3x 120Hz Eyefinity Portrait Setup

Nice setup, I tried that with my dell 24" but there's so much metal around the actual screen, removing the bezels would be useless. Plus the bezels on the FW900 are just so fat themselves, that the advantag would be negligible, i just overlap them.


PS: YOUR GUN IS A VOLTSWAGON, CANNOT UNSEE!!!
 
So Vega how's the qua-fire eyefinity novel going? Any progress with 11.11WHQL and CAP1? Those monitors are awesome it's a shame they didn't lauch they here (Brazil). I woul like to do your mod ou the 23" version... And importing is insanity... I ended replacing my old 2209WAs for 3 U2412m... now I need to find a decently priced stand to debezel then...
 
R-Type said:
I remember that tear well, and its one of the biggest things concerning my about my plan to grab a couple of 6950's again. I remember when I got the card the first time, there was talk about display port hubs coming out that would allow you to connect 3 displays to a single DP port. Does anyone know if these have come out yet?
Click to expand...

Very interesting read guys I have to say, and Vega you must have more cash than sense, that or a set of iron b@lls lol. Credit where credit is due though, good achievement considering the risks.

There is a common misconception about DP imo, especially when resolutions are concerned. AMD/ATI developed the interface for a number of reasons and arguably against market trends (que Sony PS and Bly-Ray format) because of a number of inherent limitations VGA, DVI/DVI-D and HDMI intefraces have in their design. Most notably is the reliance of the aforementioned to a dedicated system clock, meaning that each interface on the graphics card must have its own dedicated signal clock to send data to each display. Hence the reason to use "active" HDMI/DVI adapters and the likes when going multi display from a single source as most graphic cards can only provide two dedicated signal clocks per unit and these cannot be shared across graphic card outputs so for 2+ display solutions this is an issue when using a single GPU card.

The DP design gets rid of all that nonsense and allows multiple displays to be driven from a single interface/socket. This is to say that only a single clock signal is now required for all outputs since the clock signal is now encoded and sent with the data stream. In professional display wall solutions with DP it is possible to daisy chain (connect in series) multiple displays which can all be driven from a single output on the card. As you can see this offers a much more flexible way forward for multi screen setups.

As far as I am aware DP (in its latest itteration) supports up to the same (if not higher) resolutions and bandwidths as DVI-D, but where DP moves ahead is the fact that it can do this over longer distances than DVI. If for example you wanted to run a display more than 7M away from the source, DVI is simply not a viable solution, where as DP can comfortably go up to 15M on a single end to end cable run. Yes, both are limited by impedance and losses as with any electrical signal therefore supported resolutions drop as the length of cable increases, but the advantages are clear to see.

I believe that In a few years time DP will be the standard socket replacing DVI and the aging VGA probably to be replaced by DVI into the cheap and cheerful displays with only one input option. I'd hazzard a guess that in the long term DP will probably also displace HDMI if the Eyefinity revolution extends to the commercial Home Theater market, but I suspect that the way things are going with eyefinity its larger market will be in the PC arena.

As some people have already mentioned, simple is always best and with commercial grade graphics solutions now supporting 3+ DP interfaces on a single card and the cards themselves have enough horse power to drive up to 3 displays in 3D environments, the solution is simple and elegant. We just need display manufacturers to hurry up and start offering more options with micro bezels and Input and Output DP interfaces, then we will be :D:D:D:D

In professional display card solutions (nVIDIA Quadro series) the DP interface has been a standard for some time now, with each card capable of running (theoretically) in excess of 12 large displays. 4 DP outputs x 3 monitors connected in series with the software and drivers required to have them configured as a single display or any combination there of.

DP is definately the way, the issue is finding the right panel type TN/IPS/PVA, etc. with the best dimensional size and most reasonable resolution (for me 1080P) and most minimalist bezels, to drive a 3 monitor setup from a single or a dual GPU source at 60Hz and by the posts on here preferably 120Hz :D........The search continues on that front still as Im not convinced by TN panels for 3x1 portrait setup.

