I'll believe it when I see it. Right now ATI has the only triple (soon to be sextuple) monitor capable hardware out of the box. Nvidia seemed to be more interested in gpu-computing and folding than showing any promising gaming features. So if they do add that feature it would be a surprise. We'll see when GT300 comes out in 2010, but I'm not holding my breath. I'll enjoy getting those abilities right now in the present, TYVM.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
NVIDIA and its own Eyefinity?
- Thread starter FrgMstr
- Start date
cybereality
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 8,789
Sounds to me like you aren't even in the market for *ANY* monitor, let alone multi-monitor. CRT... lol...
Yossarian22
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Messages
- 1,799
Trolls from the Display forum. Don't feed them.
Brackle
Old Timer
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,883
Of course you dont like eyefinity. It's not an nvidia product /laugh
Modred189
Can't Read the OP
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Messages
- 16,691
Personal opinion aside, BOTH companies really need to show why multimonitor gaming is better than a single, larger screen considering the %'s shown in the poll above. And this is in the target demographic; enthusiasts.
If you have 1/3 enthusiasts saying that they don't care at all, a good chunk siding with nvidia, and not including other responses regarding price, marriage etc, the market may be exceedingly small.
It's interesting that ATi is catering to such an extremely enthusiast style technology, considering their recent push in all things mid-range.
If you have 1/3 enthusiasts saying that they don't care at all, a good chunk siding with nvidia, and not including other responses regarding price, marriage etc, the market may be exceedingly small.
It's interesting that ATi is catering to such an extremely enthusiast style technology, considering their recent push in all things mid-range.
Eyefinity doesnt really interest me, LCDs dont even interest me. I game on my trusty 21" CRT at 2048x1536 and will for some years to come, but i think its a great feature for those who are interested and have the luxury of being able to afford multiple LCDs and GPUs.
Innovations like this is what technological progress is all about, what may only appeal to a small percentage of people right now might have a bigger following in the future. Im sure its something i would like to experience one day, hopefully when you can cover an entire room wall with LCDs with minimum bezels for under $1000
Innovations like this is what technological progress is all about, what may only appeal to a small percentage of people right now might have a bigger following in the future. Im sure its something i would like to experience one day, hopefully when you can cover an entire room wall with LCDs with minimum bezels for under $1000
i see it differently. i see about 60% (conservatively, considering the >12% total margin of error) of enthusiasts expressing some interest in multi-mon gaming, either from ATI or nVidia. compare that to how many [H] enthusiasts are genuinely interested in multi-GPU gaming. do you think it's as high as 60%? i don't, but i don't have hard numbers to back that up. considering how great multi-monitor setups are for productivity, i suspect ATI is hoping to appeal especially to the people whose home computers are both for gaming and productivity, and who might already have 2+ monitors.
as for "needing to show why it's better than a single, larger screen," if you really need to be shown it might not be the technology for you, which is fine, but you said you were putting personal opinion aside and i don't really think you did. i've shown the EyeFinity demos [H] did to lots of friends, and the reaction is a pretty consistent "wow." i think the current software cons - poor bezel management, FoV distortion and wonkey HUD placement - will only improve over time in the same way that SLI and CF scaling has improved over time (even if it's something only a tiny fraction of people actually use). plus, where game devs fail, modders often step in.
my answer to your question about why more monitors are better than a single large one is based on pixels. my interest in multi-monitor gaming doesn't come primarily from cutting-edge shooters and racing games. the bread and butter of my gaming is strategy games (even if good ones are few and far between). it was a night-and-day difference when i went from 1280x1024 to 1920x1200, being able to see that much more of my battlefield--and that's only a 75% increase.
simply put, i don't want more AA--i can barely tell the difference between 4x and 8x--i want more pixels. i want my display to contain and convey more information, and a 52" 1080 screen won't show me more information than a 23" 1080 one; it just means i can discern the information from across a room instead of across a desk.
ATI has brought me the ability to scale up by 200% if i want, spending less for 2 more monitors than a single 30" monitor would cost (and still offering a higher pixel gain over the a 30"). even if i can't afford to buy those monitors now, the technology will be there when i am ready and willing.
at the end of the day, it's not a big enough thing to sway my decision-making, but ATI just happens to have faster, more energy-efficient and economical GPUs right now, which makes EyeFinity some very sweet icing on the proverbial cake.
Modred189
Can't Read the OP
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Messages
- 16,691
Valid argument, and I can DEFINITELY see what you mean in regards to RTSs. I remember when I 'borrowed' a friend's monitor for Supreme Commander and its multi-monitor capability.
