Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Triple Monitor Solutions From AMD, Nvidia Face Off

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the more-pixels-than-you-can-shake-a-polygon-at dept.

AMD 75

New submitter Dputiger writes "Nvidia's latest GTX Titan puts a renewed focus on multi-monitor gaming, but how does it compare against other cards at half the price? 'The games we tested fall into two general camps. Arkham City, DiRT 3, and Serious Sam: BFE are all absolutely playable on the GTX 680 or 7970 in a single-card configuration, even with detail settings turned all the way up. Shogun 2, Metro 2033, and Crysis 3 aren’t. In Shogun 2 and Metro 2033, however, the Titan maintains a playable frame rate at High Detail when the other two cards are stumbling and stuttering. Crysis 3 was the one exception — in that game, all three cards remained playable at High Detail, and dropped below that mark once we increased to Very High Detail and added 4x SMAA.' Field of view adjustments, the impact of bezels, and single-card performance at multiple detail levels are all covered, as is the price of multi-screen setups."

cancel ×

75 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ya know (1)

BKX (5066) | about a year and a half ago | (#43088733)

I've had a triple monitor setup for years, but I've never actually gamed on it. This article makes me want to give it a shot. Unfortunately, my machine is kind of low powered (Core 2 Duo E6???, Radeon 5770) for the more recent games that could actually use triple monitors, so maybe not. And, I hate most recent games. I wonder how Defense Grid would look on three.

Re:Ya know (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year and a half ago | (#43088807)

I have the 30" center and a 19" on each side, but I've only ever gamed on the middle monitor. I don't think I've ever even played a game that was capable of multi-monitor. And, like you, I have an older setup.

Re:Ya know (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089713)

any recommendations from the hive mind on how to minimize the bezel effects? for example, monitor recommendations with especially small bezels? other thorughts?

Re:Ya know (1)

LiSrt (742904) | about a year and a half ago | (#43090581)

Hacksaw?

Depending on the model, it might just be plastic in that area.

Re:Ya know (1)

DoctorBonzo (2646833) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091543)

Check the {Nvidia,Ati} control panel. There's probably a way to set the screen window rectangles to overlap...

Re:Ya know (1)

quacking duck (607555) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092405)

My GTX670 has a Surround feature with a bezel correction option which lets you "hide" part of the merged desktop behind the bezels, e.g. when you move your cursor between screens it'll look like it's going "behind" the bezel instead of jumping the gap between displays. Works best with monitors with small bezels to begin with, of course.

Re:Ya know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092547)

I have 3 24" BenQ 3D monitors running at 5760x1080 for playing games (using two GTX 670 cards in SLI). There is software that can create custom resolutions in order to reduce/minimize the bezel effects but I often find it not worth running at odd resolutions. As you are fixated on the centre screen, your brain kind of melds the other two into view so you dont even notice any sort of issues with the side monitors even though it may be a bit out.

The other solutions are: 1) find monitors with the slimmest bezels possible, 2) hack off the side of each connecting monitor!

Re:Ya know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43112119)

open the cases and bond a VESA mount to the back of each bare panel. Use ones with external power adapters so you don't have mains voltages to worry about. LED backlights eliminate the other high-voltage component.

Re:Ya know (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092265)

I have the 30" center and a 19" on each side, but I've only ever gamed on the middle monitor. I don't think I've ever even played a game that was capable of multi-monitor. And, like you, I have an older setup.

I've also got a 30" center, but two 22" side monitors. I only game on the 30". If you've got the nvidia surround setup the games don't need to be capable, The drivers tell the OS that you really have one monitor with an extremely wide resolution. It won't work right (or at all?) with different resolutions on the three monitors. There are a few games that actually do support multi monitor (MS Flight Simulator) but they are few and far between.

Re:Ya know (1)

jon3k (691256) | about a year and a half ago | (#43093237)

Is this a portrait-landscape-portrait setup? Got any pictures to share? I'm considering going from 2x24 to some type of 3x setup in PLP.

