AMD Next Generation ATI Radeon Eyefinity Technology

TheBuzzer said:
seems like it is good for business that need to show lot of data.
Click to expand...

I cannot wait for this card to be released.

6 monitors on one card would save so much space and (hopefully) power.

Currently - the best viable option for 6 displays for a workstation (low power, quiet) is a Quadro NVS 440 + NVS 290. The NVS 440 today still runs $200+ even though it is about a 5+ year old card - so if this is a $300 card, it will give ATI the one up on workstations that require 4+ monitors.

The 4850x2 actually allows for quad (4) monitor out, but it is too damn loud and the dual graphics chip draws more power than I would like.
 
wow now all we need is monitors with no bezel i cant wait till they drop this stuff. AMD is firing on all cylinders for once this would be act two to global foundries picking up smc and i hope is just the start of a very prosperous amd for once
 
Anyone who didn't see this coming, please send me $10 now. :p
mavalpha said:
The other possibility is, this is their way of advertising DisplayPort support. The standard is supposed to allow daisychaining, so this may be a roundabout announcement that "we support DisplayLink."
Click to expand...

Better yet, send it Kyle's way instead. :)
 
This is definitly a good thing, but it is only the first step.

Current monitors are extremely limiting in how much information they actually give a viewer. There was someone earlier in this thread that commented on how pointless the sidescreens are, since you're never looking at them anyways, and that it really didn't add anything, but i'm going to disagree.

Most video games these days assume you're a certain distance from your monitor, usually that you're getting below 90degree horizontal view. For example, hl2 comes with default of 75 degrees for a 4:3 aspect ratio. (versus the 180 or so degrees you can actually see)

If you really think about this, this is a pathetically small viewing window (never mind the vertical for now...). I can't even begin to count how many times i've been irritated by a video game because i missed something simply because it was in some stupid corner that normally i would see out of the corner of my eye.

Furthermore, it greatly adds to the immersion when i'm, literally, immersed in my environment. It's just something about peripheral vision that just bumps it up to 11. I'm not sure how many of you have tested this, but for me it was quite an eye opener.

The thing is, i don't think i fully realized how awesome it was until i truly got to test it. And let's not kid ourselves, very few people are going to go out and buy a matrox/2nd video card and 2 extra monitors to test out this nifty feature. For me, it only occured when i found myself with 1 extra pci express card, some friends with some monitors that i borrowed for a day, and one free boring weekend with the soft th software. I have to admit, the bars are pretty annoying between screens, but it didn't keep me from realizing how awesome all that extra peripheral information was.

However, now that native 3 monitor spanning is integrated into the video card, people are that much closer to playing around with 3 monitors. Suddenly it's well within people reach to try out a 3 monitor setup if they borrow some monitors from some friends or "rent" them from a retail store.

And i think once more people start playing around hopefully using a 3 monitor setup, more ultra widescreen monitors will start showing up as well as more field of view options in applications for generally much larger much higher resolution monitors.
 
I just hope they have a hard launch like the R770. I would hate for them to run out of stock like the x-25m G2's.
 
I can see a lot of programmers going for these cards just for the multiple display support.

Two screens off of one card just isn't enough anymore when working on multiple files, debugging, researching, etc. all at the same time.

From the looks of it, the 5870 is going to be a KILLER card. I can't even imagine how beastly of a card it is to drive that high of resolution with high detail.

I was happy when I more than doubled performance when I went from my 3870 to my 4850... the 5870 may be the first card I am truly amazed by performace wise. Looks like it probably won't even break a sweat running max settings on any current game on a single monitor.
 
I'll also have to disagree with those that suggest that multi-monitor gaming is impractical / not beneficial.

I too have a 50" pioneer kuro plasma that I do most my gaming on (audio via B&W 800 series setup + JL Audio Fathom 113 sub), and prior to a recent multi-monitor gaming experience (with Forza 3), I too would have placed myself firmly with the skeptics with regards to the usability / usefulness of multi-screen gaming.

Two minutes with a 3x1 screen setup was more than enough to change my mind. The sense of immersion is so much greater when your peripheral vision is engaged in the experience, and there's so much more actionable information available at any given moment. For me, it was a dramatic reminder that to date, most, if not all, of my "immersive" gaming experiences had been realized through a small portal in my visual field.