And I think I stated something wrong... when I referred to multi-mon v one large screen, I personally do not prefer one or the other, my 22" 1680X1050 is more than enough for what I want OR need. i was simply stating that the two companies need to tell us why this solution is better than it's competing option. I.e., on current games and game engines that do not stress most modern cards (my GTX260 maxes out %90 of games' settings), why should I upgrade my card AND buy more monitors when I can just do the screen?
And maybe it comes down to games. I like RTS games, but it has been a LONG time since a AAA RTS was released. Hopefully SCII, and even Diablo II, considering it's ~top-down style. I suppose that, for me, have never seen the value in multimonitor gaming OR large format screens. With large format monitors, they often get TOO big for the average desk as you are sitting too close. And for larger screens, I have always prefered the higher resolutions provided by monitors over TVs. Multimonitor setups, RIGHT NOW, have too many issues that would be deal-breakers for me, such as the bezel issue and the side-monitor distortion.
Frraksurred
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,751
I understand a 40"+ screen is physically bigger then a 30", but 2560x1600 blows 1920x1080 away. To say nothing of 7680x1600 vs. an 1080p. I can deal with the bezels, I cannot deal with blurry, jagged edge, 240hz, but still ghosting smear-fest. Sorry.
Don't get me wrong. I love my HDTV, but I view it at the distance it was designed for, not as a monitor. I'll keep my 30's for that.
Don't get me wrong. I love my HDTV, but I view it at the distance it was designed for, not as a monitor. I'll keep my 30's for that.
I understand a 40"+ screen is physically bigger then a 30", but 2560x1600 blows 1920x1080 away. To say nothing of 7680x1600 vs. an 1080p. I can deal with the bezels, I cannot deal with blurry, jagged edge, 240hz, but still ghosting smear-fest. Sorry.
Don't get me wrong. I love my HDTV, but I view it at the distance it was designed for, not as a monitor. I'll keep my 30's for that.
I like the setup, but those twinkies are BAD for you! Also I'm wondering if you're bothered by the center speaker being a little bit taller than the central monitor. Perhaps a monitor stand to elevate those 30 inchers woud make it even nicer?
my own apologies for jumping to conclusions.
i'm really hoping starcraft 2 plays well with eyefinity. i know with some games, getting very high resolutions to work is simply a matter of editing an ini file or something equally as simple.
and there are other potential issues too. LCDs refresh top to bottom when oriented traditionally, and i've read that for some people, having the monitors refresh side to side is unpleasant. at the end of the day, it's good that different people have different goals and hang-ups when it comes to these sorts of things. i'd much rather see lots of diverse technologies coming from all the players involved. innovation is innovation, even when it isn't necessarily relevant to my immediate interests and goals.
Last edited:
I like that setup and would think about a stand for the speaker instead of the monitors.
LGabrielPhoto
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2006
- Messages
- 3,248
Wrong. Have you considered how ATI as ignored real 3D gaming from the very beginning? 3D gaming is Nvidia 3D Vision...I do not see ATI having anything comparable so based on the way you analyze things ATI is not interested in promising gaming features either....
I do not care for Eyefinity. Triple monitors could be nice but that I can do even with software.
When bezels are gone then things could change but the problem is, the image is going to be flat no matter how many monitors you add...after seeing REAL 3D images it is hard to go back.
In any case, it is good to have choices I guess and I have made my own and respect anyone who makes a different one, we are not all the same.
Regards
5040x1050 = 5,292,000 pixels * 60 frames = 317,520,000 pixels / second
1680x1050 = 1,764,000 pixels * 60 frames = 105,840,000 pixels / second
Per [H]'s benchmarks, Crysis: Warhead at 1920x1200 with 2xAA renders at 26.6 FPS on the 5870. That's 138,240,000 pixels / second. You going to need a lot of ATI graphics cards to run games stretched over three screens with the eye candy turned on. Eyefiniti will be a great feature... for all your two or three generation old games.
1680x1050 = 1,764,000 pixels * 60 frames = 105,840,000 pixels / second
Per [H]'s benchmarks, Crysis: Warhead at 1920x1200 with 2xAA renders at 26.6 FPS on the 5870. That's 138,240,000 pixels / second. You going to need a lot of ATI graphics cards to run games stretched over three screens with the eye candy turned on. Eyefiniti will be a great feature... for all your two or three generation old games.
flak-spammer
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2007
- Messages
- 262
Honestly I don't even see eyefinity as a useful technology. It's target is a very small portion of the population. I find it difficult enough to play some games on a 30" eventually you reach a point where bigger just makes things harder. That's just my view and of course I'd say a very small number of people have more than one monitor.
I probably won't use Eyefinity, but my next card must at least support 3 monitors and do it on a quiet mainstream card, not some double GPU beast. Since I hooked up my HDTV, I have a 3rd monitor that is just sitting idle. I really miss having more than one for computer usage.
Right now that is only ATI and unless Nvidia steps up, they are out of the running to replace my 8800GT.