My current predicament outside of the home setup is to find a Touch screen unit supporting DP plus two other non-touch screen units of the same size, bezel, aspect ratio and resolutions for a 3x1 solution for a project I am working on but that one is mission impossible right now I feel :(

P.S. sorry for the lengthy first post :D

Hum
 
I love the setup. Wish i could afford to do a pair of 6990's instead of 6970's. Great job on the slim bezels!

I think your post has inspired me to mod the bezels on my eyefinity setup. My LCDs are out of warranty and I do have a spare bezel for my FW900 that I can hack. I've gotten used to the bezels, but would like to inlay the lcds into the large bezel of my FW900 Triniton to prevent view clipping when not sitting right in the center because I overlay the LCDs over the CRT's large bezel.
 
Last edited:
slick_humour said:
Very interesting read guys I have to say, and Vega you must have more cash than sense, that or a set of iron b@lls lol. Credit where credit is due though, good achievement considering the risks.

There is a common misconception about DP imo, especially when resolutions are concerned. AMD/ATI developed the interface for a number of reasons and arguably against market trends (que Sony PS and Bly-Ray format) because of a number of inherent limitations VGA, DVI/DVI-D and HDMI intefraces have in their design. Most notably is the reliance of the aforementioned to a dedicated system clock, meaning that each interface on the graphics card must have its own dedicated signal clock to send data to each display. Hence the reason to use "active" HDMI/DVI adapters and the likes when going multi display from a single source as most graphic cards can only provide two dedicated signal clocks per unit and these cannot be shared across graphic card outputs so for 2+ display solutions this is an issue when using a single GPU card.

The DP design gets rid of all that nonsense and allows multiple displays to be driven from a single interface/socket. This is to say that only a single clock signal is now required for all outputs since the clock signal is now encoded and sent with the data stream. In professional display wall solutions with DP it is possible to daisy chain (connect in series) multiple displays which can all be driven from a single output on the card. As you can see this offers a much more flexible way forward for multi screen setups.

As far as I am aware DP (in its latest itteration) supports up to the same (if not higher) resolutions and bandwidths as DVI-D, but where DP moves ahead is the fact that it can do this over longer distances than DVI. If for example you wanted to run a display more than 7M away from the source, DVI is simply not a viable solution, where as DP can comfortably go up to 15M on a single end to end cable run. Yes, both are limited by impedance and losses as with any electrical signal therefore supported resolutions drop as the length of cable increases, but the advantages are clear to see.

I believe that In a few years time DP will be the standard socket replacing DVI and the aging VGA probably to be replaced by DVI into the cheap and cheerful displays with only one input option. I'd hazzard a guess that in the long term DP will probably also displace HDMI if the Eyefinity revolution extends to the commercial Home Theater market, but I suspect that the way things are going with eyefinity its larger market will be in the PC arena.

As some people have already mentioned, simple is always best and with commercial grade graphics solutions now supporting 3+ DP interfaces on a single card and the cards themselves have enough horse power to drive up to 3 displays in 3D environments, the solution is simple and elegant. We just need display manufacturers to hurry up and start offering more options with micro bezels and Input and Output DP interfaces, then we will be :D:D:D:D

In professional display card solutions (nVIDIA Quadro series) the DP interface has been a standard for some time now, with each card capable of running (theoretically) in excess of 12 large displays. 4 DP outputs x 3 monitors connected in series with the software and drivers required to have them configured as a single display or any combination there of.

DP is definately the way, the issue is finding the right panel type TN/IPS/PVA, etc. with the best dimensional size and most reasonable resolution (for me 1080P) and most minimalist bezels, to drive a 3 monitor setup from a single or a dual GPU source at 60Hz and by the posts on here preferably 120Hz :D........The search continues on that front still as Im not convinced by TN panels for 3x1 portrait setup.