Re:Ya know (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year and a half ago | (#43095237)

Yes, Portrait/landscape/portrait. No pics. I ran across someone selling a 30" for cheap (he is a Chinese immigrant and it was a China-only version of a Chinese maker I've never heard of, so he was having trouble selling it, so it was cheap, but same 30" LG IPS screen as most 30" displays), and had a 19" 1200x1600 already, so grabbed another. Someone else recommended a 22" because they don't cost much more, but the 19" matches the size of the 30" more closely, so they feel like a single wide monitor when you are sitting there, rather than having a larger monitor on the side. But if I had documents up on the sides for work, I might appreciate the real estate. But if I did it again, the 30" center, and a 19" on each side is what I'd do. Thankfully, that's what I have.

Re:Ya know (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089057)

I've wondered for a few years why they didn't make multi-monitor games. But not like in the linked article, with perfect picture across three whole screens.

For FPS, have the central monitor like normal, high res, bullseye on target/in center, and so on. Have the side monitors blurry, like what your normal peripheral vision would be. You would see that something is there, but you would have to shift your focus to see it clearly. You would know soon enough what every blurry blob is in a game, and what is just scenery.

They could also move the on-screen controls, life indicators, radar-scan, etc onto the side monitors, so the main one is uncluttered.

For the side scrollers or more scenic games, I don't think this would add to the game experience much, since it may reveal too much, and take the fun surprise factor out of playing. Or make the designer just add that much more garbage to challange you, since you see it for longer as you move.

Re:Ya know (1)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089173)

My problem is that many games look warped when playing on multiple monitors.

I really wanted to get my money's worth when Skyrim came out, but it won't let you set the vertical and horizontal field of view separately.
What you end up with is the center monitor looks fine, while the side monitors are stretched and warped.

Another problem* is I prefer to have my monitors set at a slight angle, that way I can turn my head slightly and be looking straight at them. I want peripheral vision not one big monitor with an aspect ratio of 48:9.

* The first problem persists, even if the monitors are set at no angle.

Re:Ya know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092463)

To correct for it, you have to place your eyeballs far enough from the monitor that the angle from the leftmost monitor edge to your eyes to the rightmost monitor edge is equal to the game's FOV setting. Then you can only look around by rotating your eyeballs and holding your head perfectly still. It's an awful system, and it makes multi-monitor gaming stupid and pointless. It looks so bad that I can't believe AMD actually advertises it as a feature.

They need to build some sort of framework that lets developers render multiple viewports into the same scene with very little extra work. The world is full of people incorrectly arcing their monitors and playing awful looking games. It's about time someone fixed this mess.

Re:Ya know (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089281)

I've got a very similar set up to you actually. Also never really gamed on it.

Personally I think games are absolutely retarded on 3 monitors. Every single screenshot was warped horribly which means you are basically going to use it as one monitor with some eye candy for your peripheral vision rather than actually looking around the place.

Now simulators is where three monitors is awesome.....

Re:Ya know (1)

TheRealQuestor (1750940) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089369)

Like you I have had a triple monitor setup for years, back when you needed at LEAST 2 video cards to push them. I "have" done some eyefinity gaming on them but find that, even though I never get sea or motion sickness in RL, playing on all 3 makes me kind of ill after a while. It's like the peripheral vision part is not playing well with my brain or something. Plus my primary monitor is a 27" which fills up my line of vision quite well on it's own, so the added fluff with the 2 side monitors just isn't worth the extra strain on my aging hd 7990 now.

Re:Ya know (1)

Molochi (555357) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089519)

I've got an old work system that supports three monitors with a GF9400GT and the intel onboard (G41) port. Also had an ancient Athlon 1.2GHz system that supported three monitors with a GF2MX and a Voodoo Banshee PCI card. In a galaxy long ago we set up a UT99 "system" that ran 4 monitors so you could see behind you. That was pretty awesome. I'm glad that today (13 years later) the kids can experience it.

Re:Ya know (1)

Zencyde (850968) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089677)

I got a triple monitor setup back when AMD first announced Eyefinity. I recommend gaming on it, if you'd like compatibility information go to www.wsgf.org and check the game compatibility list. Here's the DR for Defense Grid: http://www.wsgf.org/dr/defense-grid-awakening [wsgf.org] Also, after switching between protrait and landscape modes repeatedly, with 3x1Portrait coming out to almost 16:9, I finally decided to swap out to a 5x1P setup. Really digging it and it makes anything list-oriented, such as terminal, quite awesome. Though I'll admit straight up, 5 monitors is past the realm of usability and well into the realm of gaming. You're not going to be using more than 4 monitors efficiently.

