Where are the 1920x1200 3D displays?

D

dparm

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
181
From what I can tell, they don't exist.

I would like my next LCD to offer 3D but the only options I see are 1080p. I'd gladly pay for 1200p or even 1600p 3D.
 
Where are the 1200p anything, man? They're dead. No 1200p TN and even among IPS 1200p is no longer a given.
 
I know, and it pisses me off. At least HP stayed with 1200p on the new ZR2440w.

I guess I could live with 1440p or 1600p 3D but those don't exist either.
 
Honestly it doesn't bother me much but if it's a deal-breaker for you just get a 22" IPS and use it in portrait mode next to your 3D screen. 3D is far more impressive than an extra 120 pixels.
 
dparm said:
From what I can tell, they don't exist.

I would like my next LCD to offer 3D but the only options I see are 1080p. I'd gladly pay for 1200p or even 1600p 3D.
Click to expand...

I think there was a thread a couple of months ago stating that dual link DVI can't handle the bandwidth requirements of 1920 x 1200 @ 120hz. I don't have a link for you though.
 
xDezor said:
I think there was a thread a couple of months ago stating that dual link DVI can't handle the bandwidth requirements of 1920 x 1200 @ 120hz. I don't have a link for you though.
Click to expand...

Display port sure can. The issue isn't bandwidth its that all LCD manufacturers are switching over to 16:9 for there entire line ups.

You are much more likely to see a 1920x1080 3D IPS panel than a 1920x1200 3D TN panel at this point.
 
The simple answer is nobody bothered to make one.

xDezor said:
I think there was a thread a couple of months ago stating that dual link DVI can't handle the bandwidth requirements of 1920 x 1200 @ 120hz.
Click to expand...
It can.
 
Lengradde said:
Why not just want...more vertical pixels? Would you not be happy with 3840x2160, even though that's 16:9?
Click to expand...


Yes, I just don't like the idea of going DOWN in pixels.

Any suggestions on where to go and try out the 3D thing? I'd like to sample it with a game or two before committing to this and later regretting it.
 
whatever, then manufacturers could just use display port for input, it has enough bandwith.

but no, they'll rather use 16:9 instead of 16:10 to save 10% for their panel.
 
dparm said:
Yes, I just don't like the idea of going DOWN in pixels.

Any suggestions on where to go and try out the 3D thing? I'd like to sample it with a game or two before committing to this and later regretting it.
Click to expand...
Buy it, pay the 15% restocking fee and return it. Or, I hear they're releasing Titanic 3D in theaters again.

The only place I ever saw it on display was at microcenter, but they took it down a couple of years ago. They were using 16:10 monitors too! ;)

ToastyX said:
It can.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah? Prove it! (I kid, I kid)
 
Torr Samaho said:
whatever, then manufacturers could just use display port for input, it has enough bandwith.

but no, they'll rather use 16:9 instead of 16:10 to save 10% for their panel.
Click to expand...

Well it is more than that. We're still talking a LOT of bandwidth and processing power and since these 1200P would only have use in PC 3D gaming which isn't a huge market, well there has to be some return here and right now I don't think it's there, as much as I like 3D gaming.
 
Resolution: 1920x1200@120Hz
  • Bandwidth: 9.84 Gbit (With Needed Overhead) or 276.48 MHz.

HDMI
  • v1.0/1.1/1.2 = 4.95 Gbit (165 MHz)
  • v1.3/1.4/1.4a = 10.2 Gbit (340 MHz)
DVI-D Dual Link
  • 9.9 Gbit (330 MHz)
DisplayPort
  • v1.0/1.1 = 10.8 Gbit (360 MHz)
  • v1.2 = 21.6 Gbit (720 MHz)

It's possible as overhead is taken account for. In fact you could include all of these inputs if you wanted to and still keep operation at max resolution. As far as HDMI goes, no one tends to use the full spec and it would need to be 1.3 or higher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top