My current predicament outside of the home setup is to find a Touch screen unit supporting DP plus two other non-touch screen units of the same size, bezel, aspect ratio and resolutions for a 3x1 solution for a project I am working on but that one is mission impossible right now I feel :(

P.S. sorry for the lengthy first post :D

Hum
Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree with you on the benefits of DP. I bet quite a few around here will too. I've had many generations of GPU's and monitors that use DVI-D and DP. My computer sits in another room 25 feet away. I've always had DP quality issues. From the stupid AMD driver warning about DP problems that you have to ignore, to losing the signal completely, to monitors going blank or into standby, or to visual corruption on screen.

I've tried many different cables, everything from cheapo mono-price ones to expensive high quality blue-jeans cables and I still have DP issues. On a 25-foot run, DVI-D has run perfectly 100% of the time. I have never had a single issue running 1080P@120Hz or 2560x1600@60Hz at 25 feet with DVI-D. DP has been a comparative nightmare.

Daisy chaining DP devices off of a single output sounds great in theory but where is the practice? The long promised DP hubs, where are they? Where are the monitors that support DP chaining? Do any even exist? If DP has problems sending a single signal 25 feet, how in the world is it going to hold up sending signals for 2-3 monitors over the same cable? I avoid DP like the freaking plague. DP might be alright for some 4 foot cable for a PC right next to your monitor, but not for me.
 
Vega said:
I've tried many different cables, everything from cheapo mono-price ones to expensive high quality blue-jeans cables and I still have DP issues. On a 25-foot run, DVI-D has run perfectly 100% of the time. I have never had a single issue running 1080P@120Hz or 2560x1600@60Hz at 25 feet with DVI-D. DP has been a comparative nightmare.
Click to expand...

I see that Monoprice currently does not sell DP cables longer than 15 feet. If Monoprice doesn't sell a cable length longer than a certain length, that is a hint for me that I shouldn't try to go further than that.

The wikipedia entry for DP lists among DP's advantages "Reduced bandwidth transmission for 15 meter cable (at least 1920x1080p60, 24 bpp), Full bandwidth transmission for 2 meter cable". 2 meters is a bit more than 6.5 feet; based on that I have no reason to expect that DP would give you 1080p@120Hz at 25 feet.
 
I haven't had any trouble with DP but I'm only using 4-6 ft cables... I do agree that DP is under developed. Its been years now and the DP hubs and daisy chaining dreams still look more like vapor than anything else.

At this pace, Thunderbolt might overtake DP for many of the same applications... Has AMD/NV looked at TB at all as a future EF/Surround option or will licensing & cable costs make that unrealistic for a few more years? The bandwidth sure is there, and daisy chaining seems to work relatively easily on the first few Mac-geared products.
 
evilsofa said:
I see that Monoprice currently does not sell DP cables longer than 15 feet. If Monoprice doesn't sell a cable length longer than a certain length, that is a hint for me that I shouldn't try to go further than that.

The wikipedia entry for DP lists among DP's advantages "Reduced bandwidth transmission for 15 meter cable (at least 1920x1080p60, 24 bpp), Full bandwidth transmission for 2 meter cable". 2 meters is a bit more than 6.5 feet; based on that I have no reason to expect that DP would give you 1080p@120Hz at 25 feet.
Click to expand...

I currently have 3x 25 foot display port runs working but like I said they are flaky and I had to go with super thick blue-jeans cables to get it to work. The same 25 foot run via DVI-D has zero issues. If DP lits its full transmission capability only out to a measly 2 meters, that is clearly inferior to DVI-D.
 
I cannot comment on the issues individuals have had using DP, but I can say that as always there are too many factors at play, least of all graphics drivers, to be able to determine with certainty that its the fault of the interface, from what I have read and seen there are issues with drivers using DVI, nevermind DP.

Of course, for now DVI is the primary choice for enthusiasts, but like VGA its not future proof and this will be phased out in the next few years imo. All the big OEM's are on the bandwagon as well as VESA, so it will happen whether we see it at this stage or not.

If you have the time, have a read at DP.

