Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

3D Vision Ready 2560x1600?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 26, 2009 1:43:40 PM

Hi all

I want to kick off a discussion about the absence of a 2560x1600 "Nvidia 3D Vision Ready" monitor on the market.

Resolution
========
As the owner of a Dell 30" 2560x1600 (and I'm sure other owners will agree) I don't want to go back to a lower resolution or screen size. 1080 "HD" may be high res from a couch 2 meters away, but at desktop distances of 50 to 60cm the higher pixel density offered by 2560x1600 is certainly noticable and much appreciated.

3D Vision Ready
============
Nivdia is pushing 3D and publishes a list of compatible displays on its website at http://www.nvidia.com/object/GeForce_3D_Vision_Requirem... but any of these displays would be a big step down in resolution.

Does anybody know whether Dell might be considering a 3D Vision compatable upgrade to their 30" 3008WFP?

Thanks

PS this forum has a very arbitrary list of "subsections" from which I have to select one in order to post. So I'm selecting Nvidia.

More about : vision ready 2560x1600

May 26, 2009 2:06:31 PM

I doubt it, 3D needs 120hz to work properly and upping to 120hz is a lot higher power usage on a 30" display which already uses 130w.
May 26, 2009 2:32:03 PM

Forget high power usage...

You'd have to run at 120 FPS to get smooth gameplay which is not going to be possible on a few games, and going to require Quad SLI or Tri 285's on a lot of other games.

Personally I'd be happy with a 1920x1200 which I could use for 3D gaming AND as my secondary monitor.
Related resources
May 26, 2009 2:39:09 PM

Hmm, the Mitsubishi's already have 3D on the much larger displays, just lower res.

The processing power will come.
August 18, 2009 2:46:08 PM

cokenbeer said:
Forget high power usage...

You'd have to run at 120 FPS to get smooth gameplay which is not going to be possible on a few games, and going to require Quad SLI or Tri 285's on a lot of other games.

Personally I'd be happy with a 1920x1200 which I could use for 3D gaming AND as my secondary monitor.


Hi, for just to clarify:

You don't need to get 120 frames per second from the game or 3D application, just 120 Hz refresh rate (actually just more than 100 Hz for some region) to be able to have an acceptable 3D sensation (and which will not give you headaches).

Of coarse if the game can output 120 fps, actually it will mean 60 fps of unique stereoscopic assembled images that the 3D Ready monitor will display it at 120 Hz horizontal refresh rate.
Actually besides of just assembling two images from different angles that forms, for example, 60 raw (?) stereoscopic frames per second; I think that the 3D Vision driver will do more altering to the outputs of the game and send some embedded signatures matching the refresh rate via IR signals to the active goggles that will react upon that. And due to that, not just some monitors that are just interpolating the input refresh rate to high refresh rates to give more than 100 Hz, but only the monitors that won't break that synchronization delivering the "untouched" input signals are 3D Ready.

So you don't have to get 120 fps to be able to use nVidia 3D Vision enabled stereoscopic; but of coarse everyone will agree that with the more fps you will get the more smoother gameplay you will receive.

Actually if you can get a non-active but just anaglyph (red/cyan) glasses from nVidia for the 3D Vision Discover; you can get a sneak peek (with 3D Vision Discover, there isn't a need of 120 Hz monitor; but you will not have the fully same sensation as 3D Vision) until more 3D Ready monitors came out and then you can fully immerse in this re-engineered and amazing 3d sensation.
February 8, 2010 9:23:57 PM

120Hz is not supported at that resolution by any industry standard protocols in use.
2560x1600x32@60Hz is the maximum speed for a dual-link DVI or HDMI cable. This is the same amount of data as 1920x1080x32@120Hz (~8Gb/s).

New cables and/or protocols would be needed to support 1600p/120 displays.
February 10, 2010 7:04:46 PM

Ant Like you said. If you would like a 30" Plus Monitor with 3D, your best bet is to wait, Sony and a bunch of other manufacturers are releasing there 3D solutions soon, And Bravia's new engine with 3D, i doubt anything higher than 2560x1600 because thats no longer 1080P but than a 1600i/p solution, and for that its going to take some time maybe your gonna have to wait until the SHD comes out with resolutions like 7680x4320 with 3D, but like mctom said its not a standard have you tried 240Hz, that might have a higher res?
May 11, 2010 8:56:19 PM

MrComputerTecho said:
Ant Like you said. If you would like a 30" Plus Monitor with 3D, your best bet is to wait, Sony and a bunch of other manufacturers are releasing there 3D solutions soon, And Bravia's new engine with 3D, i doubt anything higher than 2560x1600 because thats no longer 1080P but than a 1600i/p solution, and for that its going to take some time maybe your gonna have to wait until the SHD comes out with resolutions like 7680x4320 with 3D, but like mctom said its not a standard have you tried 240Hz, that might have a higher res?



