Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

3D vs Triple monitor

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 14, 2011 5:53:54 PM

I'm wondering of those people who have experienced both, what is your favorite? I know a lot of people dislike 3D altogether, but crazily enough I quite enjoy 3D movies and such.

I've played a little bit on triple monitors at the local PC hardware store and it's pretty cool. I think it's quite immersive. At the same time, I'm not a competitive FPS player or anything so I don't know that the peripheral vision will really add to the experience.

On the other hand, I've definitely been very intrigued by 3D games. I think there is a lot of potential there. However the only 3D I've seen in gaming is from Tom's most recent 3D review, with those dual-image screens where you cross your eyes and see the 3D effect. This obviously is not exactly comparable to actually playing in 3D. On the other hand, I did find that some games looked like cardboard cutouts pasted in 3 dimensions which was odd.

Anyway, the 12.1 preview drivers finally allow 3D with crossfire so I've started to debate the issue again...

EDIT: Also, a large 2560x1440 monitor is also an option instead of triple monitors.... I kind of like the idea of one huge screen, but of course the aspect ratio seems to be what really makes triple monitors stand out.

More about : triple monitor

a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 14, 2011 9:15:38 PM

Let me ask you this; do you plan to change your graphics cards to an Nvidia solution? If not, HD3D does not support crossfire or SLI, but Nvidia 3D vision does.

I have not played with 3 monitors over an extended period of time (just a little at a Fry's), so I can't help you there.

What I can talk about, is my experience with 3D. After a few months of it, I have found some interesting things about gaming, or maybe it's just me. The first thing that is surprising, is that gaming on a normal monitor requires your brain to learn to ignore that its seeing a flat 2D image. This isn't something that is normal for our brains, but we have trained ourselves to interpret the flat image. After using 3D vision, when I stop, I feel very disoriented, especially on games I've been playing in 3D. The games look so unbelievably flat.

3D is very immersive on games it works well on. However, a lot of games don't work well with 3D. I'd guess about half my games work well with it and the other half doesn't. One more thing, the review about the comparison between Tridef and Nvidia 3D vision does appear to be inaccurate. The Virtual 3D does not work better when dealing with shadows, or at least I cannot for the life of me find any examples that the review gave. It does, however, increase performance a lot, so it's worth checking out.

One other thing to consider. With 3 monitors, you need an extreme amount of power for good FPS and when you play a game that doesn't support it, you have a lot of extra graphics power not put to use. With a 120hz 3D monitor, you don't need quite as much power and if 3D doesn't work, you get to put that horsepower to use with 120hz gaming.
Score
0
a c 88 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 14, 2011 9:21:32 PM

In my opinion I prefer the large screen option at 2560x1440, huge screens look great and at that resolution the picture quality and detail is amazing. You would need a high end graphics card to power it especially for gaming of course.
It comes down to personal preference , I'm not a huge 3D fan and believe theres still a few issues with it all that I prefer not to have.
Score
0
Related resources
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 14, 2011 9:21:45 PM

Thanks for a nice answer, bystander.

I actually probably will go with Nvidia next gen, but for now I've got my 5850s. I was surprised to learn that CFX doesn't support 3D when reading the Tom's review, but as it happens, AMD's 12.1 preview drivers state:

AMD HD3D technology support enhancement

· Enables support for AMD HD3D technology in conjunction with AMD CrossFireX configurations

· Delivers a new Stereo 3D mode over HDMI 1.4a connections - 1080p at 30Hz is now enabled on supported displays.

So, it seems like it's back on the table for me. As you mention, triple monitors would require a lot more horsepower and I know for sure I'll be playing games at medium settings instead of ultra, which I kind of hate lol. I guess I've become a graphics snob.

I definitely appreciate your thoughts on 3D though. That sounds pretty good to me. I'm looking at a Samsung S27A950D for 3D, and then probably next summer get a GTX 670/680.

Anyway, I would still like a little more feedback, especially on triple monitors. I feel like both would be very cool to have. I do have to give the 3D route credit though because even without 3D you can still play at 120fps which is pretty awesome.
Score
0
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 14, 2011 9:26:15 PM

About that 120hz gaming...After playing at 120hz, 40 FPS doesn't cut it any more and I've actually played a few games at reduced settings just so I can feel the smoothness of 75+ hz. Dragon Age 2 was one such game, at 40-60 FPS, the game felt choppy. I saw another forum poster complaining about going away from 3 monitor gaming too. When you get used to luxury, it's hard to step down.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 15, 2011 1:34:27 AM

I got a 3D vision DLP projector a week ago and Dirt 3 is blowing my mind on it. It's only 720p but it looks amazing to play a game in 3D on an 8' screen. The end of the hood that appears to stick out 4 feet from the screen into the room is life sized!

