AMD Eyefinity Question

H

halodude23

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
1,130
I'm currently in the process of purchasing triple monitors and I'm not sure if these combinations are possible so I was wondering if someone could guide me.

Here's the combinations I'm looking at ATM
2 DVI + Active MDP
2 DVI + HDMI
2 MDP + DVI

Thanks!:D

For anyone having the same question as me, here's the DVI>MDP adapter that supports 120 hz. It's cheaper than 100$
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=6904&seq=1&format=4#
 
Last edited:
unless they changed something the 2DVI + HDMI will not work as there are only 2 RAMDACs

you need display port in the mix

Someone please correct me if they fixed this in the 7xxx series
 
Depends on the card, some of the Sapphire FLEX line could do this but normally at least one has to be Displayport.
 
You stated "Active MDP" as one of the combinations - you only need active DisplayPort adapters if the monitors do not have a DisplayPort input. What monitors are you getting?

Your XFX card cannot output to both DVI ports *AND* the HDMI port at the same time - pick any 2, but not 3. You'll have to use at least 1 of the miniDisplayPort connectors, both if you are going higher than 1920x1200 as only 1 of the DVI connectors is dual-link.

If you are buying monitors that do not have DisplayPort inputs *AND* they are 1440p or 1600p please note you will have to buy a fairly expensive dual-link DVI to DisplayPort adapter for each monitor plugged into the miniDisplayPorts (around $100CDN each).
 
you only need active display port if you are above 1920x1200. if you are 1920x1200 AND below you'll be fine with a passive adaptor
 
risqu3 said:
you only need active display port if you are above 1920x1200. if you are 1920x1200 AND below you'll be fine with a passive adaptor
Click to expand...

Passive/active adapters have little to do with resolution. They have *EVERYTHING* to do with the number of monitors. Passive adapters work *IF* only 2 monitors in total will be hooked up to the card. That's because the AMD GPU's have only 2 clock signal generators for displays. The passive adapter needs that clock to do it's job. If you are hooking up 3 or more monitors to the XFX card then at least one of the adapters has to be active to work.

Single-link vs. dual-link DisplayPort adapters *DO* have a profound effect on resolution. Single-link can handle only up to 1920x1200 (but are a lot cheaper at $30CDN), while dual-link can go 2560x1600 (but are much more expensive).
 
rtangwai said:
You stated "Active MDP" as one of the combinations - you only need active DisplayPort adapters if the monitors do not have a DisplayPort input. What monitors are you getting?

Your XFX card cannot output to both DVI ports *AND* the HDMI port at the same time - pick any 2, but not 3. You'll have to use at least 1 of the miniDisplayPort connectors, both if you are going higher than 1920x1200 as only 1 of the DVI connectors is dual-link.

If you are buying monitors that do not have DisplayPort inputs *AND* they are 1440p or 1600p please note you will have to buy a fairly expensive dual-link DVI to DisplayPort adapter for each monitor plugged into the miniDisplayPorts (around $100CDN each).
Click to expand...


I'll be getting 3 PLANAR SA2311Ws(120hz). They are only 1080p so I think I'll be fine.
 
Last edited:
risqu3 said:
you only need active display port if you are above 1920x1200. if you are 1920x1200 AND below you'll be fine with a passive adaptor
Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't know that, thanks for clarifying and do you have a recommended adapter that I should know? Currently looking for something cheap that supports eyefinity.
 
rtangwai said:
Passive/active adapters have little to do with resolution. They have *EVERYTHING* to do with the number of monitors. Passive adapters work *IF* only 2 monitors in total will be hooked up to the card. That's because the AMD GPU's have only 2 clock signal generators for displays. The passive adapter needs that clock to do it's job. If you are hooking up 3 or more monitors to the XFX card then at least one of the adapters has to be active to work.

Single-link vs. dual-link DisplayPort adapters *DO* have a profound effect on resolution. Single-link can handle only up to 1920x1200 (but are a lot cheaper at $30CDN), while dual-link can go 2560x1600 (but are much more expensive).
Click to expand...

