Laparoscopic surgeons may be hindered during complex procedures by the two-dimensional (2-D) view provided by standard videosystems. First-generation three-dimensional (3-D) systems have been developed with the hope of improved laparoscopic manipulations. We assessed whether laparoscopic task performance was better in 2-D or 3-D among individuals with varying levels of laparoscopic experience. Five different tasks were performed in random order using 2-D and 3-D videosystems by medical students (N = 10), junior surgical residents (N = 10), and experienced laparoscopic attending surgeons (N = 10). Tasks were timed and repeated 3 times in a pelvic-trainer using a 0-degree laparoscope. The tasks included placing objects on a flat surface in a set pattern, passing objects through a suspended ring of 1.5 cm I.D., clipping suture with a Lapra-ty^®, loop ligating a foam pedicle, and suturing with knot-tying. The participants then completed a questionnaire regarding relative system preference and perceived advantages or disadvantages of the two systems. The data were analyzed by ANOVA, Tukey's pairwise comparisons, and Chi-square. Attending surgeons performed all tasks faster than trainees. There were no significant differences in task performance times between 2-D and 3-D within any group; however, suturing/knot-tying was performed 12% faster (p=0.06) in 3-D by all groups. With repetition of some tasks, learning curves were identified in both 2-D and 3-D. Subjective enhancement of motor control in 3-D was reported by 60% of participants, yet 53% complained of inadequate illumination and 20% reported headache or eye strain. Our results suggest that first generation 3-D videosystems offer no significant advantage to the novice or expert surgeon performing laparoscopic tasks. Ongoing trials with the next generation of 3-D videosystems may support a trend showing 3-D beneficial for complex laparoscopic tasks such as suturing.