How Realistic Is Multi-Monitor Gaming On A Budget?

[jjb8675309]

I agree Onus, hopefully we will see that write up soon. My question is does frame time variance still exist with the Tahiti GPUs? Also can anyone tell us about a midrange Omega crossfire solution in general?

 

[hausman]

Regarding which ports the monitors were hooked up to (2xDVI 1xHDMI)... Doesn't the Radeon still require one to be connected via DisplayPort? Or is that no longer a requirement?

 

[cracklint]

when I bought my 280 r9 I invested in 3 dell 22 in ips panels for eyefinity, there was no advantage in fps multiplier and the only about 1/3 of my side panels extended fov on the sides. the rest was a stretched, distorted mess. I was disappointed and sold my extra monitors. landscaped views of the ocean in farcry 3 looked nice but I didn't feel any more immersion than on one monitor, to me the cost justification just isn't there , but to each their own.

 

[maestro0428]

I am curious about frame times in CrossfireX too, which is why I have stayed away from AMD since my r280x. I haven't seen anything about a fix, so... I did not use the display port on the AMD card for the test, I ran 2xDVI and 1xHDMI for both cards.

 

[zambutu]

I had 3 24" screens in landscape eyefinity for a while for fps gaming. Switching to portrait was night and day difference do me. Lose some peripheral, but the added immersion from having a life sized gaming scale was well worth it.

 

[mjw]

Why don't all the TV manufacturers stop trying to shove curved TVs down the consumers' throat and instead focus their misplaced efforts to produce curved gaming monitors (where unlike the living room tv, curvature does actually improve the user experience)?

 

[zambutu]

A larger curved 21:9 monitor would be the perfect gaming setup. Make it oled and we're golden

 

[wrxturbo]

I foresee the multi monitor setup losing its appeal in the near future for gaming once VR headsets start taking hold of the market. I’ve already seen combat flight simulator gamers with developer versions of the Oculus Rift on youtube where they had pushed aside their monitors for the far better immersive experience that only a VR system can deliver. Plus I am sure an Oculus rift will cost far less than what is needed for a multi display setup.

 

[RedJaron]

Plus I am sure an Oculus rift will cost far less than what is needed for a multi display setup.

That very much depends on how visual display technology progresses. You have to assume that as VR headset tech improves, so too will normal desktop displays. Desktop displays will still be the norm, meaning economy of scale will keep those prices down. Miniaturized tech is usually more expensive than the normal size stuff, so packing those components into a smaller VR headset suggests increased costs.

 

[jjb8675309]

Yeah 3 1080p monitors are something consumers can obtain today. Oculus Rift looks cool but it still may be a while before that tech hits mainstream. Meanwhile John Carmack is pluggin away with code.

 

[zthomas]

Good way in showing off low to medium end cards.. 3 awesome monitors great visuals.. very wide perspective.. thinking some sort of headset.. for detection could be used as well.. so wide a field of view, you may miss something in the process when making quick movements.. wondering about like Google glass.. a little view square just out of the field of vision, making a little sound if a gun gets pointed in your direction.. hmm

 

[Sakkura]

Plus I am sure an Oculus rift will cost far less than what is needed for a multi display setup.

That very much depends on how visual display technology progresses. You have to assume that as VR headset tech improves, so too will normal desktop displays. Desktop displays will still be the norm, meaning economy of scale will keep those prices down. Miniaturized tech is usually more expensive than the normal size stuff, so packing those components into a smaller VR headset suggests increased costs.

Small displays are more mainstream than desktop computer displays. A lot more people buy smartphones than desktop computers, let alone monitors for desktop computers (since you can keep using the same monitor for many years, even after changing the computer).

So economies of scale are favoring the display side of things for Oculus and other VR projects. The rest of the VR device obviously will be more niche, but the real hurdles are software support and developing a better control scheme. Gamepads and mouse + keyboard just aren't well suited for VR.