Some priceless information in your posts. Do you have any recommendations for further reading. My limited research on DP and mini-DP did not get me a lot of usable facts (e.g. what is max resolution of mini-DP).

Sorry for the minor hi-jack.
 
Fort_Major said:
Some priceless information in your posts. Do you have any recommendations for further reading. My limited research on DP and mini-DP did not get me a lot of usable facts (e.g. what is max resolution of mini-DP).

Sorry for the minor hi-jack.
Click to expand...

Most of what I learned about the AMD GPU's and DisplayPort came from AMD's own website:

http://www.amd.com/us/products/technologies/amd-eyefinity-technology/how-to/Pages/faqs.aspx

Details about DisplayPort and miniDisplayPort can be found at the standard's website:

http://www.displayport.org and http://www.vesa.org/

The only difference between DisplayPort and mini-DisplayPort is size. MiniDisplayPort was created by Apple because they needed a smaller connector for their Macbooks.
 
halodude23 said:
I'll be getting 3 PLANAR SA2311Ws(120hz). They are only 1080p so I think I'll be fine.
Click to expand...

Not so fast - 1080p @ 120Hz requires a dual-link DVI to DisplayPort adapter. Your monitor doesn't have DisplayPort so you will have to shell out another $200 for 2 adapters (because you have only 1 dual-link DVI port on the card). You'll have to buy 3 dual-link DVI cables as well.

Depending on what you are paying for the monitors, you might want to consider buying a model that has native DisplayPort inputs.
 
rtangwai said:
The only difference between DisplayPort and mini-DisplayPort is size. MiniDisplayPort was created by Apple because they needed a smaller connector for their Macbooks.
Click to expand...
Hah, yeah I managed to gather 1/2 of that from the Wiki article. Was rather amused to see Apple contributing to a non-proprietary format. What I was unable to get was confirmation that they were exactly the same.

Thanks for the links. Shall take a look
 
rtangwai said:
Not so fast - 1080p @ 120Hz requires a dual-link DVI to DisplayPort adapter. Your monitor doesn't have DisplayPort so you will have to shell out another $200 for 2 adapters (because you have only 1 dual-link DVI port on the card). You'll have to buy 3 dual-link DVI cables as well.

Depending on what you are paying for the monitors, you might want to consider buying a model that has native DisplayPort inputs.
Click to expand...

Does it really cost 200$? I mean I found the adapters already and I think that price is a little over exaggerated lol. It sucks how I have to spend more money than I already am.....
 
halodude23 said:
Does it really cost 200$? I mean I found the adapters already and I think that price is a little over exaggerated lol. It sucks how I have to spend more money than I already am.....
Click to expand...

YES YOU REALLY DO REQUIRE A $100 ADAPTER

You will require a dual-link adapter if you want to run your monitor at 120 Hz. If you don't spend that amount of money, your expensive new monitors will only run at 60 Hz.

Also, you will have to tell us EXACTLY what AMD card model you have because over the last few years AMD has been cheaping-out and providing only ONE dual-link DVI port.

This means you MAY only be able to drive ***ONE*** of your monitors at 120 Hz without an adapter! So be prepared to drop $200 for adapters.

I wish people would stop gaping in disbelief when you tell them that high-end setups are expensive :rolleyes:

And I suppose you also expected to drive your 5760x1080 monstrosity in Crysis 3 at 120 Hz with an HD 6850, right? You do know that high-end gaming REQUIRES high-end budgets, EVEN IF you can find a deal on the 120 Hz monitors alone?
 
Last edited:
Fort_Major said:
Big caps is big
Click to expand...

Hey, he already wasted sixty bucks buying the wrong adapter thanks to nissanztt90 .