By the way, you show me one OEM which has delivered on a new solution/standard which has worked first time out of the box. MS have been the masters at this by letting their customers do their product testing in field (at the customer's expense) from day dot with most other OEM's playing a very similar game ;) so why you expect anything to be different in any other market segment is a mystery. Believe me when I say, I also want the shizzle to just work when I spend my hard earned cash, but as early adopters we have to accept we are going to be the guinea pigs and its going to cost us for the priviliedge :mad:

Nvidia Quadro cards work well with long DP cable runs and I have experience of this in professional video wall installations, granted its only pushing 2D material, but it works. At this time its hard to find hardware that has the I/O and internal electronics for daisy chaining, but NEC, JVC, and (I think) Samsung are working on solutions for screens in excess of 50" which will cost a small fortune no doubt.

The fact is DP offers quite a few advantages as video interface, least of all it is license free unlike HDMI, so its going to be looked at favourably by OEM design team beancounters when developing a new product, whether for mass market or commercial applications.

Hum
 
Last edited:
For those that do not read the FW900 thread:

Here is some comparison shots between my 3x 120Hz setup and my Sony FW900. The FW900 is running 1920x1200 over very high quality Belkin studio professional BNC-5 cables. FW900 is setup with Unkle Vito's recommended 50 brightness, 100 contrast, 9300K (this monitor was calibrated by him). Graphics card is a AMD 7970. Comments are below the applicable screen shot (view original size for best view):



SANY0023.jpg


Here you can see the LCD setup has a "crisper" picture versus the CRT which appears to be "softened".



SANY0024.jpg


From a subjective standpoint, the Samsung's also appeared to have a better contrast.



SANY0025.jpg


Camera's are notorious for not capturing black images properly from displays. Subjectively in real life, the back lights on both setups were similar and surprisingly the CRT didn't offer much benefit here.



SANY0026.jpg


Here the camera captured a realistic portrayal of the white differences. The FW900 had a blue-gray tint to it while the LED back lit Samsung's had brilliant, pure whites.



SANY0027.jpg


The camera was very poor at picking up reds properly. In real life this image is scorching bright red. The FW900 had a pink'ish look to it while the Samsung's were stunning red.



SANY0028.jpg


Green's were pretty good on the FW900, but the Samsung's just had more "pop".



SANY0029.jpg


Blue's for both were surprisingly almost a perfect match. The blue's for both screens were much darker and intense than portrayed here.



SANY0030.jpg


Both had a nice picture with this image.



SANY0031.jpg


Here in a completely dark room you can see the Samsung's really over-driving the image. The FW900 work's quite well in a dark room. Here also you can see the TN viewing angle limitation on the left screen. That is because the camera has been shifted left to capture the middle point of both screens. If you sit in the middle of the Eyefinity setup, 90% of the viewing angle problems disappear. One caveat though is you must sit in the middle, not for someone who likes to sit on the couch and watch TV at crazy angles!



SANY0032-1.jpg


Here in the black room you can see both make nice images, with the Samsung's appearing to be over-driving some while the FW900 not handling the blacks/contrast as well.



SANY0033-1.jpg


From pitch black room to a back light. As you can see, this is where the Samsung's really have an awesome image. The FW900 wasn't too affected by the back light and still looked pretty good. In this shot you can also see a bit of the natural blurriness of the CRT.



SANY0034-1.jpg


And now with all the interior room lights on (it is dark outside). The LCD's still hold up really well with all the extra lighting. Here you can see the FW900 starting to look washed out. In fact, this is one of my largest gripes with using it. Ambient light really affects the picture in a really bad way. In my room here during the daytime, I have blinds to cover all of the windows. They are just normal blinds to block direct sunlight, they are not "black-out" blinds. Unfortunately there are seven large windows in this room. Even with all of them with closed blinds, the ambient light is enough to completely wash out the FW900 picture. The Samsung's still work pretty good.

I will try and get a picture tomorrow of the FW900 in the room lit by non-direct, ambient light diffused through shades.