Re:Ya know (1)

jonadab (583620) | about a year and a half ago | (#43120751)

> I've had a triple monitor setup for years,
> but I've never actually gamed on it.

I game on my dual-monitor setup all the time.

I put the terminal window with NetHack on the first monitor, and a web browser window for reference material (lists of armor weights or potion prices or whatever I need to check at the moment) on the second monitor.

What? What do you mean, that's not the kind of gaming you're talking about? You can't fool me. This is Slashdot. Everyone here plays NetHack. Everyone knows that.

Why triple monitor gaming? (1)

Khyber (864651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43088871)

I mean, obviously I would if I COULD, but really I'd see myself using one monitor for gaming, another monitor for a movie, and the other for live streaming porn!

Re:Why triple monitor gaming? (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089591)

I don't know about AMD but nvidia allows the addition of a non-surround 4th monitor for your porn addiction. I haven't tried it because I don't have the space for another monitor.

Dangit. Now I want to try it.

Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43088939)

I no longer lust after multi-monitor setups since I use the simulator less. A shooter in 3 screens? Well chances are you want to point your gun where you're looking at all times. But in a flight sim, looking in a different direction to where you're pointed makes a whole lot more sense.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

Kell Bengal (711123) | about a year and a half ago | (#43088981)

"Peripheral vision."

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

Khyber (864651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089009)

They already make HD wrap-around screens for that.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092613)

Wrap-around is incorrect for all modern FPS games. The crummy nature of the rendered view means that, for a correct perspective, your monitors must all be in the same plane, and your face should be so close to the monitors that it forms an angle with the outside edges of your setup equal to the FOV of your game.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

Khyber (864651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092867)

You must not actually work with any flight sims or real FPS games with independent cameras for each section of the FOV. These work just fine. And no, you don't have to sit right up against the screen. You just need a monitor wide enough.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43094617)

I didn't mention flight sims, just modern FPS. Which modern FPS uses independent views for periphery monitors? That isn't a bluff-calling question, I genuinely want to know, and will buy the crap out out if it as soon as possible.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

Khyber (864651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43096177)

Modern? None. Doom and Quake have modifications that allow for it, as I think Doom 3.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

SpzToid (869795) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089311)

I couldn't agree more. Years ago, I'd have killed for what is possible to buy today, just for flight sims, especially MS Flight sim, the only reason to buy Windows AFAIK. Now investing in hardware just to run MS Flight sim seems like a hopeless 'requirement' when spec'ing hardware.

For everything else, especially actual work stuff, 2x 27" monitors or less seems much more realistic. Not to mention K.I.S.S. principles being best, especially if the rig does double-duty as an actual workstation.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089787)

Thirteen plus years ago you could do it with a couple of Matrox cards.

Re:Who cares since they cancelled MS Flight Sim (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089615)

"Why jerk my neck around like a goon when Tyranno-Vision decides what I should look at?"

Well, that's not an apples to apples comparison but peripheral vision covers it. In a racing game, I can see who's moving up on my side. In a shooter, it's like taking off blinders. Same reasons you like it for flight simulators.

Still a flat viewing plane (5, Interesting)

White Flame (1074973) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089191)

All this does is increase the viewing angle of a flat display. There is no actual true wraparound, where you can look to the side and see things off to your side*. The wider it is, the more stretched the image, and if you angle the side monitors toward you, the in-game angles are all misaligned.

Have we forgotten Doom and MS Flight Sim as to how to actually do multi-monitor properly? Each display should be rendered from a different angle, allowing real viewing in multiple directions, giving you selected projections of an actual sphere of vision.

* = Due to the nature of 3rd person cameras there's a bit of this in some of those scenarios, but even that partial effect is completely lost in things like driving games and any 1st person camera perspectives.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43089409)

Some racing simulators still manage proper multiple monitors. The catch is the emphasis on "simulator" instead of "game"

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (1)

Megor1 (621918) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089561)

You angle your side monitors to avoid some of that.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | about a year and a half ago | (#43090267)

I like to angle mine 120 degrees.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092643)

Away from you?