I just wanted to make things LOUD AND CLEAR. Oh, and I hope he can cancel that order from Amazon, because it really is a waste of his money :D
 
His card is barely strong enough for 60 fps in eyefinity let alone 120 fps, so 120hz is pointless and therefore dual link adapaters are pointless. Your telling him he needs to spend an extra 160 for essentially nothing.
 
defaultluser said:
YES YOU REALLY DO REQUIRE A $100 ADAPTER

You will require a dual-link adapter if you want to run your monitor at 120 Hz. If you don't spend that amount of money, your expensive new monitors will only run at 60 Hz.

Also, you will have to tell us EXACTLY what AMD card model you have because over the last few years AMD has been cheaping-out and providing only ONE dual-link DVI port.

This means you MAY only be able to drive ***ONE*** of your monitors at 120 Hz without an adapter! So be prepared to drop $200 for adapters.

I wish people would stop gaping in disbelief when you tell them that high-end setups are expensive :rolleyes:

And I suppose you also expected to drive your 5760x1080 monstrosity in Crysis 3 at 120 Hz with an HD 6850, right? You do know that high-end gaming REQUIRES high-end budgets, EVEN IF you can find a deal on the 120 Hz monitors alone?
Click to expand...

I have an XFX 7870 DD 2 GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150605

I didn't really get that from Amazon, I purchased it from Ebay instead(2 for 32$).... Well there goes my 32$ :eek:

Are there any specific cards I should be eyeing ATM aside from another 7870 if I really have to?
 
halodude23 said:
I have an XFX 7870 DD 2 GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150605

I didn't really get that from Amazon, I purchased it from Ebay instead(2 for 32$).... Well there goes my 32$ :eek:

Are there any specific cards I should be eying ATM aside from another 7870 if I really have to?
Click to expand...

Thank you for providing your full specs so we can get a clearer idea of what you need!

Do you need a new/different card? No, the 7870 is enough to start with, and you can always Crossfire later. Do expect to get the Crossfire itch when you try to play games at Eyefinity resolutions though :D

You do have a bog-standard 7870 when it comes to connectors, so here is your lineup:

HDMI
2 x Mini DisplayPort
2 x DVI (1 Single Link, 1 Dual Link)

This means to run 120fps monitors in Eyefinity, you will need them to either:
(1) Find another monitor model that accepts native Displayport (no adapter needed, except a passive mini to full cable)
(2) Use the $100 active Mini Displayport to Dual-Link DVI
(3) Use the active Single-Link adapters you bought and settle for only 60 Hz.

You cannot use passive Displayport to DVI adapters for the third monitor no matter what you connect. And (AFAIK) you have to connect all your monitors to one card (Eyefinity restriction), so you can't just CF another card and use it's DVI output.

These BenQ 120Hz 24" monitors are highly-rated, and have no shortage of connection options:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824014270

You know it makes sense if you're already going to drop $200 on adapters. At least this way you get something more for your money :D
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
Thank you for providing your full specs so we can get a clearer idea of what you need!

Do you need a new/different card? No, the 7870 is enough to start with, and you can always Crossfire later. Do expect to get the Crossfire itch when you try to play games at Eyefinity resolutions though :D

You do have a bog-standard 7870 when it comes to connectors, so here is your lineup:

HDMI
2 x Mini DisplayPort
2 x DVI (1 Single Link, 1 Dual Link)

This means to run 120fps monitors in Eyefinity, you will need them to either:
(1) Find another monitor model that accepts native Displayport (no adapter needed, except a passive mini to full cable)
(2) Use the $100 active Mini Displayport to Dual-Link DVI
(3) Use the active Single-Link adapters you bought and settle for only 60 Hz.

You cannot use passive Displayport to DVI adapters for the third monitor no matter what you connect.

These BenQ 120Hz 24" monitors are highly-rated, and have no shortage of connection options:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824014270

You know it makes sense if you're already going to drop $200 on adapters. At least this way you get something more for your money :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, but I think I may have found a possible unlock for the SL-DVI port? Not sure if it's going to work but.....
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=22824786&postcount=1226

If all else fails, I'll just get 100$ adapters, FML.

I mean I already purchased them so there's no turning back.
 
