Originally Posted by wnielsenbb
It would only need one dual link dvi input. That is really a vital feature for many of us. Without that we have no choice but polarized with a special screen and 3rd party 3D drivers. How much is twice as expensive? PC Gaming is by far the largest source of 3D content. I think it would be REALLY wise to put out a 3DVision compatible version. You would be alone in that market, and that is a really good place to be.
I'm not up to speed with using non-certified Nvidia 3D Vision displays with DVI Dual-link.
I thought the Nvidia generic CRT mode only worked on VGA outs.
I'd be cautious about Dual-link DVI. Doing 3D this way is not supported by any open standard, it's the exclusive realm of Nvidia 3D Vision. If Nvidia wants to kill you or force you to pay royalties, they can.
Dual single link DVI... yes but why ? If you do polarised you can get the colour correction done by software, and with your product you'd still be vulnerable to non-synchronized outputs from the PC. (it's the problem I have)
I'd rather stick with standard 3D formats : those are hdmi 1.4 and Display Port.
-> Hdmi 1.4 input is kind of mandatory because it's everywhere on consumer hardware, but it doesn't do 1080p60 per eye (it doesn't do what I want but it's good to have at least a backup solution even if it only supports 1080p BluRays and 720p60 games)
-> Display Port 1.2 input (but hdmi outs) is the technical solution for my PC problems but only ATI graphics cards currently officially support it. Nvidia could easily support it but they aren't motivated at all.
Even if it's not final, you must have at least a rough idea of target you're heading towards.
My price limit will depend on whether it does only proposition 1 or also proposition 2 I stated above.