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43097949)

This gives incorrect results, though. The render is only correct when viewed on a flat plane. You have to re-render for the side monitors if you decide to angle them, as grandparent mentioned.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43089837)

Star Citizen has explicitly said that the multiple monitors at multiple angles is how they want the game to function (it was one of their stretch goals during the crowd funding portion of the game financing)

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (1)

complete loony (663508) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089979)

It's obvious that the graphics driver is assuming that your panels are arranged on a flat plane, and that your eyes are some distance directly in-front of the center display.

Each screen really needs to be rendered from the point of view of a separate camera based on their actual orientation. This could probably be achieved using head tracking relative to each screen, then each perspective can be rendered correctly and doesn't need to be manually calibrated. Like this 5 year old [youtube.com] demo.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (1)

del_diablo (1747634) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091029)

Lets not forget that it increases the angle of view, but it uses a broken view scaling by default. Extended view is useful, but not if the scaling gode is broken and botched, and there exists way to get even 200+ degree FoV with the right viewport code. A rather good example video, notice how the viewport is broken at 170 and 180 degrees with the default viewport code. [youtu.be]
So in this age of next generation gaming, we will get Quake like viewport code, which is broken over 120 degrees, and a FoV of 30-60 degrees.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092763)

I wouldn't say it's broken. It's a perfectly good implementation of a projection that's mathematically incapable of reaching 180 degrees (you would need a screen with an infinite ratio of width to height). The project in the video seems to be based on Fisheye Quake, which has been around for a while, but I'm thrilled to see someone is still working on it. But it doesn't really use a "fixed" projection, it cuts the normal crummy projection into pieces and remaps the pieces onto a sphere around the user. Some GPU manufacturer or engine company needs to make multiple viewports the new normal to end the suffering.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (1)

White Flame (1074973) | about a year and a half ago | (#43099237)

That's a really interesting video, and a really cool idea for a single-monitor display! It doesn't look like those sorts of >180 fisheye projections would even take that much to get used to, but still would take a bit of retraining to gain a sense of where you are & what's around you.

However, a proper multimonitor solution doesn't even need to go that far; something similar to the last one (cubic), where each monitor has its own flat but independent viewing plane, would suffice for taking proper advantage of the multiple displays. Plus, it would still take full use of the existing flat perspective triangle rasterizers of GPUs.

Re:Still a flat viewing plane (2)

mungewell (149275) | about a year and a half ago | (#43094603)

The key to good multi-monitor support is render each screen properly, and not just treat them as a super-wide planar monitor. Each screen should be treated as a pane of glass looking into the virtual world behind.

This forum thread does a good job of explaining how this can work:
http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/showthread.php/147425-Projection-to-a-non-perpendicular-view-plane [opengl.org]

Generally the real benefit is only seen with 1st person views.

Bought 3 for iRacing, but great for others, too (1)

_Shorty-dammit (555739) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089223)

I bought three monitors a couple years ago for iRacing, as it is almost a requirement in that sim for a good view. (They even have a built-in FOV calculator to give you a 1:1 life-size view.) I wouldn't want to race without it. I had not given any thought at all to how it would be in anything else, but I've found it's quite nice to have in all kinds of games. I've got an older system, an AMD Phenom II running at 3.8 GHz and a pair of GTX 480 cards in SLI, and for most things it is fast enough, but not everything. I'd definitely like to upgrade to one of the recent Intel CPUs and perhaps 680 cards.

I think a big bottleneck with triple screens is how much RAM they put on the video cards. It doesn't seem to be as much of an issue with single screen setups, but once you triple the resolution you require that much more for the framebuffer data, and that obviously takes away from storage for all the other data. It definitely takes its toll. Not to mention the horsepower required to crunch all the extra pixels. It is definitely worth it, in my opinion.

PowerColor great for multi-monitor gaming (1)

detain (687995) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089271)

PowerColor makes video cards based on Radeon chipsets that support 3+ monitors and have been making them for a long time. They weren't really mentioned in the article but worth looking into.