I think your confused i had to read what you said a few times the refresh rate has nothing to do with the size of the pixel or the size of the screen... a pixel is a pixel so the refresh rate means nothing besides the how clear moving images are... so why would trying a 240hz TV make any difference? If you want a extreme DEF TV or MONT> you just have to wait a few years allow the 3d to get into peoples homes and what movies can you name that even have 3d... they dont have any and if you need to check Nvidias web site they tell you there....

Sorry guys but they are far from making this happen I know i almost spent $3,000 getting set up for it now im just back to PC games and having fun with it
May 11, 2010 9:03:44 PM

On my own note about why there is a absence of higher than 1080p for 3D, Well i feel like were moving to fast, they havent made any movies or anything normal people want so if we use history you all know for it to take off EVERYONE has to buy one not just us... Also the media for TV is barely Peaking 1080p why would they want antyhing higher if the news is only in 1080i?? Id give it ALOT of time... But its really gay i know but i dont see why they even make mont. anymore have you guys tried playing on a DLP anything???... I have a 1080p HD20 projector and WOW not the same thing as my 40" toshiba or my 24" AW Mont.

the high rez is cool looking but the IN YO FACE 300" screen is insanely scary when playing DOOM or AVP
GO DLP

DLP is the fastest graphics chip in the world read up on the LaserVue TV from MItsu..
May 11, 2010 9:08:22 PM

I don't think the op is really checking back 9 months later to see if he got a reply.
Anonymous
August 16, 2010 5:03:12 AM

1080p vs. 2560 x 1600?
Ok. I have been so over whelmed with all this tech stuff. Everyone has been pushing the "Full HD" bull as the catch phrase for new "HD World" With the limited knowledge I have I have been able to understand the main stream methods of audio and video interface. The question I have for all of you is should I just wait to upgrade my systems until 1600p and DisplayPort are main stream (Guessing they'll call it that.) From what I've learned the next highest resolution step is at 2560 x 1600, but with the little research I've done I've found a shockingly low Contrast ratio for these displays compared for the new 500,000:1 Samsung has just released. The new "1600p" would most likely use the DisplayPort as the main way of transfering HD picture to your TV. With this DisplayPort it offers a much faster transfer rate and offers a color depth of 16 Bits per connector, which would seem to make HDMI rather obsolete.

* 3 years ago

Additional Details
Am I completely wrong to think that with this somewhat unknown technology out there, all of us are going to take the betamax and HD DVD way with the (1080p TVs and HDMI)

3 years ago
"They would just be screwing over anyone who bought a 1080p tv if they just go and make 1600p tv's in the next few years."

Well, that's one of the major fears I have. 1600p with DisplayPort is out now and will hit main stream this year.

3 years ago
Anonymous
August 16, 2010 5:08:49 AM

Question what about the current Radeon HD 5970 - witch supports 1600p.

2) is it better then the Nvidia latest card. - for 3D.

August 16, 2010 5:12:51 AM

Quote:
1080p vs. 2560 x 1600?
Ok. I have been so over whelmed with all this tech stuff. Everyone has been pushing the "Full HD" bull as the catch phrase for new "HD World" With the limited knowledge I have I have been able to understand the main stream methods of audio and video interface. The question I have for all of you is should I just wait to upgrade my systems until 1600p and DisplayPort are main stream (Guessing they'll call it that.) From what I've learned the next highest resolution step is at 2560 x 1600, but with the little research I've done I've found a shockingly low Contrast ratio for these displays compared for the new 500,000:1 Samsung has just released. The new "1600p" would most likely use the DisplayPort as the main way of transfering HD picture to your TV. With this DisplayPort it offers a much faster transfer rate and offers a color depth of 16 Bits per connector, which would seem to make HDMI rather obsolete.

* 3 years ago

Additional Details
Am I completely wrong to think that with this somewhat unknown technology out there, all of us are going to take the betamax and HD DVD way with the (1080p TVs and HDMI)

3 years ago
"They would just be screwing over anyone who bought a 1080p tv if they just go and make 1600p tv's in the next few years."

Well, that's one of the major fears I have. 1600p with DisplayPort is out now and will hit main stream this year.

3 years ago


OP hasn't responded in over a year....
a c 171 Î Nvidia
August 16, 2010 5:48:56 AM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!