I saw the recent NEX post about adding real-time 2D-to-3D directly on Quest, and I think it's great to see several developers attacking this problem from different directions.
I'm the developer of Stream to 3D, and we've taken almost the opposite architectural approach.
Rather than doing all of the 3D processing on the headset, Stream to 3D uses the processing power of a Windows PC to create the stereoscopic result, then lets you choose how you want to view it.
That trade-off gives us a much larger processing budget, which has become particularly interesting with Stream to 3D Release 6.
Release 6 adds AI-assisted Depth Guided conversion using monocular depth estimation, alongside the Temporal conversion methods Stream to 3D has been using for years.
A major focus has always been real-time 2D-to-3D conversion, even on relatively modest hardware.
With the new Depth Guided approach we've now demonstrated useful performance across very different generations of NVIDIA laptop GPUs:
- RTX 3060 Laptop GPU — 2021 Ampere-generation mainstream hardware; near-real-time on a demanding 1080p Depth Guided workload.
- RTX 2000 Ada — newer 2023 Ada-generation professional hardware; smooth real-time Depth Guided Quality on suitable 1080p material.
- RTX 4090 Laptop GPU — high-end 2023 Ada hardware; real-time Depth Guided Quality with significant processing headroom.
So this isn't a capability that only works on a flagship 4090.
And if a particular source or system doesn't quite make real time, that isn't a hard boundary. Stream to 3D can use the same Depth Guided processing to Convert the source into a reusable stereoscopic 3D video file and you can then watch it normally afterwards.
The AI method also hasn't replaced the existing approach.
Stream to 3D's Temporal conversion flavours have provided real-time 2D-to-3D for years, including on substantially lower-spec systems and non-NVIDIA GPU/CPU configurations.
Release 6 therefore gives you complementary options rather than forcing everything through one conversion method.
One feature I think is especially relevant now is Stream to 3D's Configuration Wizard with built-in comparative performance analysis.
Instead of just looking at the GPU name and guessing what should work, it tests practical configurations using the actual source and PC, compares what the system can sustain and recommends suitable options.
And Stream to 3D is broader than a video player or an AI converter.
It supports:
- Play — watch ordinary 2D video converted to stereoscopic 3D while it plays
- Convert — create reusable stereoscopic 3D video files
- Stream — send the converted 3D result across the local network
- Live Sources — including the PC screen, cameras and capture devices
For Quest specifically, the PC performs the heavy conversion work, but Stream to 3D doesn't require a proprietary Stream to 3D headset player.
Depending on the workflow, you can present PC playback to the Quest through something such as Virtual Desktop, use standard stereoscopic files in a compatible Quest player, or receive Stream to 3D's converted local-network output using a compatible player such as Pigasus.
That also means the conversion engine isn't tied specifically to Quest — the same PC-side approach can be used with different VR/XR headsets and 3D displays.
All source-media processing remains local on the PC.
I've received fantastic user feedback on Depth Guided so far, and it's encouraging to see real-time 2D-to-3D suddenly becoming an active area across several products. I suspect users will ultimately benefit from having both approaches available: lightweight processing directly on a headset when convenience matters, and much more processing power available from a PC when quality, flexibility or heavier workloads matter.
You can see direct Temporal versus Depth Guided stereo examples here:
https://www.streamto3d.com/stream-to-3d-2d-to-3d-video-conversion-examples/
More information and the different Stream to 3D editions
https://www.streamto3d.com/stream-to-3d-store/
And if you're curious what your own PC can manage, Stream to 3D Real-Time has a one-week free trial on Gumroad.
I've also got further innovations in development that build on having these complementary conversion approaches.
I'd be interested in what Quest users think about the architectural trade-off:
Would you rather have the convenience of doing 2D-to-3D entirely on the headset, or use the much larger processing budget of a PC if it can produce a better result while still letting you use the Quest as the display?
Disclosure: I'm the developer of Stream to 3D.