Re:PowerColor great for multi-monitor gaming (1)

mactard (1223412) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089433)

All higher end GPUs have at least 3 outputs on them now. You don't need a special card anymore. My low-end Nvidia GTX 660 has two DVI, one DisplayPort and one HDMI.

Re:PowerColor great for multi-monitor gaming (1)

toddestan (632714) | about a year and a half ago | (#43100915)

Just because the card has the physical ports doesn't mean it can drive all the ports at once. My ATI 67xx has the same configuration as yours, but it's pick any two, or enable Eyefinity and with the right monitor (or Displayport adapter) you can use the DisplayPort plus any other two for three total monitors which is the configuration I use.

4K single monitor gaming displays not ready yet (1)

fragMasterFlash (989911) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089345)

It seems these GPUs can also support 4K single monitor gaming [brightsideofnews.com] quite nicely even if gaming quality 4K displays aren't quite ready for prime time yet.

how do these work in Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43089375)

especially with free drivers?

I don't spend much time gameing, but at work I have three monitors, all rotated 90 degrees (spreadsheets are wide, everything else is tall)

But even with a fairly beefy (1G) radeon card I find the performance for soing simple things like scrolling text in a tall xterm is poor.

Re:how do these work in Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092585)

I'd like to know the same thing. I imagine not so good. I have three monitors setup on two nVidia cards using the nouveau drivers. And even for office work I notice slowness.

Best monitor setup (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43089495)

Side note, apparently the best monitor setup is 3 x 30" portrait mode (all three monitors on their side).

Source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/multiscreen_madness_we_test_four_incredible_display_setups

It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

cstec (521534) | about a year and a half ago | (#43089575)

I was a pioneer/advocate/addict of multimonitor gaming. To the point where back in the day when I got a deal on 22" Nokia high-res CRTs I bought three. I had my second on the desk and was going back for the third when I looked back and realized my desk was buckling under the weight of just two! After reinforcing the desk, XP era, it became obvious that multimonitor gaming was broken, because the resolution wasn't there to support it. What's the point of running 3 monitors if it's not 3 TIMES your normal res, which at 1920x1200, took quite a while to arrive. So I shelved it for a while.

Eventually, tech caught up and it struck me about 6 months back that I had the parts lying around to 5760x1200 the 24's and call it good. So I bought the adapter for #3, hooked it all up and prepared to rejoice. And there wasn't much rejoicing. Games just don't work.

What triple screen gaming even means is up for debate, but fundamentally, I think we all expect the extra screens to be more views on reality. More FOV, more of what we really see from our eyes in real life - wrap around video. Well, except it's NOT just FOV. Games need to be designed for it, and they're not.

I spent days running EVERY title I could. Widescreengaming.net is a huge help for this. But in the end, the views in everything from Quake to Rage are unbearably broken. The best results by far were from Dungeons & Dragons Online, which looked almost good enough to keep, but Unreal Engine titles, ID engine titles, everything else - nothing worked without horrible distortion. At last I fired up Civ IV, thinking isometric viewing at least would work; not a chance, instead of seeing the world (wrapped!) in glorious high-res, I got a screen where the men in cities 75% were as tall as the screen, and a small fraction of the world was displayed!

DDO actually was pretty hot, but frankly the only truly multimonitor title may be Flight Simulator. And that's almost cheating - they just have more than one screen to display. But Eyefinity et al is DOA if there aren't titles that support it. Otherwise it's about as effective as piling all your speakers on top of each other and playing Master & Commander in 5.1. Enjoy the mud.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

peragrin (659227) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091043)

Actually multimontior support is generally broken across most applications not just games.

Run a full screen flash video on one and see what happens when you click your mouse on one of the other ones.

Most apps that run in full screen break under multi-montor setups. they just can't be used that way.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092835)

Run a full screen flash video on one and see what happens when you click your mouse on one of the other ones.

