Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Multiple Monitors or 3d for overhauled/modded Skyrim

Tags:
  • Nvidia
  • Gaming
  • Monitors
  • LED Monitor
  • 3D
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 18, 2012 7:19:35 PM

Hello, should i use 3 led gaming monitors off of my evga ftw overclocked gtx 670 or use a single led 3d gaming monitor off the same card? It's either or, I can't afford 3 3d displays.
What I mean is, which would make Skyrim look and feel better and more immersive?
The regular led monior that I will by 3 of: http://tinyurl.com/7jwy58p
3d monitor: http://tinyurl.com/6tlf6rp

More about : multiple monitors overhauled modded skyrim

a b C Monitor
July 18, 2012 8:14:18 PM

3d is a gimmick IMO - I say go with 3 seperate monitors
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 9:52:41 PM

Ive heard that too, but nvidia 3d vision, skyrim, and 3d vision fixes together are supposed to look amazing.
m
0
l
Related resources
July 18, 2012 9:55:33 PM

dingo07 said:
3d is a gimmick IMO - I say go with 3 seperate monitors


Dude seriously 5tfu, people who dont own 3d systems dont have the right to comment on 3D gaming, im sorry you were to stupid or cheaped on a proper system (this is giving you the bennifit of the doubht u actualy used 3dvision, ddd, iz3d) but u have no idea what your talking about (going to the movies to see 3D doesnt mean you know anything about 3D gaming)

3D adds another dimension to your gaming experiance, surround only adds peripheral vision (whoop de fing do)

your 670 will more than handle 3d gaming, start with one screen then add more if you want to expand, and skyrim in 3d is absolutly amazing, theres nothing like a dragon breathing fire out of your monitor
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
July 18, 2012 9:59:40 PM

I personally chose 3D, and it does look amazing. Especially after you use the Helix mod. http://helixmod.wikispot.org/gamelist

People who use 3 monitors also like it, but the way I see it, 3 monitors is just more of the same, 3D adds another dimension. You also gain 120hz, for games which 3D doesn't work well with.
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 10:02:51 PM

Just to reiterate, i dont mind people having a diffrence of opinion, i mind it when people call 3D a gimmick beause they got a head ache from watching toy story in 3D at the movies when they didnt ever properly set up a 3D system, or even know the diffrence between a movie actualy filmed usign 3d technology vs a conversion. It just makes you a tool that regurgitates false information

the fact of the matter is most people who join the 3D community are huge fans who want help inform people of the truths about 3D gaming and help stop spreading the false rumours and old sterotypes that people got from old 3d technology that has since been shaped into an amazing addition to gaming. I can count on 1 hand how many peopel i know that tried 3D in a proper set up and didnt like it. Its not possible to count on all my hands and all my toes how many people tried 3D and LOVED it.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
July 18, 2012 11:26:55 PM

I'm not sure why you quoted me for that. I know what you mean, and it bothers me too, but my post had nothing to do with him or your response.
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 11:37:56 PM

Sorry didnt realize you were only talking to OP, removed quote
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
July 19, 2012 1:35:22 AM

To sp0nger - Dude, for real, you know absolutely nothing about me and prove your idiocy with your blown up comment and your attack at what character you think I am. Not to mention im entitled to my opinion! I guess you get off on personally attacking people you don't know... Loser!

To clarify, perhaps I should've stated that unless your looking at a pair of QXGA's projected on a Stuart, you're just dipping your toes in the water of a blow-up pool looking at a 3D 24 inch monitor. 3D is for the big boys to get the most out of it, big boys have 8 foot screens and three hundred thousand dollar A/V systems - neither of which I have, but what I am qualified to professionally install, whether it's an 84 meter megayacht or a penthouse in Hampstead Heath.

Im a huge fan of 3D, but doing 3D on a 24 inch monitor doesn't begin to do it justice, IN MY OPINION.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
July 19, 2012 1:45:46 AM

dingo07 said:
To sp0nger - Dude, for real, you know absolutely nothing about me and prove your idiocy with your blown up comment and your attack at what character you think I am. Not to mention im entitled to my opinion! I guess you get off on personally attacking people you don't know... Loser!

To clarify, perhaps I should've stated that unless your looking at a pair of QXGA's projected on a Stuart, you're just dipping your toes in the water of a blow-up pool looking at a 3D 24 inch monitor. 3D is for the big boys to get the most out of it, big boys have 8 foot screens and three hundred thousand dollar A/V systems - neither of which I have, but what I am qualified to professionally install, whether it's an 84 meter megayacht or a penthouse in Hampstead Heath.

Im a huge fan of 3D, but doing 3D on a 24 inch monitor doesn't begin to do it justice, IN MY OPINION.


