual

00:02:28.120 --> 00:02:35.239
something between these two because it's got the same number of Cuda course as a

00:02:32.760 --> 00:02:41.319
580 but it's actually clocked about like a 570 so that's that's that graphics

00:02:37.720 --> 00:02:43.239
card so the 680 uh oh yeah so 3D why do

00:02:41.319 --> 00:02:47.239
we need more power for 3D well for one thing let's start I've actually already

00:02:45.280 --> 00:02:51.840
run all of the tests for this one so I've pretty much got them here but let's

00:02:49.080 --> 00:02:57.720
take a look first at a case study of the GTX 580 so in this case I'm going to

00:02:54.159 --> 00:03:00.480
highlight the GTX 580 Row for regular

00:02:57.720 --> 00:03:06.879
and then the GTX 580 Row for 3D Vision okay so in terms of average

00:03:03.760 --> 00:03:08.640
frame rates we see it requires about

00:03:06.879 --> 00:03:13.319
double the processing power in all scenarios minimum maximum and average in

00:03:11.400 --> 00:03:18.200
order to enable 3D Vision we get half the frame rate crisis 2 we're going to

00:03:16.120 --> 00:03:21.879
see a very different scenario where actually 3D Vision doesn't uh give it

00:03:20.680 --> 00:03:26.319
that much of a hit which is something that crisis 2 was actually designed for

00:03:24.159 --> 00:03:29.599
with The Witcher we see this scenario again where it takes about double the

00:03:27.599 --> 00:03:33.760
processing power remember it's rendering the scene from this angle and then from

00:03:31.599 --> 00:03:38.560
this angle and then using the glasses to show only the correct the correctly

00:03:36.319 --> 00:03:43.400
angled scene to each of your eyes to give you that 3d effect next Batman

00:03:40.920 --> 00:03:47.760
Arkham City we see once again a huge performance hit for enabling 3D Vision

00:03:45.799 --> 00:03:51.680
and finally with Skyrim we see the same thing where it takes about double the

00:03:49.000 --> 00:03:55.680
processing power so that is one big reason why stereoscopic 3D gaming

00:03:53.920 --> 00:04:01.319
enthusiasts might go with something like a GTX 680 over a last generation card

00:03:59.159 --> 00:04:07.519
because da you can actually see I'm going to

00:04:04.079 --> 00:04:12.560
highlight the GTX 680 with a green color

00:04:07.519 --> 00:04:17.200
for new NVIDIA cards okay so the 680

00:04:12.560 --> 00:04:17.200
actually performs across the

00:04:17.359 --> 00:04:23.040
board almost on par or better or sort of

00:04:21.199 --> 00:04:27.479
a little bit lesser or a little bit better than the last generation GTX 590

00:04:25.880 --> 00:04:33.120
which if you guys recall is pretty much equivalent to two GTX 5 70s or 580s

00:04:30.960 --> 00:04:41.039
somewhere in between that so that puts it a clear double the performance of the

00:04:36.800 --> 00:04:43.960
580 here in Battlefield 3 um double the

00:04:41.039 --> 00:04:47.479
performance of the 580 here in crisis 2 more than double the performance in the

00:04:45.479 --> 00:04:50.800
witch or two please note 20 FPS is not playable you'll have to dial back the

00:04:48.880 --> 00:04:55.440
detail levels one way or another this is just giving us the relative performance

00:04:52.520 --> 00:04:59.280
in a GPU bound scenario uh next we've got a significant Improvement although

00:04:57.440 --> 00:05:05.160
not nearly as huge as some of the ones we've seen before so 60 from 40 for the

00:05:02.120 --> 00:05:07.880
GTX 680 versus the 580 and finally in

00:05:05.160 --> 00:05:13.080
Skyrim we see yet another doubling of performance so while the regular

00:05:09.840 --> 00:05:16.000
performance num showed the GTX 680

00:05:13.080 --> 00:05:21.120
definitely beating the GTX 580 here actually yeah I guess it's

00:05:19.160 --> 00:05:26.360
pretty much close to double across the board maybe I should have looked more

00:05:23.160 --> 00:05:28.680
closely at these yeah okay oh okay

00:05:26.360 --> 00:05:32.440
Batman Arkham City not so much but then again not so much

00:05:30.319 --> 00:05:37.840
so okay what we've learned is that if you throw more processing power at it in

00:05:34.759 --> 00:05:39.919
this case the GTX 680 over the previous

00:05:37.840 --> 00:05:44.360
generation GTX 580 remember this is clocked at 1 GHz and that is a flexible

00:05:42.240 --> 00:05:48.199
clock speed using GPU boost it'll actually scale itself up in scenarios

00:05:46.080 --> 00:05:53.680
where it's not using as much power with 2 gigs of 6 GHz clocked memory this is

00:05:50.960 --> 00:05:58.160
using a new 28 nanometer process it consume significantly less power than

00:05:56.160 --> 00:06:03.560
the last generation GTX 580 so you can can see here oh no no no

00:06:01.319 --> 00:06:08.120
sorry not not against the GTX 580 but against the GTX 590 which is closer to

00:06:06.039 --> 00:06:14.479
it in terms of performance so you're uh saving as much as 100 to 150 watts under

00:06:11.880 --> 00:06:19.080
load across the board uh compared to a 590 and getting similar performance

00:06:17.360 --> 00:06:24.280
getting similar power consumption to the 580 and just blowing it out of the water

00:06:21.680 --> 00:06:30.199
in terms of performance especially as you guys can see in 3D Vision so if you

00:06:27.520 --> 00:06:36.400
want a game in stereoscopic 3D a GeForce GTX 680 is probably not a bad choice and

00:06:34.080 --> 00:06:40.720
thanks to Galaxy for providing the GTX 680 that I use to run these benchmarks

00:06:38.680 --> 00:06:46.080
don't forget to subscribe to lonus Tech tips for more unboxings reviews and oh

00:06:44.080 --> 00:06:51.800
wow I almost forgot to mention that yes the 680 is the first graphics card from

00:06:48.280 --> 00:06:54.479
NVIDIA to support 3D Vision surround off

00:06:51.800 --> 00:07:00.039
a single card so using DisplayPort and then dual dvis you can actually run

00:06:57.440 --> 00:07:03.879
three displays in 3D Vision in surround mode off a single card and I shouldn't

00:07:02.240 --> 00:07:09.840
say it's the first because technically the 590 supports it because that one has

00:07:06.440 --> 00:07:12.400
dual gpus to power its three DVI ports

00:07:09.840 --> 00:07:17.680
but it is the first single GPU card that not only supports 3D Vision but also

00:07:14.319 --> 00:07:20.680
supports 3D Vision surround off a single

00:07:17.680 --> 00:07:20.680
card