One thing the FW900 does (in a dark room), is provide a pretty nice picture that is super smooth. Although it does seem somewhat "blurry" compared to a LCD image, the blurriness has it's own like-able quality. Maybe it is because you don't need as much AA? :)

I went from a 6990 not being able to get 2304x1440 and I still cannot with the new 7970 cards and new drivers. It's like the driver has something built in that does not allow that resolution, no matter what .inf's say. I'd love to get that resolution as games look really good! Getting that resolution is so easy on my GTX580, but it doesn't have enough horsepower like my 2x 7970's to run that.

So are there still AMD users out there that are able to get 2304x1440 somehow? If so, what exactly did you do? I have tried BNC cables, VGA cables, removed EIDI pins, many different .inf's off this thread, created my own .inf's, registry edits, power-strip. Nothing seems to work! The AMD driver keeps telling me my max resolution is 2048x1536 crappy 4:3.

It is nice though having the best monitors from each technology IMO.
 
Hey did you ever get a chance to do a write up of your custom bezel mods? I am really interested in doing something similar but I am wondering how you got this done without vesa mounts on the monitors. Also, isn't the power supply located on the bottom piece? Did you just tape it to the back of the monitor? Can that stand hold the monitors in landscape? A write up would be really great if you have the time. Thanks!
 
Vega, please post pics/instructions of your disassemble of these monitors.

I too am looking at getting these and was going to simply mount them upside down using a custom clam-shell type adapter to hold the LCD to a VESA compatable mount.

However, removing the bezels to also tighten the grouping would be the ideal solution.

Please please post pics/info, etc..!!
 
How did you get that Essence One :p

How good is it, what was the price, did you swap out any amps yet?

Your display setup is amazing. But the GPU power to handle thouse monesters are more than I coul;d ever feel comforable spending :p

I plan on going with a single 120hz 27" display as soon a good quality monitor is released with VESA support.
 
Vega said:
Camera's are notorious for not capturing black images properly from displays. Subjectively in real life, the back lights on both setups were similar and surprisingly the CRT didn't offer much benefit here.
Click to expand...

:eek: Something is seriously wrong there. Why is that FW900 glowing that much? That is definitely not how mine looked in the dark, no wonder it "doesn't offer much benefit", you aren't supposed to be able to tell that it's on. Unless you sit in a pitch black room for 10 minutes staring at it, at that point maybe your eyes will start to pick up some faint light. But this definitely looks like its brightness is too high. It should not have a "backlight".

Not to mention you should use 6500K and not 9300K, I assume he calibrated the 6500K preset to D65 which is the standard white point that looks closest to neutral white. 9300K is the reason you have that blue tint.
 
Hey Vega, how did you hook up these screens to a 7970 if it only has one DVI port?

Did you connect them using the Mini-DP ports? Does that run 120Hz just by using a Mini-DP to DP cable? Or did you use active adaptors for this?

Cheers
 
UltraDude said:
Hey did you ever get a chance to do a write up of your custom bezel mods? I am really interested in doing something similar but I am wondering how you got this done without vesa mounts on the monitors. Also, isn't the power supply located on the bottom piece? Did you just tape it to the back of the monitor? Can that stand hold the monitors in landscape? A write up would be really great if you have the time. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Magnus_Dx said:
Vega, please post pics/instructions of your disassemble of these monitors.

I too am looking at getting these and was going to simply mount them upside down using a custom clam-shell type adapter to hold the LCD to a VESA compatable mount.

However, removing the bezels to also tighten the grouping would be the ideal solution.

Please please post pics/info, etc..!!
Click to expand...

Hey guys, I have two more S23A750D's inbound for my 5x1 portrait expansion. I can take photo's and do a step-by-step.

BurntToast said:
How did you get that Essence One :p

How good is it, what was the price, did you swap out any amps yet?

Your display setup is amazing. But the GPU power to handle thouse monesters are more than I coul;d ever feel comforable spending :p

I plan on going with a single 120hz 27" display as soon a good quality monitor is released with VESA support.
Click to expand...