Step 1, install Office 97

Step 2, launch any app and drag it to the second display on an XP machine

Step 3, laugh as it is revealed that Microsoft can't develop working software for their own OS, when the pop-up menus pop-up on the primary display.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

peragrin (659227) | about a year and a half ago | (#43099187)

um office 97 is 16 years out of date

at least use

run iTunes, play anything full screen, video, visualizer, etc watch all other monitors fade

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

DKlineburg (1074921) | about a year and a half ago | (#43130095)

It isn't just 97. At work I have 3 monitor setup. Office 2010. I have an excel spreadsheet with forms written in VBA code. It is any guess which monitor it will pop up, under, over around. It has no relation to which monitor is 1, which the spreadsheet is on, if the spreadsheet is on two, maximized (max goes to just one). So yeah, it is broken.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

peragrin (659227) | about a year and a half ago | (#43143273)

Office 2010 opens on the monitor and size it was when last opened. I do it all the time with remote desktop, bouncing between one and two monitor setups.

However that said. it takes registry hacks to break Office 2010 out of the archaic every window must open inside of the master window mentality. It really sucks trying to run two spread sheets side by side on two different monitors and still be able to see background apps.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

DKlineburg (1074921) | about a year and a half ago | (#43187771)

I'm talking about forms loading when excel is all ready open.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43091687)

You're running a 5760x1200 display and you expect the Quake series (last of which was 2005) to run properly? Sounds like a metric assload of wishful thinking to me.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092813)

Neither does Fallout. Neither does Skyrim. Neither does Bioshock. Nothing looks good in super-widescreen. It's a garbage setup.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43096227)

In my opinion, Widescreengaming.net is hurting widescreen gaming. They list titles as "compatible", and cheer for any engine that's willing to smear its contents horrifically across multiple screens, when they should be advocating for multi-view engines, and giving low marks to anything that can't produce a 180-degree FOV.

Re:It doesn't work. No game support. (1)

glittermage (650813) | about a year and a half ago | (#43096973)

I have both Eyefinity and Surround setups, both running at 5760 x 1080 resolution, using triple monitor setup. A few games don't support mulit-monitor (Unreal 3 Engine based games) but others (Source // Valve games), Battlefield franchise, Crytek engines (Crysis), Civ 5, Dirt 3, Trackmania Canyons, EuroTruck Simulator 2, Take on Helicopters, Defense Grid, Assassin's Creed franchise, etc do. More and more of my games are supporting Eyefinity/Surround setups. When a game doesn't support the Eyefinity / Surround I simply right click / disable the multi-monitor before playing the game (or simply launch game and outside monitors go dark).

As long as I have the financial means I will be using 3 or more monitor setups.

They call 30fps playable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43089657)

Mmmm, i'd much rather have increased fps than more pixels...
Personally, 30fps is not playable , it's jerky and horrible.

Re:They call 30fps playable? (1)

halltk1983 (855209) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092239)

I assume you don't watch movies either, for the same reason? They're only 24 fps.

Re:They call 30fps playable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43092915)

They're not interactive. It makes a huge difference. I was reading an article the other day (probably linked from here) about the human sensitivity to head-motion making head-mounted VR displays unpleasant, even at 120hz, and about ways to make sure the eyes received a view less than 20ms from what they expected (by applying transformations to the z-inclusive framebuffer just before output, or even applying progressive transforms while "racing the beam"). The human eye is far more sensitive than mot people give it credit for, but it matters more and more the more interactive things get.

Re:They call 30fps playable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43095365)

Not even close to the same thing...
In many a game i have found an enemy moving fast enough that while trying to place a crosshair on it at low frame rates (40 or less) it is virtually impossible without overshooting the target or missing a lot.
In games with above 80 frames a second i find i can put my crosshair on an enemy and track it without too much trouble even at high speeds, over 100 frames a second and it becomes trivial.

Swapping screen configuration easily (1)

Brulath (2765381) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091005)

NVIDIA Surround and AMD Eyefinity are both fairly clumsy technologies; both approaches merge two or more physical screens into one logical screen. Whilst active the spanned mode results in oddities like a stretched task bar, the inability to properly borderless maximise windows to one monitor only, and things such as full-screen movies which would usually fit on one monitor with black bars above/below will instead stretch across the three and look terrible.