 

[zthomas]

Plus I am sure an Oculus rift will cost far less than what is needed for a multi display setup.

That very much depends on how visual display technology progresses. You have to assume that as VR headset tech improves, so too will normal desktop displays. Desktop displays will still be the norm, meaning economy of scale will keep those prices down. Miniaturized tech is usually more expensive than the normal size stuff, so packing those components into a smaller VR headset suggests increased costs.

Small displays are more mainstream than desktop computer displays. A lot more people buy smartphones than desktop computers, let alone monitors for desktop computers (since you can keep using the same monitor for many years, even after changing the computer).

So economies of scale are favoring the display side of things for Oculus and other VR projects. The rest of the VR device obviously will be more niche, but the real hurdles are software support and developing a better control scheme. Gamepads and mouse + keyboard just aren't well suited for VR.

 

[zthomas]

My thinking is on the creative side.. the designer in me thinks one plays these games in this 3 monitor setup is almost 3D.. some wear headphone and equipped with a mic to chat within game process.. those 3D headsets.. have had little traction yet for gaming.. I have read the new F 35 helmet has screens on the edges showing outside fields of vision surrounding the aircraft.. maybe something along the same lines for gaming

 

[RedJaron]

Small displays are more mainstream than desktop computer displays. A lot more people buy smartphones than desktop computers, let alone monitors for desktop computers (since you can keep using the same monitor for many years, even after changing the computer).

So economies of scale are favoring the display side of things for Oculus and other VR projects. The rest of the VR device obviously will be more niche, but the real hurdles are software support and developing a better control scheme. Gamepads and mouse + keyboard just aren't well suited for VR.

I'm not sure cell phone displays translate to something like the Occulus. Yes, they're both about the same size, but the Occulus needs very fast response and good pixel-fill, two things cellphones don't need to worry about as much. Not unlike how most people get basic 1080 60Hz TN and IPS panels vs the relatively few who want 120Hz and 144Hz screens, 1440 displays or other displays seen as "premium." Those premium tech and specs are falling in price, but I have to think the basic tech will also fall too. And like you said, all the ancillary parts of the Occulus will remain comparatively high.

Of course the cost or VR will fall in the future, but will it fall enough? You can get three decent displays for $450 right now, or even less if you watch sales and specials. How much will that drop by the time Occulus becomes mass available and supported? VR will likely be cheaper than multiple premium displays, but in the mid-range segment I think I'll still give the edge to desktop displays.

 

[Alabama Rick]

I've got 2 GTX 460's with a new mb with room for 3 cards. It's very hard to plan for a 3 sli video cards without thinking about spending $600 for cards. I have 3 monitors. One 24 inch and one 22 inch 16.9 and a 22 inch 16.10. I know I messed up. I am still playing CS source and enjoying it. When I see an article like this the first question is can the video card be 3-way SLI?

 

[jjb8675309]

^Sure it can but you will likely be limited by the 1GB frame buffer before that 3rd 460 will matter much is my guess. It would be cool if there was some feature built into the driver that would allow you to use mismatched monitors and align black bars below and above the picture where needed. Certainly it couldn't accommodate ANY monitor array but if you have some 22 OR 21 OR 24 inch monitors lying around (for example) why not.

EDIT GTX 460s do not support 3 way sli AFAIK

 

[Alabama Rick]

The 460's are 2 way sli.

 

[Sakkura]

I'm not sure cell phone displays translate to something like the Occulus. Yes, they're both about the same size, but the Occulus needs very fast response and good pixel-fill, two things cellphones don't need to worry about as much. Not unlike how most people get basic 1080 60Hz TN and IPS panels vs the relatively few who want 120Hz and 144Hz screens, 1440 displays or other displays seen as "premium." Those premium tech and specs are falling in price, but I have to think the basic tech will also fall too. And like you said, all the ancillary parts of the Occulus will remain comparatively high.

