3 way Monitors (Eyefinity) or 1 120hz 3D monitor

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

3 way Monitors (Eyefinity) or 1 120hz 3D monitor

  • 3 Monitors

    Votes: 62 82.7%

  • 3D Vision

    Votes: 13 17.3%
  • Total voters
    75

All you need is a big nose, and since the nose never stops growing, and our eyes only will get worse with age, soon everyone will be able to do 3D heheh
When I tried 3D, it was decent, but I think a great option, whereas eyefinity, its something Id use 24/7, or as much as possible
 
And thats perhaps the best thing about Eyefinity. You can use it 24/7. In gaming you get your side views, and when using the desktop it gives you a larger work space. The only possible bad thing would be movie watching. But I guess thats what black bars are for.
 
That was the point I was trying to make in my first post. Even with three monitors the bezels get in the way. The only way right now to defeat it is to modify the monitors by removing the center bezels. I have seen someone disassemble LCD's before but can't remember where.... then you would have to make your own support system for it...... or manufacturers are going to start pumping out more of those "semi circular" monitors to give you the tri monitor effect without the bezels in the way.... last time I looked the only one available was like $2500...... not in my ball park.
 


There is a fairly important difference between 6x eyefinity and 3x eyefinity. In the 6x version, the bezels become part of the main action, in the 3x version, the center screen is where most of the action takes place, with some added view space on the sides.
 


What you seem to not be understanding, which is common with these criticisms, is that the Field of View on that 108" ($100,000) TV is still only effective at about 70-90 degrees, and if stretched you loose detail and the edges. And while it's 108" it's still only about 1200-1600pixels wide (the new 150" are 4Kx2K. So it's pretty much like taking a 1080P projector and blowing that up to 75", it's not as impressive, and nothing new, and for the price I could buy a 2K (and even cheap 4K) projector and blow it up to 108" or more, and still have the same tiny field of view and 'big pixels' although more of them.

It's not the same, and not that hard to see how it's not the same. It's like comparing a 30" 2560 x 1600 Monitor vs a 42" 800x600 Plasma. It's apples & oranges.

Also until they support multiple inputs like the wrap around screens (which then still need the multiple output of the ATi card), or HDMI 1.4+ or Displayport 1.2+, they will not support the bandwidth to achieve anywhere near the same detail.
 
Not an issue with LCD makers, its more of an issue with the bezel. Meaning I would rather have one large screen (120Hz) as opposed to 3 smaller 60Hz screens in EF. I can see where some users could care less about the bezel since they are looking for a wider view (perif) for certain games.

Mitsubushi and a few other companies are supposed to come out with a screen similar to the alienware dlp for much less.

As far as the glasses go, no those are not included since they are 199.99$ alone. But the question is : Are the glasses trully worth the 200.00$ ? Has anyone tested these? As far as the reviews go it aint all that. Here is an example :

http://reviews.cnet.com/desktop-monitors-displays-accessories/nvidia-geforce-3d-vision/4505-6513_7-33529318.html

The bottom line: Though casual gamers will be satisfied by the Nvidia 3D Vision Kit's 3D gimmick, the unacceptable compromise to playability of some titles means hardcore gamers should steer clear.
Click to expand...

At 99.99$ maybe, but for the price of a decent screen?
 
I'd read good things about them somewhere ages back...
sounded pretty cool in many games even not designed for it.

Would still go for Eyefinity - will hardly be a put off, especially in racing games
may make a 3 screen setup later this year if all goes well

and lets face it - who didn't think that screen setup on the Nebuchadnezzar was damn cool :sol:
 
hmmmm I'm pushing more and more for the surround gaming. 1 thing I hate about surround is the stupid bars between the screens, so I might try getting as slim as possible...😛
 


It was more sarcasm than anything. ..................
 
Hey didn't mean to start an argument. Was just stating an opinion and seeing what you thought of it. I didn't mean for you two to get at each other like that, my apologies. When I was stating I felt it was over expensive is because for that same $500 that you are using for 3 monitors, while it may be a sensible upgrade for you as you have very high end graphics cards, could be spent in a better way. As a person wearing glasses, I can't see 3D at the movies, nor have I actually tried a 3D monitor. But I have tried Eyefinity, and while it allows you to do more, it also hinders performance in some aspects. A nice very high resolution monitor would do the trick for me as I am a more practical person. However in answer to your previous I didn't add anything to the discussion I will say this: If you can see 3D in the movies, and have experienced the monitors, and they actually make things look 3D to you then go for a 3D monitor. 3D seems to be the way movie makers are going according to the latest trades (One movie has just been delayed a whole year just so they can re-make it in 3D, Cabin In the Woods). So I could imagine with the invent of 3D monitors they would make games that would use them no? Sorry about causing you guys to go at it before, I didn't mean it in that way.
 
I'll cut to the point, Eyefinity is simply awesome (I have one with a 5970 OC'd).

All the games that I expect to work (Far Cry 2, Left 4 dead, Crysis, STALKER, HAWX, etc) do work. Almost every modern game can support Eyefinity.
Eyefinity is MUCH easier to support by the dev, all they need to do is code it to support large resolutions & a FOV based on the resolution.
For 3D the engine must be able to support 2 cameras per player, offset them to about 6 cm far apart, then point both cameras to a point in Cartesian space.

So Eyefinity support will be much more widespread because it is both easier & Matrox helped for several years.

The bezels aren't a bother, as everything you look at is the main monitor, you don't even look at the side ones, they slip into your periphial vision.
 


Textures should remain the same (just maybe more of them displayed concurrently in a scene), they should be mapped to objects and the ground should be a repeating texture.

It still must draw a wider FOV, but much of that information was already ready in VRAM for when the character moved (so that it doesn't need to call for resources from the CPU/RAM/HDD), so the effect while being an increased workload, shouldn't be as bad as if you were truly adding all of that as new resources for each screen.
 
Honestly im not too sure as to why it would be so hard to create and LCD screen with detachable side bezels. THis way you can stick them together for eyefinity.
 
@ TGGA IC IC, much like tricking old games that don't support widescreen I'm assuming.

As for coke zero...I dont know why it tastes better than coke diet...reading the side it seems like there is absolutely no difference lmao.
 



Damn straight!


Was considering disassembling my BenQ 24" LED to see if I could chop the sides off earlier LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom