There's always a new kind of technology budding in the industry, and right now, it's glasses-free 3D. If you were a Nintendo 3DS user back in the day, you'd know that this technology — which is appearing in prototypes and consumer products right now — is actually somewhat old. However, it's getting good enough that the best monitors supporting glasses-free 3D might be a serious consideration for high-level gamers. In fact, some of the biggest names in the monitor market, including Acer and Samsung, are making headway.

Most recently, Samsung showed off its glasses-free Odyssey 3D monitor at Gamescom. Meanwhile, Acer has been experimenting with glasses-free 3D for a long time in its SpatialLabs lineup. But is this technology any good, and should gamers care? To find out, I tested some Acer SpatialLabs displays and spent hours gaming on them. Here's how it went.

What I like about glasses-free 3D monitors

It's a personalized experience that does add immersiveness

To best understand how glasses-free 3D works, we need to briefly review the science behind the technology. This Acer SpatialLabs monitor might look like any other 4K portable monitor, but it's actually hiding two cameras at the top of the display. They're not webcams; instead, they are designed to track your head and eye movements. You see, there's a lenticular lens that refracts images coming from the 4K IPS panel, essentially splitting them in two. These images combine to form a 3D effect from a 2D image, but the monitor needs to know exactly where your head and eyes are for the effect to feel realistic.

The monitor's 3D effect is more believable and immersive when it's being used with games or apps that support it. All the software is handled by the SpatialLabs Experience Center, and you can turn any 2D image into a 3D one. Why might you want to use a SpatialLabs monitor — or one of Samsung's upcoming glasses-free 3D offerings — over something like a VR headset? Well, for high-end gaming, there are key limitations that can come into play while using PC VR headsets. The best experiences, like those you'll find on Meta Quest or Apple Vision Pro hardware, come from devices that don't support AAA games.

Don't take this the wrong way, but the best thing I can say about the stereoscopic 3D features on the monitors I've tested is that they work. You're not going to feel completely immersed in a game or a program, and it's not even going to feel incredibly groundbreaking. Instead, it feels more akin to the experience you'd get from watching a 3D movie in a theater, riding in a 3D theme park ride, or using something like a Nintendo 3DS.

To be clear, it's impressive that something with the form factor of a normal portable monitor or gaming monitor can provide glasses-free 3D effects. The games aren't jumping out at you, but you can clearly see a difference when 3D is turned on versus when it's turned off. Glasses-free 3D monitors are essentially the only way to get this kind of experience while playing on a premium gaming PC, so if that's what you're after, the tech is ready in 2024. For me, the experience just isn't that much better than using a normal monitor for me to seriously consider buying a stereoscopic 3D monitor of my own.

What I don't like about glasses-free 3D monitors

There are too many drawbacks to make this tech worthwhile in 2024

After testing stereoscopic 3D monitors, my takeaway wasn't that the effects were impressive. Any of the "cool factors" regarding the technology quickly wore off when I realized how many limitations there are. I've already mentioned that the glasses-free 3D is most enjoyable when the app or game you're using is specifically optimized for it, and not many are.

More importantly, resolution and refresh rate dip heavily if you're using a stereoscopic 3D monitor. The SpatialLabs monitor I used was 4K, but the lenticular lens cuts that into two images, literally halving the resolution. So, you get a fun 3D effect that totally works, but you lose refresh rate and resolution — which I'd argue are more important.

The system requirements are tough to live with, too. The specific monitor I tried required at least an Intel Core i7 or higher processor and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 graphics card for desktops, or an Intel Core i7 or higher and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070ti or higher graphics card for laptops. These requirements will vary over time and are based on the stereoscopic 3D monitor you're using, but the point is you'll need an expensive gaming PC.

That's in addition to the high price of glasses-free 3D monitors — they'll cost well over $1,000 on their own. Rounding out the unfortunate parts of the experience are the multiple cables that are needed to power your monitor and connect it to your PC. It's fine if you have a desktop, but owners of the best laptops will get frustrated quickly.

I'm much more confident in mixed-reality, wearable tech

It doesn't seem like glasses-free 3D can provide a better experience

To sum up, it's not that I think stereoscopic 3D monitors are inherently bad. The technology is neat, and I hope companies keep working on it, so one day it becomes an easier sell. For now, the marginal improvement in immersiveness and the viewing experience aren't enough to justify the exorbitant costs and the growing pains. If these monitors just needed a single cable, had lower system requirements, and worked with most apps and games out of the box, I'd be much more convinced.

Instead, I'm still bullish on wearable displays being the next big thing in gaming experiences. Whether it's a tiny set of glasses or a full-fledged mixed reality headset, I think these devices are the future. I've already tried a few of them, and came away impressed. More importantly, there's clear room for growth and innovation in the space, and the technology will only get better. I'm not as convinced the same is true about stereoscopic 3D monitors for gaming.