Even in xfire you wont have enough power to take any advantage of 120hz in any recent games...you are wasting your money with 120hz...you only have enough power to drive one monitor at higher FPS like that...you dont need those stupidly expensive adapaters. If you buy them your going to realize they did nothing for you and you wasted your money.
 
halodude23 said:
I'm fine with putting all settings at low if I have to. Mostly using these monitors for homework, movies and other stuff.
Click to expand...

So even though you wont notice a difference between 60fps and 120fps...youll sacrafice a shit ton of visual quality...JUST to be running at 120hz?
 
nissanztt90 said:
So even though you wont notice a difference between 60fps and 120fps...youll sacrafice a shit ton of visual quality...JUST to be running at 120hz?
Click to expand...

Actually, I notice a difference between 60 hz and 120 hz, everything seems smoother and buttery. I mean, I'll be upgrading to another GPU within a few months so I'll just have to deal with this for now lol.
 
halodude23 said:
Actually, I notice a difference between 60 hz and 120 hz, everything seems smoother and buttery. I mean, I'll be upgrading to another GPU within a few months so I'll just have to deal with this for now lol.
Click to expand...

Smooth/buttery and xfire are so hell and gone from each other this post is nearly laughable...you are going to find out the more expensive way that 120hz is a gimmick.
 
nissanztt90 said:
Smooth/buttery and xfire are so hell and gone from each other this post is nearly laughable...you are going to find out the more expensive way that 120hz is a gimmick.
Click to expand...


120 hz may seem like a gimmick to you, but others can debate that. It's really just personal preference. I think you're better off referring to 240 hz and above as a gimmick because it looks so fake.
 
With tv and movies 120hz is not a gimmick since it equalizes frame timing to 5:5 from 3:2...thats why its smoother. With computer gaming...doesnt do shit other than raise your FPS cap above 60 and prevent tearing until you go over 120fps...and you will not noticed an appreciable difference. At any rate...for tv and movies you only need 1 monitor...so you can do 120hz over DVI. Second...you still dont have enough power to necessitate dual link adapters...but whatever...your money.
 
nissanztt90 said:
With tv and movies 120hz is not a gimmick since it equalizes frame timing to 5:5 from 3:2...thats why its smoother. With computer gaming...doesnt do shit other than raise your FPS cap above 60 and prevent tearing until you go over 120fps...and you will not noticed an appreciable difference. At any rate...for tv and movies you only need 1 monitor...so you can do 120hz over DVI. Second...you still dont have enough power to necessitate dual link adapters...but whatever...your money.
Click to expand...

I believe you're referring to VSYNC which I don't use. And because I don't use VSYNC, my fps goes well above and beyond over "120 FPS(I'm not worried about tearing)." I really don't know where you're trying to go with this post, it's not going to deter me from getting 120 hz and I am quite dubious you've ever owned a 120 hz monitor before. Let's stick on the current topic instead, I'm not trying to instigate here, just looking for some answers. Thanks for trying to help though.
 
Your card may generate the extra FPS but the screen only refreshes at 60hz or 120hz...60fps or 120fps is the limit your eyes will see...frames after that are essentially discarded...going over the refresh rate of the monitor causes tearing. Im not referring to vsync...that syncs your GPU with the monitors refresh rate which again discards frames when you go over the refresh rate to prevent tearing in this case. Your not looking for answers...your looking to justify 120hz and dual link adapaters which is silly. And i am giving you answers...you just dont like them...that dual link is pointless because you dont have the power for a 120hz set up in eyefinity unless you turn stuff way down (again, youll sacrafice a shit ton of aesthetic quality for no appreciable difference), and if you do run 120hz it will be on a single monitor...which you can do over DVI...without the adapter...
 
nissanztt90 said:
Your card may generate the extra FPS but the screen only refreshes at 60hz or 120hz...60fps or 120fps is the limit your eyes will see...frames after that are essentially discarded...going over the refresh rate of the monitor causes tearing. Im not referring to vsync...that syncs your GPU with the monitors refresh rate which again discards frames when you go over the refresh rate to prevent tearing in this case. Your not looking for answers...your looking to justify 120hz and dual link adapaters which is silly.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm definitely not looking for answers, I'm looking for a heated debate and the question was "To get 120 hz or not to get."