I've had a 22" 3d screen for about a year but the projector just blows it away, if you have the space for it that is the route I would go.
Score
0
December 15, 2011 1:51:30 AM

Well I can't input too much right now but I just ordered a Dell U2711 (2560x1440 monitor) so I'll try to remember to tell you how it is. Although from what I've experienced the few times I've gotten to use high res panels as the one I just ordered is that they just completely take up you field of vision, maybe not as much as triple monitors, but personally I'd rather have one big display with no bezels.
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 15, 2011 5:41:10 AM

Thanks for all the feedback, guys!

I'm kind of thinking you're right, drumsrul786. A single massive high res display might just be all you really need, size wise. But 3D graphics are just so... tempting :D 

It would be cool to get a projector for sure lol but that's not going to happen anytime soon. I live in an apartment ;) 
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 15, 2011 6:46:47 AM

I have both 3 monitor set-up & a 55" 3D TV. And I tried Avatar ( James Cameron ) both in 3D (1920x1080) & Eyefinity (5760x1080) and I end up finishing that & playing more games in Eyefinity. The 3D might be nice at first but the novelty wears off. But viewing the scene in very wide 5760x1080 screen ( even with bezel ) is just stunning... I helps me improve the game because I do not have to move the mouse as much to see whats on the side... I just shift my focus to either of the side screen to see what's there...

Here's the setup run by 2x6950 2GB ( Sapphire Flex + Sapphire special Dirt Edition ):

All 5 monitors are coming from the Sapphire Flex although it is not yet configured in Eyefinity when the picture was shot.

Here's the one with Eyefinity configured:

Never mind the bright window with flimsy curtain... it has been replaced and its not as blinding as before during the day lol...
Score
0

Best solution

December 15, 2011 6:58:19 AM

I spent $2500 bucks a year ago as an early adopter of Eyefinity. If it tells you anything I'm spending $3500 this year to move on to a 5x1 6000x1920 system.

Portrait mode is the way to go in my opinion. I realize that the bezels are more pronounced in this mode, but the stretching you get in landscape due to silly ratios is quite disturbing. In portrait mode you get really close to that 16:10 feel (my current system is 18:10) yet having 5.3 million pixels 18" away from your face in crystal clarity is amazing.

Just keep in mind that if you do go with Eyefinity and you decide you'd like portrait mode, go with IPS 16:10 monitors. TN monitors don't do very well in Portrait due to limited view angles, and 16:9 monitors really pronounce the bezels due to their elongated nature.
Share
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 15, 2011 2:19:55 PM

randomkid said:
I have both 3 monitor set-up & a 55" 3D TV. And I tried Avatar ( James Cameron ) both in 3D (1920x1080) & Eyefinity (5760x1080) and I end up finishing that & playing more games in Eyefinity. The 3D might be nice at first but the novelty wears off. But viewing the scene in very wide 5760x1080 screen ( even with bezel ) is just stunning... I helps me improve the game because I do not have to move the mouse as much to see whats on the side... I just shift my focus to either of the side screen to see what's there...

Here's the setup run by 2x6950 2GB ( Sapphire Flex + Sapphire special Dirt Edition ):
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/3166/img00891201107300843.jpg
All 5 monitors are coming from the Sapphire Flex although it is not yet configured in Eyefinity when the picture was shot.

Here's the one with Eyefinity configured:
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/9829/img00827201106051620.jpg
Never mind the bright window with flimsy curtain... it has been replaced and its not as blinding as before during the day lol...


That's not entirely a fair comparison. 3D on a movie is not nearly as good as on a PC game, as well as 3D on a 3D TV is awful in comparison to on a 3D monitor.
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 15, 2011 2:40:43 PM

randomkid - that's a crazy setup, but it looks like you're using TVs instead of monitors...?

That deadspace shot though... yeah, I definitely like that ultra widescreen. But 3D... 3D!!!!!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:02:43 AM

bystander said:
That's not entirely a fair comparison. 3D on a movie is not nearly as good as on a PC game, as well as 3D on a 3D TV is awful in comparison to on a 3D monitor.

No, I played Avatar the Game in 3D. The Avatar Game has 3D mode & the picture leaps right out of the screen. But I still have 1920x1080 there...
But in any case, my eyes hurt when I game with a monitor. Being too close to the display is not my cup of tea. So, I wouldn't know about how 3D TV compare to a 3D monitor. I am not about to buy a 24" 3D display when I have a 55" one. :D 


wolfram23 said:
randomkid - that's a crazy setup, but it looks like you're using TVs instead of monitors...?

That deadspace shot though... yeah, I definitely like that ultra widescreen. But 3D... 3D!!!!!

Yes, they are 3x42" LG TVs. As I mentioned, I do not feel comfortable gaming too close to the display so I game slouching on the couch...
Well, wide screen in 3D is the ultimate. You can get the best of both worlds at the same time... :bounce: 
Score
0
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:13:03 AM

randomkid said:
No, I played Avatar the Game in 3D. The Avatar Game has 3D mode & the picture leaps right out of the screen. But I still have 1920x1080 there...
But in any case, my eyes hurt when I game with a monitor. Being too close to the display is not my cup of tea. So, I wouldn't know about how 3D TV compare to a 3D monitor. I am not about to buy a 24" 3D display when I have a 55" one. :D 


The problem isn't the size, the problem, and the reason why I'd call it awful, is that a 3d TV at 1080p is only able to generate 24hz. That's painful. I've tried it and it makes me want to puke almost immediately.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:16:43 AM

bystander said:
The problem isn't the size, the problem, and the reason why I'd call it awful, is that a 3d TV at 1080p is only able to generate 24hz. That's painful. I've tried it and it makes me want to puke almost immediately.

:lol:  I will check on that... :) 
Score
0
December 16, 2011 4:20:03 AM

dont do my mistake please stay away from 3d monitors i swear to you when i wear the glasses after 10- minutes my head were about to explode from ache instead of it you can buy 2560-1600 monitor or go with nice 3 x IPS monitors 1920-1080 as @a4mula said using 3 ips monitor on eyefinity is great in landscape or portrait because you wont have to adjust the left and the right monitors everytime because of the viewing angle issues or you will be at greater deal if you went with 2560-1600 monitor
here is one that have great color accuracy and very great response time
the HP ZR30W im currently using LG IPS236V with 5 MS response time believe me there was no ghosting at all and there was no diffrence between it and my older 2 ms monitor .
good luck if you needed any help at all please PM im excited
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
December 16, 2011 4:59:29 AM

johnnyq8 said:
dont do my mistake please stay away from 3d monitors i swear to you when i wear the glasses after 10- minutes my head were about to explode from ache instead of it you can buy 2560-1600 monitor or go with nice 3 x IPS monitors 1920-1080 as @a4mula said using 3 ips monitor on eyefinity is great in landscape or portrait because you wont have to adjust the left and the right monitors everytime because of the viewing angle issues or you will be at greater deal if you went with 2560-1600 monitor
here is one that have great color accuracy and very great response time
the HP ZR30W im currently using LG IPS236V with 5 MS response time believe me there was no ghosting at all and there was no diffrence between it and my older 2 ms monitor .
good luck if you needed any help at all please PM im excited

Grammar. It's your friend...

I can only share my experience with 3D. I recently bought a 47" LG 3D TV. I love it. So far I have only 1 3D blu-ray, but I have a handful of PS3 3D games. They all look amazing. Uncharted 3, Resistance 3, especially Killzone 3, all are gread in 3D.(3,3,3, 3D lol). Anyways, I know that's console gaming, but it does indeed work with PC from what I have heard. All the latest 3D TV's use HDMI 1.4, which is the requirement for AMD's HD3D. I tried World of Warcraft with the iZ3D driver, it looked pretty good. I only got to use it for a few minutes though, and didn't get the settings to their best. That's the thing. Almost all PC games will work in 3D, but most you have to adjust settings for, unless you go NVidia. AMD's HD3D allows native 3D support, but not many games use it, so for the rest you are stuck with iZ3D/DDD.

Another thing is the resolution. Yes, it's true, if you want to get over 24 frames you must use 720p. HOWEVER, this is only with 3D TV's. The reason for this is the limited bandwidth of HDMI. If you use a 3D monitor with either Dual-DVI or Displayport, you can enjoy full 1080p HD 3D. But IMO 720P isn't that bad, and is still better than 1080P w/o 3D. So what I recommend is you try the 3D out in person. Best buy had all the kinds of 3D TV's on display. Try them. Then go to a micro-center or a store with an eye-finity setup and try it.

If you have any more questions about 3D, such as active vs passive 3D, I will do my best to answer, but I am still learning too, so I don't know everything lol.
Score
0
December 16, 2011 6:41:41 AM

he will get a pc setup i cant imagine how 47 inch monitor will be such great trust me i tried tv 3d and nvidia 3d vision the both killed my eyes and wont pop out the picture as imax i prefer eyefinity i tried need for speed hot pursuit on it i can still crying from that excitement
Score
0
December 16, 2011 1:16:46 PM

wolfram23 said:
I'm wondering of those people who have experienced both, what is your favorite? I know a lot of people dislike 3D altogether, but crazily enough I quite enjoy 3D movies and such.

I've played a little bit on triple monitors at the local PC hardware store and it's pretty cool. I think it's quite immersive. At the same time, I'm not a competitive FPS player or anything so I don't know that the peripheral vision will really add to the experience.

On the other hand, I've definitely been very intrigued by 3D games. I think there is a lot of potential there. However the only 3D I've seen in gaming is from Tom's most recent 3D review, with those dual-image screens where you cross your eyes and see the 3D effect. This obviously is not exactly comparable to actually playing in 3D. On the other hand, I did find that some games looked like cardboard cutouts pasted in 3 dimensions which was odd.

Anyway, the 12.1 preview drivers finally allow 3D with crossfire so I've started to debate the issue again...

EDIT: Also, a large 2560x1440 monitor is also an option instead of triple monitors.... I kind of like the idea of one huge screen, but of course the aspect ratio seems to be what really makes triple monitors stand out.


After going from 2 screens to 3d and then to 3 screens in my opinion if you want a gimic which will last a few months until you realise there is limited functionality for it then go for 3d. Dont get me wrong 3d is absolutely amazing when you use it and the compatability with games is supprisingly high however what I found myself doing is getting fed up of having to put glasses on every time and also finding it very uncomfortable when wearing a headset. Movie wise there are very very little movies out there usable with pc 3d technology.

With tripple monitors youll find things less WOW but more functional, emersive and the joy of having 3 monitors will never wear off.

In short; if you want a wow factor and something to impress a visitor once in a while go for 3d. If you want something which is usable in all aspect, effective and efficient with multi-tasking go for the tripple monitors.
For me I went for tripple monitors because im a PC gamer and love the fact that I play games on 3x27" monitors; it is made of win and never gets old.

Sig
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 16, 2011 1:46:14 PM

Lots of good feedback, thanks a lot everyone!

I'm still not entirely sure what I want to do, although definitely a part of that is because my 5850s won't handle eyefinity lol.

It seems like most of you prefer eyefinity over 3D. I can understand that, but at the same time, I always imagined we'd be gaming in 3D and so I have high hopes for it.

I definitely hope I can test drive a 3D setup in the near future, though. I've played a little bit on eyefinity displays at the store and it's definitely neat.

Also, http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX31505
6 monitor, 5760x2160, setup for the low low price of $3400! =P
Score
0
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 16, 2011 2:32:28 PM

One of the difficulties in knowing how people would feel about 3D is that many people see 3D in a subpar manner.

At least a couple people here are giving experiences with 3D at 1080p and 24hz. That's what's causing their head to want to explode. 3D gaming requires 60hz per eye, which is not possible by TV on at 1080p or even on some 3D monitors in the past that originally supported HD3D. It's also very uncomfortable at low FPS. So you won't enjoy it if you are getting 30 FPS, which also means you want a powerful card. And also because it's fairly new technology, you have to learn how to tune it so it really looks good and even fix times it's way out of whack that can cause very uncomfortable viewing.

If you have the right setup, 3D can look very good. The glasses are the one thing that can be annoying, but I have a very hard time convincing myself to not use 3D now that I've experienced it.
Score
0
December 16, 2011 3:31:44 PM

wolfram23 said:
Lots of good feedback, thanks a lot everyone!

I'm still not entirely sure what I want to do, although definitely a part of that is because my 5850s won't handle eyefinity lol.

It seems like most of you prefer eyefinity over 3D. I can understand that, but at the same time, I always imagined we'd be gaming in 3D and so I have high hopes for it.

I definitely hope I can test drive a 3D setup in the near future, though. I've played a little bit on eyefinity displays at the store and it's definitely neat.

Also, http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX31505
6 monitor, 5760x2160, setup for the low low price of $3400! =P


I'm currently running 3150x1680 with a single 5870, so it can be done. While I've yet to run some of the more modern demanding games (metro 2033, bf3) it's run everything I've thrown at it (civ5, shogun2 probably being the most demanding).

The 2209w are really ideal monitors for a 3x setup that's lacking in gpu power due to their 1680x1050 native resolution, e-IPS screens and 75hz (forced) refresh. They don't have native displayport support, but that's pretty easy to get around with a passive dp>vga adapter. They've become a little tough to get nowadays though but I snagged them for $208 /w free shipping last year. If you could find them at that range I'd highly recommend them.

As far as the Samsung monitors goes. Talk about dropping the ball. 1920x1080 at over $500 a pop? Really Samsung? They did get the bezels right though.

Quote:
EDIT: Also, a large 2560x1440 monitor is also an option instead of triple monitors.... I kind of like the idea of one huge screen, but of course the aspect ratio seems to be what really makes triple monitors stand out.


I've considered this route as well. A typical 30" can push 2560x1600 which gets us back to that 16:10 ratio that's ideal, but these screens run right a 1k a pop. At the end of the day you can pick up 3x Dell u2412M 24" 1920x1200 IPS Displayport screens for that price. Yeah, you get the bezels, but you also get 6.9M pixels vs 4M pixels and a considerably larger (I haven't done the math sorry) viewing area. It comes back out to that 18.75:10 ratio, but that's the same ratio as my current setup and it doesn't feel skewed or elongated the way 16:9 does.

Here's a pic of the system I emulated when I did my build. It's the 3x 2209w in portrait. While it's not quite as aggressive as 3x42 in landscape I really was aiming for clarity and precision.

Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:01:22 PM

bystander said:
One of the difficulties in knowing how people would feel about 3D is that many people see 3D in a subpar manner.

At least a couple people here are giving experiences with 3D at 1080p and 24hz. That's what's causing their head to want to explode. 3D gaming requires 60hz per eye, which is not possible by TV on at 1080p or even on some 3D monitors in the past that originally supported HD3D. It's also very uncomfortable at low FPS. So you won't enjoy it if you are getting 30 FPS, which also means you want a powerful card. And also because it's fairly new technology, you have to learn how to tune it so it really looks good and even fix times it's way out of whack that can cause very uncomfortable viewing.

If you have the right setup, 3D can look very good. The glasses are the one thing that can be annoying, but I have a very hard time convincing myself to not use 3D now that I've experienced it.


I think that's pretty reasonable. I tweak my games and settings to the nth degree anyway, tweaking 3D is just another somewhat tedious but somewhat fun step lol.

I've of course seen many 3D movies, but those are 24fps I'm sure. I've never suffered headaches or anything. I think one of my biggest concerns with 3D is the glasses, because I often wear headphones (Sennheiser PC 350s). I can definitely foresee it being uncomfortable after an hour or two.
Score
0
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:04:49 PM

wolfram23 said:
I think that's pretty reasonable. I tweak my games and settings to the nth degree anyway, tweaking 3D is just another somewhat tedious but somewhat fun step lol.

I've of course seen many 3D movies, but those are 24fps I'm sure. I've never suffered headaches or anything. I think one of my biggest concerns with 3D is the glasses, because I often wear headphones (Sennheiser PC 350s). I can definitely foresee it being uncomfortable after an hour or two.


I've tried wearing headphones (G35's) and it just wasn't comfortable with the current 3D vision glasses. 3D vision 2 says they have fixed or helped it, but I'm not sure how I'd feel with both my ears and eyes covered at once even if they fit.
Score
0
December 16, 2011 4:25:30 PM

Just set up 3 - 24" monitors (2 Acer LEDs and a Hanns G) in eyefinity with a 2500k OC to 4400 and 2 5850s in Crossfire. COD MW3 is a Blast. BTW, I bought a licensed version of FRAPS and my frame rates with resolution at @5800X1080 with 4X AA was 40 fps average with a low of 18 and a high of 91. Very playable. I went from 1 24" monitor to Eyefinity (bought a Startech USB powered Dsiplayport adapter for @$100). What a difference in game play. I have a flight simulator game Rise of Flight by 777 Corp (WWI planes) and it is Stunning in Eyefinity.
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 16, 2011 4:26:18 PM

Hmm... Yeah. Well, the Samsung glasses appear to have fairly small um... ear pieces?? Whatever they are called. I think it might not be too bad, but my headset is big and it might put a lot of pressure on them.

I definitely like the price of 3D compared to eyefinity. At the least I'd need 2 more 1080p monitors for eyefinity, which is at least $400. Ideally, I'd get 3 new thin bezel monitors. The Samsung S23A700D is $380 with glasses (23" 1080p). There's of course the 27" model, but I don't think I really want one that huge at only 1080p. That size should be 2560x1440.

I think I might have to try 3D and if I don't like it after 6 days, return it haha. Work the system and all that.
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
December 23, 2011 4:47:58 PM

Best answer selected by wolfram23.
Score
0
!