The Essence One is for sale. I bought it for $550.

http://www.google.com/products/cata...T6iOFM-3twes7rCnAg&ved=0CGMQgggwAA#scoring=tp

I haven't swapped out any op amps, I am more than satisfied with it's performance. Zero jitter, awesome sound, works perfect with my Sen HD650's and HK GLA-55's. And that is high praise coming from an Essence STX!

Xeanor said:
Hey Vega, how did you hook up these screens to a 7970 if it only has one DVI port?

Did you connect them using the Mini-DP ports? Does that run 120Hz just by using a Mini-DP to DP cable? Or did you use active adaptors for this?

Cheers
Click to expand...

Two are hooked up natively with DP and the third HDMI limiting the right monitor to 60Hz until either a change it out with a 700D (DVI-D) or get an Eyefinity 6 type card with all DP, hopefully the 6GB version!
 
Magnus_Dx said:
You can have an eyefinity group with two monitors at 120hz and one at 60hz?
Click to expand...

More or less, it kicks down the two other displays to 100Hz, hence why I want to buy a temp 700D to get them all back to 120Hz while I wait for the Eyefinity version cards.
 
Wow that's a really nice set up you got. You must have spend a fortune to get that kind of set up.
 
Hey Vega! Looking forward to your step by step, I'm def interested in building an eyefinity setup this year, would like to see your take on it.
 
Vega said:
Hey guys, I have two more S23A750D's inbound for my 5x1 portrait expansion. I can take photo's and do a step-by-step.

Two are hooked up natively with DP and the third HDMI limiting the right monitor to 60Hz until either a change it out with a 700D (DVI-D) or get an Eyefinity 6 type card with all DP, hopefully the 6GB version!
Click to expand...

Ah, so just use a Mini-DP to DP lead and a DP cable and you're good to go @120Hz?

Do you have any quirks/issues with using DP or does it work flawlessly?

I want to get 2 extra 120Hz screens soon but I'll have to switch to AMD or use a SLI setup.
 
I officially have two more monitors inbound (1x DP version and 1x DVI-D version) to make this work with either a 6990, 7990 or 6GB Flex 7970's.

I will take plenty of pictures of the disassemble procedure of both types.

5x1 portrait thin bezel 120Hz baby. :D
 
You and your crazy monitor setup's lol One day your going to have to do this with some LED front projector's :).. Thanks again for the help with the DVI cable got it in the mail today. Nice looking cable. Get the reset of my stuff Friday so I can do my remote location setup.
 
Vega said:
I officially have two more monitors inbound (1x DP version and 1x DVI-D version) to make this work with either a 6990, 7990 or 6GB Flex 7970's.

I will take plenty of pictures of the disassemble procedure of both types.

5x1 portrait thin bezel 120Hz baby. :D
Click to expand...
Fantastic. Does the 7970 still have the tearing issue with mixed connection types like the 6 series did?
 
I still prefer LLL (landscape) to the narrow bars but that does look nice.
.
I had previously asked around about running more outputs from a 2nd card if I added a 6970 to my 6990 for trifire, but I guess you can't use the outputs on the 2nd card when doing trifire unforutnately. That would have added several. I've also heard about displayport hubs allowing you to connect multiple displayport monitors to a hub but they seem to never materialize.
 
Kinda wish you weren't going 5x1 just so we could get you to decide on 2fire with the Flex-6, or if you're going to plunk down for the 7990 in March for 3fire (or 2x 7990 for 4fire?!).

Based on the 6990, the 7990 might not have 5 mini-DP outs and that would suck for your setup, though potentially the tearing wouldn't be as big a deal on that peripheral montior.

Just very curious to see if it's going to take 2 or 3 79xx cores to move triple 120Hz, or in your case 5x 120Hz... which I really can't fathom as this point...
 
Well in my testing, going from 3x1 to 5x1 didn't creat a giant hit like you think. IIRC it was around <5 frame loss. Reason is that you aren't adding that much more object to render, yes you may be adding pixels, but as long as you don't hit the Frame Buffer Limit (Which on a 6GB model, like hell you will) you should be fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top