Of course, all that only applies if the camera's field of view is widened to accomodate the additional resolution as opposed to just making everything bigger. Assuming that, I'm pretty excited about this development and am looking forward to a adding couple more monitors to my gaming setup (and relegating the plasma to TV and movies).
 
cyclone3d said:
I can see a lot of programmers going for these cards just for the multiple display support.

Two screens off of one card just isn't enough anymore when working on multiple files, debugging, researching, etc. all at the same time.
Click to expand...
well, wouldn't it be cheaper to just buy two really basic video cards? I doubt most programmers need the video horsepower.
 
What about actual software that will "allow" this upon release of the card? Will people have to wait for the developers to release a patch to "increase" the resolution? Considering what happened when widescreen monitors first came to market. Support was bleak at best. If the software out today can't cope with the increase in resolution, this might suck for early adopters.
 
I had the pleasure of playing L4D2 on that very same 3x2 30" setup while interning at AMD in Sunnyvale this last summer. Though I don't really think this product is going to find much revenue outside of professional graphics applications, it was certainly breathtaking to kill some zombies, drawn in 24.6 megapixel glory. Too bad a 30" display sets you back $1.5k nowadays!
 
I've very interested to how much horse power these cards actually have to push these displays. I'm a fan of multiple displays but I'm more hoping that this will help to drive up the resolution of individual displays. get the 2560X1600 down to the mainstream and usher in some new higher resolutions.
 
BoogerBomb said:
Depends on how many slots the computer has.
Click to expand...
there's very few computers that don't have an extra pci or pci-e slot. If they're filled, attempting to fit a massive dual-slot video card wouldn't help.

I don't think this technology would benefit anything other than 3d rendering spanned across multiple monitors. Also certain video players i have had wouldn't play across multiple monitors simultaneously unless they were spanned.

Maybe later if they start releasing low end video cards that still have 3 or 6 monitor support.
 
Ironically no one seems to be talking about wattage? Granted the GPU might consume less then the previous generation, but now you're adding a ton more wattage for all those displays now! lol...
 
The thing that may make this implementation easier is the drivers and software to control the multi-monitor setup. I don't do it because drivers right now are a bit of a headache to deal with when doing multi-monitor. I tried using a regular LCD and my HDTV but went just the HDTV because it was a headache getting resolutions to play nice and the displays to do what I wanted. Im interested to see how this setup can handle different monitors of different resolutions.
 
I really don't think they expect many people to do 6 monitor setup. I think 3 is the happy medium.

Not saying tons of people will do that, but that's closer to your "average' enthusiast, I think.
 
Wazooty said:
I really don't think they expect many people to do 6 monitor setup. I think 3 is the happy medium.

Not saying tons of people will do that, but that's closer to your "average' enthusiast, I think.
Click to expand...

Yea I agree, Specially considering if you run 6 monitors, and play a FPS the crosshair will be all fucked up.

I plan to do a 3 monitor setup....Now all we need is an LCD monitor with no bezel.......
 
This beats the shit out of Physx any day of the goddamn week.

Now we need a LCD technology that has no-bezel\barely any coverage so we can seamlessly make custom "screens" and resolutions.
 
3DChipset said:
Ironically no one seems to be talking about wattage? Granted the GPU might consume less then the previous generation, but now you're adding a ton more wattage for all those displays now! lol...
Click to expand...

Are you that biased towards nVidia that you can't just say, wow nice one AMD. Christ. I was so red-biased years ago that I dedicated my name to their cards. Watch this: nVidia makes excellent products and I'm proud to own a GTX280.

See? Fanboys CAN compliment their opposing brands.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
RADEoN said:
Are you that biased towards nVidia that you can't just say, wow nice one AMD. Christ. I was so red-biased years ago that I dedicated my name to their cards. Watch this: nVidia makes excellent products and I'm proud to own a GTX280.

See? Fanboys CAN compliment their opposing brands.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
Click to expand...

You're doing it all wrong!
 
This Technology would be frigging killer if you have a few thousand dollars to spend on projectors and a huge wall in your house, then spend the time to mount and align them flawlessly. But besides that, I don't know if that many gamers would elect to go this route for displays.
 
Yossarian22 said:
This beats the shit out of Physx any day of the goddamn week.
Click to expand...