Clearly I said I wanted 120 hz, how am I justifying, you were the one who came up with your statement of how 120 hz was a gimmick. :confused:

For one, go and try out a 120 hz monitor and then a 60 hz monitor, if you can't perceive the difference then I don't know what else to tell you. I'm not looking for whether 120 hz pointless to me or not, I already purchased it and yes I wasted my money in your terms.

Also, my question was already answered a while ago, there's really nothing more to add in this thread besides digressed b.s

>>I know I have to turn my settings down but as I've stated before, I'll be getting another GPU or a 2nd Radeon 7870. Again, thanks for the help and I don't really want to assail you on this topic or anything.
 
Last edited:
I can perceive the difference with tv and movies...because of the 5:5 even frame sync instead of the tv expanding 24fps to the 60hz refresh rate via 3:2 pull down. I have a feeling you have no idea what im talking about there though. 120hz monitors arent a waste if you have the GPU power to push it...and you dont...so dont waste your money on the adapters for it. 120hz is only a gimmick when it comes to video games.
 
nissanztt90 said:
I can perceive the difference with tv and movies...because of the 5:5 even frame sync instead of the tv expanding 24fps to the 60hz refresh rate via 3:2 pull down. I have a feeling you have no idea what im talking about there though. 120hz monitors arent a waste if you have the GPU power to push it...and you dont...so dont waste your money on the adapters for it. 120hz is only a gimmick when it comes to video games.
Click to expand...

Well the deal was extremely good, that's about the only reason I went for it. I was really looking forward to a Korean IPS monitor but then again, this is my first time doing eyefinity and I would love to experience it for once. I think I said I'd get another GPU soon..... Not sure why it's a waste of money??:confused:
 
halodude23 said:
Well the deal was extremely good, that's about the only reason I went for it. I was really looking forward to a Korean IPS monitor but then again, this is my first time doing eyefinity and I would love to experience it for once. I think I said I'd get another GPU soon..... Not sure why it's a waste of money??:confused:
Click to expand...

It still wont be enough power to utilize anything past 60hz unless you start really turning settings down. Couple that with xfire being the opposite of smooth and buttery. I had xfire 6950 2gb in eyefinity...i shit you not 1 card was smoother, despite being far lower FPS. Took me a few days to decide to sell the second card. And then couple that with the fact that your eyes arent going to notice a difference past 60fps anyway. If the game feels more fluid its simply because you have an abundance of GPU power, not because of what your eyes are perceiving. Dont make the mistake of thinking im knocking you for buying the monitors...im sure they are really nice monitors...im telling you that 60hz to 120hz in video games IS NOT going to give you the same difference in smoothness as it does when watching tv or a movie, and this is because of how the monitor processes a constant 24fps feed into a 60hz refresh rate on the screen...its smoother on 120hz because frames are being displayed for equal amounts of time vs how they are displayed on a 60hz monitor...totally different with a gpu producing a non constant FPS feed.

The simple fact of the matter is GPUs arent powerful enough for 120hz in eyefinity. If you want to play games at 120hz...its only going to be on 1 monitor...which you can do over DVI...making those active adapters pointless for you...which is what i said was a waste of money.
 
Last edited:
nissanztt90 said:
Couple that with xfire being the opposite of smooth and buttery. I had xfire 6950 2gb in eyefinity..

And then couple that with the fact that your eyes arent going to notice a difference past 60fps anyway.

The simple fact of the matter is GPUs arent powerful enough for 120hz in eyefinity.
Click to expand...

Lots of subjective remarks that you pass as absolute truths.

1) There are HOARDS of people that don't perceive this lack of "smoothness" that you are preaching about in crossfire. I spent time with dual 6970's and never had ANY of those issues at all.