Every Oculus prototype and devkit so far has had a panel designed for use in phones. And Samsung Gear VR takes it one step further by using an actual phone in there.

 

[zthomas]

they were looking to see if you can do it on a low budget. not mid to high, LOW budget

Budget gaming on this site tends to mean a $500 - $600 gaming rig on a single display. You can easily get respectable med-high gaming performance for that much money. So if that experience is your baseline, I'd assume you'd want similar performance if you stepped up to three screens. Trying to squeeze two additional monitors into a $600 budget is the same as squeezing in a 4K monitor into a $1000 mid-range gaming rig budget. Yes, you can do it, but you're surrounding yourself with a whole lot of poor quality pixels.

As an experiment, this is just fine. But to get better real-world applications, this needs to explore just how much horsepower it takes to replicate that single-screen $600 budget system experience across three screens.

I mean, with $400 invested in monitors, would the difference between a $100 R7 260X and a $190 R9 280 really be that big a deal?

Exactly. When you already have that much money in displays, does this idea really translate to the "low budget" category anymore? The total money involved here is closer to $1000 than $500, so it's more like a mid-range gamer. Either that or we divide budget, mid-range, and extreme into single-display and multi-display groups.

Does anybody use 3 monitors in portrait orientation? I don't have a 3 monitor setup, but if I did, I think that is the way I would go. Are there any pros and cons to either a portrait or landscape orientation.

I've mixed portrait and landscape displays for work for nearly 10 years, but I've never tried portrait for gaming. Mixing three 1080 screens like that gives you a 3240 x 1920 display, which is a 27:16 aspect ratio ( 1.6875.) That's about halfway between the typical 16:9 and 16:10 screen you're already using ( three 16:10 screens results in a 15:8 or 1.875. ) That's just a little smaller than a 4K display, except you'd have bezel gaps. I think the gaps would be disconcerting at first since we're used to landscape displays on so many things, but I suppose you could get used to it.

While playing team fortress the other day.. would be nice to have a wider field of vision.. and a second card.. just my board only supports one video card.. they say by end of 2015 the 4k monitors will be way down in price.. and they 8k will appear geez.. there is just no end to upgrading.. other benefits running 3 screens.. is that Yiynova MSP19U 19 inch drawing tablet.. was watching a youtube video.. this artist was using this strange swing arm thing.. for the drawing surface..which is also a type of monitor.. she also had two other monitors.. running the art program.. oops sorry I got off the subject..

 

[TahitiKine]

If I have a system that can't quite handle 3 monitors at the level you want. The good news is that all you need is a gpu upgrade. Weather that's adding a card or just getting a much faster one. Adding monitors is just adding pixels (increasing resolution) so it's all a matter of gpu power. So if you have a machine already it won't cost you that much to start gaming out of control. (No matter how bottlenecked you gpu is by your cpu, bus speed, chipset or amount of memory, putting in a better vid card ALWAYS improves graphics capabilities.)

 

[jjb8675309]

(No matter how bottlenecked you gpu is by your cpu, bus speed, chipset or amount of memory, putting in a better vid card ALWAYS improves graphics capabilities.)

Sorry but I have to call you out on this statement. All inclusive statements are easy to pick apart and its simply not the case; if you install a GTX970 on a platform that can barely run it then you will see no difference between that and a low end GPU.

 

[RedJaron]

(No matter how bottlenecked you gpu is by your cpu, bus speed, chipset or amount of memory, putting in a better vid card ALWAYS improves graphics capabilities.)

Sorry but I have to call you out on this statement. All inclusive statements are easy to pick apart and its simply not the case; if you install a GTX970 on a platform that can barely run it then you will see no difference between that and a low end GPU.

Exactly. Additionally, simply adding another card isn't always an option. Your mboard may not have a slot available ( or at least one with the proper lanes, ) your PSU may not have the power to run it, and your case may not have the necessary cooling to handle it.