Right now that is only ATI and unless Nvidia steps up, they are out of the running to replace my 8800GT.
People who are really into enveloping, large screen gaming should consider a front projector. They are rapidly coming down in price, and a 1920x1080 screen at 128" is loads better than eyefinity, and it gets frame rates that are just as high as your 24" monitor.
That said, Nvidia should still add it so that people who don't have other options can use this. As you said, it doesn't really cost them anything other than product differentiation with the Quadro line.
That said, Nvidia should still add it so that people who don't have other options can use this. As you said, it doesn't really cost them anything other than product differentiation with the Quadro line.
Ignoring the preformance aspect, a square (not 3x1 but 2x2) at 3840x2060 would look sooo much better at 128" and have no bezels.
This (I voted I don't care about it), not eventhis would sway my mind:
http://www.multimonitorinformation.com/hardwarereviews/radius-320/
Like I have stated before, therecomes a point when "bigger" is just the wrong direction.
And it's not just resolution.
+4xAA has dimishing returns.
+16xAFis...meh.
Just render the same dead worlds in hgiher res = meh to me.
3D I also consider a gimmick...maybe VR-glasses would change my mind.
I'd rather have more interactive, immersive worlds.
You know stuff like PhysX...that is the future (CUDA, OpenCL, Directcompute)....coupled with 3D VR glasses.
I run 2 x 21" CRT's at 1600x1200@120Hz on each monitor, giving me I.Q. your LCD only can have wet dreams off...LCD...lol...
He didn't mention Eyefinity
Brackle
Old Timer
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,883
He didn't mention Eyefinity
So we are in a thread that talks about Nvidia and Eyefinity....and he isnt talking about eyefinity.
Come on man, we all know he is the biggest nvidiot on these forums...you know he knocks everything ATI Does.
Thats just Prime1 HE does it on anandtech and techreport as well lol
maxbennett
n00b
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2009
- Messages
- 32
Eyefinity + 3dvision + Phsyx + no bezel monitors. one can dream
This.
Lucid hydra chip + nvidia card for 3d vision on main screen + Ati 5870 for eyefinity on surrounding two screens
please let this be poorly conveyed sarcasm.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
heh agreed
He does bring up an interesting point though...
As W7 allows multiple display drivers to be loaded, games could be coded to use both display drivers too.
Its got to be possible, just sadly unlikely.
RussianHAXOR
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
- Messages
- 5,590
I like the idea of EyeFinity, but if you look at the pricetag associated with it right now it doesnt make sense since it will cost more to get a 6x24" setup than it would for your entire top of the line computer.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 56,501
Never heard you say that about $400 EVGA motherboards?
And to put it straight, you can configure a full 3x1 Eyefinity setup for what a couple of SLI EVGA top end cards would have cost you in the past, so don't give me that bullshit argument above. You may not have the cash, but don't think there are not folks out there willing to invest in a more immersive gaming experience that does not require crazy headgear or glasses that give you headaches.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
Y 3>1?
3=1+2
With 3 monitors, you still have the same picture on the centre monitor just like a single monitor setup but the side monitor will add more immersion since you can see more. I really don't see why some people think that a single monitor setup is better than a single monitor setup with two extra monitors expanding the view.
3=1+2
With 3 monitors, you still have the same picture on the centre monitor just like a single monitor setup but the side monitor will add more immersion since you can see more. I really don't see why some people think that a single monitor setup is better than a single monitor setup with two extra monitors expanding the view.
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
that would look kind of weird if there was only 3dvision on one of the screens, lol. eyefinity is by far the superior solution for multimonitor gaming, but i guess there's always triplehead2go and softTH for nvidia or pre-5 series ati users.
now we just need integrated head tracking and motion controls and haptic feedback and holographic virtual reality and everything will be good to go, lol.
I just found out that NVIDIA already has an "eyefinity" feature...and have had it for years on it quadro cards..with bezel manegment ect...all you need to do to get that on your GeForce is to run nHancer.
So AMD's "big" thing...is not so "big"
Back on my old P166 I read about VR-googles.
I still think that will be where the metal meats the meat...3D VR googles...perfect immersion
JediFonger
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,777
$1,000 buys you 1080p front projectors now:
http://www.projectorreviews.com/optoma/hd20/index.php
it's on sale now.
http://www.projectorreviews.com/optoma/hd20/index.php
it's on sale now.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 56,501
Actually, i have.
I have time and time again said that the EVGA Classified boards were never intended for everyone. They're specifically designed for extreme overclocking and i have many times pointed people away from the classified and towards the other boards if it didn't make sense to their needs.