The best approach is to get 3D software to support three screens without crutches like Eyefinity. I've seen it with some mild success in Supreme Commander 2 and OpenSceneGraph, but it looks like it'll be down to graphics API and game developers to support multi-monitors properly. Given the only groups of people that seem to be really interested in multi-monitor solutions are the simulation crew (driving or otherwise), it doesn't seem like the available support is going to improve any time soon.

Re:Swapping screen configuration easily (1)

quacking duck (607555) | about a year and a half ago | (#43092573)

NVIDIA Surround and AMD Eyefinity are both fairly clumsy technologies; both approaches merge two or more physical screens into one logical screen. Whilst active the spanned mode results in oddities like a stretched task bar, the inability to properly borderless maximise windows to one monitor only, and things such as full-screen movies which would usually fit on one monitor with black bars above/below will instead stretch across the three and look terrible.

When Surround/Eyefinity is active and all three screens act as a single desktop, I have to ask... why *wouldn't* you expect a stretched task bar and maximized windows that span all three screens? The software is tricking the OS into believing that's the size of the desktop, so that's what it will size things to.

When you don't need Surround/EF, turn it off, and the OS should recognize three different monitors again.

(Oddly enough, on my GTX670 right now I have a mix of Surround/normal behaviour. Even when I turn Surround on for X-Plane, the task bar is on centre screen only but can't be hidden, and Firefox opens and maximizes to a single screen. I haven't been bothered enough to try resolving the inconsistencies...)

Re:Swapping screen configuration easily (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43096671)

In windows 7, with Eyefinity at least, you use the window-p to switch easily between 3 displays and the monstrous 1 display. Eyefinity takes over Duplicate and Extend is the 3 separate displays.

Still won't run on X11 properly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43091463)

Give it until 2023 for the support to arrive.

Discount T-Shirt,belt,hat,sunglasses sale (-1, Troll)

rundsaiw214 (2858485) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091647)

The website wholesale and retail for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat,glasses and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the price is competitive, after the payment, can ship within short time. the goods are shipping by air express, such as EMS,DHL,the shipping time is in 5-7 business days ! YOU MUST NOT MISS IT http://www.sport3trade.net/ [sport3trade.net] Discount jordan shoes $35, Air max shoes $35, Nike/shox $35, handbags $36, Sunglasses $16, New era cap $12, wallet $19, belt $18, jewelry $15, T-shirts $20, DG Jeans $36, (NFL MLB NBA NHL) jerseys $25, http://www.sport3trade.net/ [sport3trade.net]

I run three monitors. (1)

Westwood0720 (2688917) | about a year and a half ago | (#43091971)

I'm running three monitors. I play EVE Online and BF3 mainly. The downside to my setup is that I have two flatscreens and an old CRT. I use the CRT for movies, a 24" for my browser, and a 27" as my gaming screen. I tried setting up EVE on two monitors and I hated it. I couldn't imagine playing an FPS with it. Too much area to cover with your eye. I simply like to view my screen without having to turn my head. Having my browser, PC Stats / Movie, and my game in each in their own dedicated screen is awesome.

Striving to be #1 in a 3rd rate market. (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year and a half ago | (#43093205)

PC's are running behind mobile and tablets these days so all AMD and nVidia are doing is trying to be king of #3. Considering how little interest there is for multi-monitor gaming, this is even a feeble contest.

This just in.. (1)

tech.kyle (2800087) | about a year and a half ago | (#43094251)

A $1000 video card is a little bit better at playing games than a $400 video card? Blasphemy! Oh, my fragile little world is crumbling before my very eyes.

Discount Nike shox shoes,Air max shoes sale (1)

xiuchuni (2861613) | about a year and a half ago | (#43128949)

The website wholesale and retail for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat,glasses and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the price is competitive, after the payment, can ship within short time. the goods are shipping by air express, such as EMS,DHL,the shipping time is in 5-7 business days ! YOU MUST NOT MISS IT http://www.sport3trade.net/ [sport3trade.net] Discount jordan shoes $35, Air max shoes $35, Nike/shox $35, handbags $36, Sunglasses $16, New era cap $12, wallet $19, belt $18, jewelry $15, T-shirts $20, DG Jeans $36, (NFL MLB NBA NHL) jerseys $25, http://www.sport3trade.net/ [sport3trade.net]
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>