More physics/interactions > more pixels...

Now we need a LCD technology that has no-bezel\barely any coverage so we can seamlessly make custom "screens" and resolutions.
Click to expand...

That will cost a buck..and then some.
There is a reason why so mush "estate" is being used today, it's the way LCD's works..they need connections all round..it's how they work and trying to hide it will add costas it is no easy feat.
 
This looks amazing. It also makes me wonder how well it will fold.


It also makes me wonder what nvidia is going to market with their new cards.
 
Atech said:
More physics/interactions > more pixels...



That will cost a buck..and then some.
There is a reason why so mush "estate" is being used today, it's the way LCD's works..they need connections all round..it's how they work and trying to hide it will add costas it is no easy feat.
Click to expand...

CPU Physix > nvidia physix.

Specially considering 6 core CPU's comin out. Physix will be a thing of the past.
 
DASHlT said:
CPU Physix > nvidia physix.

Specially considering 6 core CPU's comin out. Physix will be a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

I don't want to go to much offtopic, but if you think a 6 core CPU will beat GPU's in SIMD performance...well...then there is nothing more to say.

Edit:
Actually there is...you want to replace your GPU with a 6 core CPU to render graphics?
If no, then you have a paradox on your hands....
 
Atech said:
I don't want to go to much offtopic, but if you think a 6 core CPU will beat GPU's in SIMD performance...well...then there is nothing more to say.
Click to expand...

Exactly :) goodbye Physix.

Hey at least Nvidia fooled a few people.

Back on topic. Lets hope that when do release these cards, that Xfire will work with 3/6 monitors right away.
It will totally suck waiting 1-2 months for drivers for it.
 
Atech said:
Edit:
Actually there is...you want to replace your GPU with a 6 core CPU to render graphics?
If no, then you have a paradox on your hands....
Click to expand...

The CPU did fine rendering Ghostbusters Physix. So yea I dont see why not :)
 
Atech said:
Sorry, but you should read up here:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1410746
I am amzaed how "blind" people are to physcis...6000 boxes is not "great" physics...interactive smoke is great physics.
Click to expand...

Come on man, the only blind one is you....Killer nic/physix. Man you could of saved money on upgrades over useless products.

But anyway lets keep this on topic. IF you wanna bicker about physcis, keep it in PM's
 
DASHlT said:
Come on man, the only blind one is you....Killer nic/physix. Man you could of saved money on upgrades over useless products.

But anyway lets keep this on topic. IF you wanna bicker about physcis, keep it in PM's
Click to expand...

I will save money..by not buying 4 more displays, to get "football helmet" bars on my game and no extra immersion...sour grapes indeed...but not from my side...and I am not the one bickering about PhysX...read the thread and drop the fallacies.
 
No one is forcing you to use this. It's a friggin extra feature!

Some people make it sound like you're friggin being force to use it

I'll tell you what. If Starcraft 2 supports the larger resolutions, then every gosu-wannabe player is going to pine for the largest monitor set up possible or whatever helps their peripherals
 
Atech said:
More physics/interactions > more pixels...



That will cost a buck..and then some.
There is a reason why so mush "estate" is being used today, it's the way LCD's works..they need connections all round..it's how they work and trying to hide it will add costas it is no easy feat.
Click to expand...

I'd agree but that link you provided:

...In fact Mark Randel, "head coder" for the Infernal Engine made it pretty clear that he thought that physics should be handled by the CPU and the GPU left for processing graphics....
Click to expand...

The thing is, I'm not a red-guy or a green-guy despite my signature rig. But look at it this way:

  1. I buy an Nvidia card; I get better eye candy due to PhysX processing (not many games support this)
  2. I buy ATI Evergreen; I have the option to do multi-head (Eyefinity) in any game, application, etc... I wish.

I doubt PhysX or Eyefinity will become the ultimate decision in someone's purchase, but I think potentially having more interactive\destructive environments is less appealing than being able to hook up multiple displays to get wider FOV and more immersive game experience.

If you buy the 5xxx Evergreen, it's a win\win situation. The possibility for Eyefinity is always there. With any current PhysX able Nvidia card, I am restricted to the code of the game. A relatively short list of games might I add.

If a fast GPU is cake and these features are icing, Evergreen has better icing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top