2017-03-16, 20:05
I think we have a lot of tests, opinions and some speculations
At the end it helps with hardware decisions.
At the end it helps with hardware decisions.
(2017-03-16, 13:54)3DBuff Wrote:So it didnt actually detect 3D on its own. That means it probably was just 540 lines per eye. Which is technically a big difference that he didn't see. My point: it's all very subjective (although I agree that MVC to 4k interlaced does sound great)(2017-03-16, 13:22)Korrigan Wrote:(2017-03-16, 03:23)p750mmx Wrote: TV displays [3D][1080p@24Hz]But isn't that half the resolution of "Hardware Based"? So there is a "big" (?) difference and you just can't see it?
Picture looks good, the same as with hardware option, not different that I can see.
No stutters, smooth image.
The display shows [3D]. It has to detect something. It's not just 540 lines per eye. Maybe it is some hardware handshaking and 1080 lines per eye interlaced or frame packing.
(2017-03-16, 18:30)p750mmx Wrote: So just test setting 3840x2160@30Hz on Kaby Lake 1.4 port and watch CPU load when playing? I do that later today when the wife is out of the picture
(2017-03-19, 16:19)3DBuff Wrote:Excuse for the interrupt, but nothing has changed sins my previous respond, will pick it up when time is available for this.(2017-03-16, 18:30)p750mmx Wrote: So just test setting 3840x2160@30Hz on Kaby Lake 1.4 port and watch CPU load when playing? I do that later today when the wife is out of the picture
I'm really curious about this. Did you get a chance to test it? From your previous post: HDMI 2.0 3D interlaced really good picture but the same on 1.4 port stuttered frame and heavy CPU load. Can you just double check on second system.