Eyefinity(widescreen) vs 30'' - general desktop use?

H

hornkiku23

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
421
I think I would have fun with one of these setup for games but i am worried the setup would be too wide to be practical for general use.

Anyone go from a 30'' to 3 24's? How is it for basic stuff?
 
I went from a Dell 3007WFP-HC to 3 Asus 26inch LCDs no problem. At first I didnt like it but after about an hour of use I adjusted & now love having three panels for desktop use.
 
I tried using a 30'' monitor and did not like it. It is too big and the high resolution make browsing web bad. Using 2 or 3 monitors would be better for general desktop use
 
mafa said:
I tried using a 30'' monitor and did not like it. It is too big and the high resolution make browsing web bad. Using 2 or 3 monitors would be better for general desktop use
Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. Which is why I am afraid to make the jump to 3 1920x1200/1080 monitors.

It's tempting though but no 2560x1600 on one screen is hard to give up.
 
I work with 2 30's and most of my time is spent looking at the main screen. I don't know if a third screen would be very beneficial to me. So, maybe it would be best to have a 30" and a 24 on the side. Though, it won't work great with Eyefinity, it is probably the cheapest and most optimal for actually doing work if that's what you're interested in.
 
I came from a dual display setup, and I gotta say, the third monitor is fantastic for my productivity. If you're in the engineering/development field, you can relate.
 
inotocracy said:
I came from a dual display setup, and I gotta say, the third monitor is fantastic for my productivity. If you're in the engineering/development field, you can relate.
Click to expand...

I hate graduating into a recession, it makes it hard for engineers to get a job (well mostly chemical engineers, which I am) :(. Productivity would be supreme with three monitors I am sure. Matlab, etc. would be fantastic.
 
I got bored yesterday and tried out triple head gaming, I don't have a ton of huge monitors, but I was able to compare 3744x900 to 2560x1600 (I do have a 30", everything else is smaller)

some observations:
- I use the 30" at 1920x1200 for general desktop usage, its FAR easier on my eyes
- even compared to 2560x1600, the 3744x900 setup seemed much "cooler" for gaming
- honestly no complaints between the 1920x1200 + 1440x900 for desktop usage compared to 3744x900 for desktop usage, both can display more than enough information for my needs (I do prefer having a very large display if I'm working with something like Photoshop or Sound Forge, however this usage is relatively infrequent and the flipside is that with a triplehead setup, you can "do more", because you can just devote a monitor to a single task vs spacing things around it)
- performance in 3744x900 gaming was FAR worse than 2560x1600 (however I wasn't using Eyefinity)

to accomplish the triple head setup I installed my GeForce 7900GS alongside my Radeon 4870X2, and loaded SoftTH 1.08 for gaming (for non-gaming, just used the ATi and nVidia drivers), I ended up not keeping the setup, mostly because I can't physically fit both the tri-head AND the 30" on my desk (oh I wish...), my normal dual-head setup is the 4870X2 driving the 30" solo, and Input Director with one of the other monitors being driven by another computer (which seems to lend itself to multitasking, as I have more processing power at my disposal as well), so I'm guessing eyefinity might have somewhat of a performance advantage as it isn't doing a lot of data shuffling over the PCIe bus, however even Matrox's data for multi-head gaming (which is a far different implementation from SoftTH) shows a considerable performance hit for non-standard aspect ratios...you also get to contend with FOV oddities in some games

in terms of multi-tasking, sheer volume wise, I prefer my normal run setup with input director, as I have two full instances of Windows and two complete computers at my disposal (and I could add more, space is my only constraint (well, that, and the 20A breaker)), its basically unstoppable processing power, however in terms of "awesomeness" factor, the triplehead has it over the 30" (I'd have to say I'm probably somewhat biased though, I've had the 30" for over a year and the whole "your character's hands are life sized and NPCs faces are life sized up close" thing has worn off)

before the input director switch, and before the 30", I used four monitors at once across two PCs (with the keyboards stacked), it was equally capable, it just got bothersome with so many HIDs and the mass of the four monitors

in short, I think my answer to your question is "both", as both sides have advantages and disadvantages, I haven't used a single PC strictly as a multi-head in probably three years, as I prefer having multiple systems behind it for more power/flexibility, although the usability even with a single PC behind it is quite good (NEC and Utah aren't kidding, it does increase productivity), I'd argue comparable or better than a 30", just because of visual separation of data (its not a matter of pixels at a point, its just organization of things, the 3744x900 setup is only about 3.3 MP but it feels so much "bigger" than the 4.2 MP 2560x1600 setup (when you've got opera fullscreened on one monitor, your work on another, and another one sitting there for whatever else you come up with, compared to playing tetris to make it all fit, it just "feels" better)
 
tboo said:
I went from a Dell 3007WFP-HC to 3 Asus 26inch LCDs no problem. At first I didnt like it but after about an hour of use I adjusted & now love having three panels for desktop use.
Click to expand...