2) Soooo many people swear by 120hz. Just because you can't see it or feel it, doesn't mean other people won't. Taking the same approach as the point above. I personally notice a difference between 60hz and 120hz. I notice it like night and day - to the point that playing at 60hz makes my eyes huty lol.

3) I can also tell you have I have run NVSurround at 120hz before. You don't need to max every setting out to get good img quality - once again something very subjective. I was able to turn down alot of unnecessary things on BF3 and able to do 110+ fps constant and I would argue that the image quality wasn't any different at that high resolution. Sure, you probably can't do that on a single 7870, but he already stated he was going to update his gpu in the future. Whether its another 7870 or quad titans, it can be done rather easily if you turn down a few settings.

And honestly, if you WANT 120hz, image quality is the last thing on your mind anyways, so that point is rather silly.

He was asking a simple question. Give him a simple answer and gtfo lol.
 
Phishy714 said:
Lots of subjective remarks that you pass as absolute truths.

1) There are HOARDS of people that don't perceive this lack of "smoothness" that you are preaching about in crossfire. I spent time with dual 6970's and never had ANY of those issues at all.

2) Soooo many people swear by 120hz. Just because you can't see it or feel it, doesn't mean other people won't. Taking the same approach as the point above. I personally notice a difference between 60hz and 120hz. I notice it like night and day - to the point that playing at 60hz makes my eyes huty lol.

3) I can also tell you have I have run NVSurround at 120hz before. You don't need to max every setting out to get good img quality - once again something very subjective. I was able to turn down alot of unnecessary things on BF3 and able to do 110+ fps constant and I would argue that the image quality wasn't any different at that high resolution. Sure, you probably can't do that on a single 7870, but he already stated he was going to update his gpu in the future. Whether its another 7870 or quad titans, it can be done rather easily if you turn down a few settings.

And honestly, if you WANT 120hz, image quality is the last thing on your mind anyways, so that point is rather silly.

He was asking a simple question. Give him a simple answer and gtfo lol.
Click to expand...

1. There are also HOARDS of people that do perceive it, and its actually a measureable and quantifiable difference...something the owners of this site have been saying for years. Just a few days ago there was a lengthy article on why another major review site wont be using xfire in there reviews anymore because of the frame timing.

2. Moot point...im not debating wether or not 60hz VS 120hz is better...your right its personal preference. Im saying 120hz requires so much GPU power on eyefinity that the benefits do not outweigh the negatives. In the end it still boils down to what settings you want to play at for what FPS you want.

3. See above.

I did give him a simple answer...he didnt like it. How bout you gtfo lol?
 
nissanztt90 said:
1. There are also HOARDS of people that do perceive it, and its actually a measureable and quantifiable difference...something the owners of this site have been saying for years. Just a few days ago there was a lengthy article on why another major review site wont be using xfire in there reviews anymore because of the frame timing.

2. Moot point...im not debating wether or not 60hz VS 120hz is better...your right its personal preference. Im saying 120hz requires so much GPU power on eyefinity that the benefits do not outweigh the negatives. In the end it still boils down to what settings you want to play at for what FPS you want.

3. See above.

I did give him a simple answer...he didnt like it. How bout you gtfo lol?
Click to expand...

1) Exactly, there are people the perceive it and there are people that don't. Thanks for proving my point that its all about what the user perceives and you can't go around saying:

nissanztt90 said:
Couple that with xfire being the opposite of smooth and buttery.
Click to expand...

That is once again - TO YOU. Let him try it and figure it out for himself instead of shooting his hopes of 120hz down.

2) I also never said anything about 120 being better - not sure where you are getting this. What I was pointing out is to refute your "absolute truth" of:

nissanztt90 said:
And then couple that with the fact that your eyes arent going to notice a difference past 60fps anyway.
Click to expand...

Which is completely false since there are many people that clearly do.

3) I really don't see you giving him an answer he didn't like or distrust - until you started proclaiming that it was worthless for him to try 120hz eyefinity...

yes, gtfo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top