As for running a full 3 x 1 Eyefinity setup... as far as i can tell it will still cost you around 1500 for 3 x 24" monitors. At this point Eyefinity doesnt make much sense because of the fact that there aren't enough DisplayPort monitors on the market to drive down the price. If the monitors were cheaper we would see Eyefinity become more of an important factor in purchasing an ATi based Graphics card. But at this point, its merely a niche market option considering the narrow support for DisplayPort across the market when compared to DVI and HDMI. To be honest, Eyefinity is a great idea... but it suffers from a similar issue that nvidia's Stereoscopic 3D does, lack of support of the necessary standard in order for market-wide adoption to occur. In both cases, this makes the monitors more expensive and takes most consumers out of the running for buying one.
To be honest, i don't really understand your constant need to make an allusion to EVGA...
Oh but you did not say that about Eyefinity. You in no way made the same comparison for cost and value. Read YOUR words as I am not sure you understand them from your own comments.
The EVGA connection? Even you are smart enough to figure that out.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 56,501
I just found out that NVIDIA already has an "eyefinity" feature...and have had it for years on it quadro cards..with bezel manegment ect...all you need to do to get that on your GeForce is to run nHancer.
So AMD's "big" thing...is not so "big"
Back on my old P166 I read about VR-googles.
I still think that will be where the metal meats the meat...3D VR googles...perfect immersion
GeForce COULD have had it for years, NV just did not want to give it to your for free.
As people have said the point of EyeFinity is for a super widescreen gaming resolution, not just a larger screen. I don't want any more height than a 22-24" monitor, but twice the width would be nice to have. With a 3x1 setup you only need 1 DP monitor. Like many others I will only jump on this if they support portrait+landscape+portrait.Silus said:
And as the review points out, you can run this on one card on medium to high settings for most games, which lowers graphic detail but adds immersion. If you want higher settings and AA it will require several cards, but I think a very small number of people would invest this much into it.
Now that Nvidia will have a fully programable gpu, I would expect them to move some quadro features out to the public. Many features are locked simply to add value to their workstation cards. In order to support 3 monitors I think you would need 2 nvidia cards in SLI.
Last edited:
That would be nice. The suggested price was $16,000 in 2007, but now that there are DLP curved monitors for around $6,000, their price is probably much less.
Also I just found this 21:9 that looks promising. Too bad it's a 56" TV http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2009/01/29/philips-cinema-219-wide-widescreen-tv-hands-on/
I think a 21:9 monitor would sell pretty well.
Last edited:
pointless unless it works in a game without stupid things like fisheye and having a weird ass hud.
the performance needs to be there also.
Man ARMA 2 would rock with this is they could make it look right and could get some monitors with no bezels
the performance needs to be there also.
Man ARMA 2 would rock with this is they could make it look right and could get some monitors with no bezels
Track IR does more for ARMAII that multimonitors...and I doubt the 5870 have the power to pull off ARMA2 in "eyefinity" 3x1...whitout castrating the game to uglyness...
Actually, i have.
I have time and time again said that the EVGA Classified boards were never intended for everyone. They're specifically designed for extreme overclocking and i have many times pointed people away from the classified and towards the other boards if it didn't make sense to their needs.
As for running a full 3 x 1 Eyefinity setup... as far as i can tell it will still cost you around 1500 for 3 x 24" monitors. At this point Eyefinity doesnt make much sense because of the fact that there aren't enough DisplayPort monitors on the market to drive down the price. If the monitors were cheaper we would see Eyefinity become more of an important factor in purchasing an ATi based Graphics card. But at this point, its merely a niche market option considering the narrow support for DisplayPort across the market when compared to DVI and HDMI. To be honest, Eyefinity is a great idea... but it suffers from a similar issue that nvidia's Stereoscopic 3D does, lack of support of the necessary standard in order for market-wide adoption to occur. In both cases, this makes the monitors more expensive and takes most consumers out of the running for buying one.
To be honest, i don't really understand your constant need to make an allusion to EVGA...
I am in the process of moving in the EyeFinity direction.
I have the card: ASUS 5870
I have one Dell 2407 that I currently use.
I bought a used Dell 2408 (has Display port) on eBay for 299
I am currently looking on eBay for a second 2408 or a 2407, since I can run 1 Display port and 2 DVI.
So I invested 379 + roughly 600 and I'm GTG.........no where near 1500 dollars and no glasses needed.
RussianHAXOR
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
- Messages
- 5,590
I am in the process of moving in the EyeFinity direction.
I have the card: ASUS 5870
I have one Dell 2407 that I currently use.
I bought a used Dell 2408 (has Display port) on eBay for 299
I am currently looking on eBay for a second 2408 or a 2407, since I can run 1 Display port and 2 DVI.
So I invested 379 + roughly 600 and I'm GTG.........no where near 1500 dollars and no glasses needed.
thats 1000 dollars, still quite a bit.