How did you feel quality and dot pitch wise going from the 3007 to the 26'' asus which arguable as less superior?
 
obobski said:
I got bored yesterday and tried out triple head gaming, I don't have a ton of huge monitors, but I was able to compare 3744x900 to 2560x1600 (I do have a 30", everything else is smaller)

some observations:
- I use the 30" at 1920x1200 for general desktop usage, its FAR easier on my eyes
- even compared to 2560x1600, the 3744x900 setup seemed much "cooler" for gaming
- honestly no complaints between the 1920x1200 + 1440x900 for desktop usage compared to 3744x900 for desktop usage, both can display more than enough information for my needs (I do prefer having a very large display if I'm working with something like Photoshop or Sound Forge, however this usage is relatively infrequent and the flipside is that with a triplehead setup, you can "do more", because you can just devote a monitor to a single task vs spacing things around it)
- performance in 3744x900 gaming was FAR worse than 2560x1600 (however I wasn't using Eyefinity)

to accomplish the triple head setup I installed my GeForce 7900GS alongside my Radeon 4870X2, and loaded SoftTH 1.08 for gaming (for non-gaming, just used the ATi and nVidia drivers), I ended up not keeping the setup, mostly because I can't physically fit both the tri-head AND the 30" on my desk (oh I wish...), my normal dual-head setup is the 4870X2 driving the 30" solo, and Input Director with one of the other monitors being driven by another computer (which seems to lend itself to multitasking, as I have more processing power at my disposal as well), so I'm guessing eyefinity might have somewhat of a performance advantage as it isn't doing a lot of data shuffling over the PCIe bus, however even Matrox's data for multi-head gaming (which is a far different implementation from SoftTH) shows a considerable performance hit for non-standard aspect ratios...you also get to contend with FOV oddities in some games

in terms of multi-tasking, sheer volume wise, I prefer my normal run setup with input director, as I have two full instances of Windows and two complete computers at my disposal (and I could add more, space is my only constraint (well, that, and the 20A breaker)), its basically unstoppable processing power, however in terms of "awesomeness" factor, the triplehead has it over the 30" (I'd have to say I'm probably somewhat biased though, I've had the 30" for over a year and the whole "your character's hands are life sized and NPCs faces are life sized up close" thing has worn off)

before the input director switch, and before the 30", I used four monitors at once across two PCs (with the keyboards stacked), it was equally capable, it just got bothersome with so many HIDs and the mass of the four monitors

in short, I think my answer to your question is "both", as both sides have advantages and disadvantages, I haven't used a single PC strictly as a multi-head in probably three years, as I prefer having multiple systems behind it for more power/flexibility, although the usability even with a single PC behind it is quite good (NEC and Utah aren't kidding, it does increase productivity), I'd argue comparable or better than a 30", just because of visual separation of data (its not a matter of pixels at a point, its just organization of things, the 3744x900 setup is only about 3.3 MP but it feels so much "bigger" than the 4.2 MP 2560x1600 setup (when you've got opera fullscreened on one monitor, your work on another, and another one sitting there for whatever else you come up with, compared to playing tetris to make it all fit, it just "feels" better)
Click to expand...


A 30'' at 1920x1200 non native.....

:confused:

This makes me sad. :)
 
I use 3x 19ins for work and do use/appreciate the different workspace. Able to dedicate a side monitor for specific uses, middle monitor as general. It is very handy able to quickly min/max to a single monitor as leaves other active /viewable - you lose this to a certain extent with single montior setups.

and eyefinity looks to be bees knees...


saying that 3x24 landscape sounds pretty wide.. perhaps 3 in portrait ?
 
I use 2 19s at work (engineer) and I could definitely use a third. Being able to maximize windows on individual monitors is key. It makes a very real impact in my productivity.

For games I'd prefer one big, high resolution monitor. I just don't look at more than one monitor at a time.
 
Yea... Running that large o an LCD at non native res is just awful.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
well, I'm not really too concerned what people think of my usage habits, and thankfully, none of you have to be here and use my equipment with me

I was trying to provide a relevant response to the OP's question, not start a flamewar about usage habits
 
Of course you should do whatever makes you happy.

Some of the comments about my equipment though have helped me find better solutions.

A 30'' display is an expensive way to achieve a 2560x1600 desktop.

Running at any other resolution greatly reduces the quality of the display.

If vision is a concern scaling resolutions create blur and eye strain.

There are a few 27+ displays that run at 1920x1200 and a few 32 inch tvs that will display text sharper than a scaled 30'' display.

They are also much cheaper.

..................but based on your advice you are pretty experienced and accomplished at this stuff so you probably know this stuff already

If you are happy with what you have thats cool but you can achieve the same thing with better results elsewhere if you are ever itching for an upgrade.
 
If one really wants to reduce strain the other option is use a gray on black interface where ever possible. My FF is modded to over ride any web page to that and so is the theme for my 2nd computer that is always on my 2nd screen. Not having blinding white shining on one's eye for hours on end really helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top