So because you've installed and viewed large projection systems (which I'm certain are for movies), you can say that 3D gaming is a gimmick? Your experience is not with gaming on a monitor. You don't know what it's like. I have seen movies and games, and I can tell without a shadow of a doubt, that the vast majority of the time, 3D gaming is better on a 27" monitor (I don't have a 24" monitor), than any 3D movie I've seen (I have not seen Avatar in 3D, which I hear is great, because 3D is done more like games are, in true 3D).

Sorry, but you have not said anything about experiencing 3D games on a monitor and if you have, you'd be shocked at how good it can be.
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 2:02:42 AM

Alright then, no need to fight. I guess 3d makes the most sense.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
July 19, 2012 2:05:52 AM

jaytrinitron said:
Alright then, no need to fight. I guess 3d makes the most sense.


I'm not going to say 3 monitor systems aren't great. I hear good things about them from others, I am just saying I am glad I chose 3D gaming. One more thing, be aware that the 3D monitor you chose will affect what video card brand you'll want to use through the life of it.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
July 19, 2012 2:11:54 AM

I'm not fighting at all, just stating my opinion, and getting tomatoes thrown at me for no reason.

I have seen games run on a computer and displayed on a 3D monitor, I would rather have the monitors surround me then look at one in 3D.
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 2:33:58 AM

I do have 3D Vision and Skyrim looks just so much awesome on it.
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 3:24:34 AM

I'm running triple monitors. Skyrim looks great even though I haven't played it much since I got this current setup (usually play BF3). You should definitely get some mods though, because I have started to notice low res textures and such since using the triple monitor setup. The menus are also a little disproportional as well, but there is probably a mod to fix all of that.

BTW, I have the 670 ftw running this setup as well. The card kicks ass!
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 12:03:45 AM

bystander said:
I'm not going to say 3 monitor systems aren't great. I hear good things about them from others, I am just saying I am glad I chose 3D gaming. One more thing, be aware that the 3D monitor you chose will affect what video card brand you'll want to use through the life of it.


Wait.. how severe is the effect of 3d on the lifespan of my graphics card?
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
July 20, 2012 12:08:37 AM

What I'm saying is almost all active shutter systems are either designed to use with AMD or Nvidia, but not both. AMD systems will use displayport connections, while Nvidia systems use dual link DVI. It won't wear them out faster, just that you will be kind of married to one brand or the other.
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 12:59:43 AM

If you ever plan to play shooters or racing games, I would highly advise going with a surround setup at this point in time. You can do it relatively cheaply, and you will be very pleased with the increased field of view.

I wouldn't say 3D is a bad way to go (I was considering it myself for a long time) but I think it needs a little time to settle in. That's not to say the technology isn't here, but I think bystander is right in saying that it can limit you.

You also have to remember just how useful an extra 2 monitors can be when you're not gaming. That was a major factor, at least for me.

Don't let me tell you though. I'm just trying to show you a few different angles on this whole thing, but it's ultimately on you.
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 2:13:07 AM

RS1no2047 said:
If you ever plan to play shooters or racing games, I would highly advise going with a surround setup at this point in time. You can do it relatively cheaply, and you will be very pleased with the increased field of view.

I wouldn't say 3D is a bad way to go (I was considering it myself for a long time) but I think it needs a little time to settle in. That's not to say the technology isn't here, but I think bystander is right in saying that it can limit you.

You also have to remember just how useful an extra 2 monitors can be when you're not gaming. That was a major factor, at least for me.

Don't let me tell you though. I'm just trying to show you a few different angles on this whole thing, but it's ultimately on you.


+1
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 6:12:51 PM

Alright. Thanks for the info then. But I still have a question: basic logic dictates that both 3d vision and 3 monitors will lower your frame rate since in both cases the gpu has to render more. What I want to know is, how severe is this effect, as in how severely do both display methods affect frame rate?
Card: EVGA gtx 670 ftw.
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 6:25:35 PM

I can speak for the surround setup. I have a single gtx 670 ftw running it. I am at work now, so I can't test, but I run skyrim at the highest settings and it is perfectly playable. The fps is probably somewhere in the 45 average range, however, that is just a guess. When I was running a 1080p setup I had a gtx 560 and I would say that the 670 runs the surround setup just as smoothly as that.

Edit: Meant to respond to jays post directly. My bad.
m
0
l
a c 468 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
July 20, 2012 6:37:36 PM

The 3D Vision setup is the least cost commitment. I would recommend you at least give it a try first, then if you don't like it, return it and get the extra monitors. Some stores have 3D demos available to try, but they really are not calibrated well and don't look as good as they will on your desktop at home.
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 8:54:17 PM

jaytrinitron said:
Alright. Thanks for the info then. But I still have a question: basic logic dictates that both 3d vision and 3 monitors will lower your frame rate since in both cases the gpu has to render more. What I want to know is, how severe is this effect, as in how severely do both display methods affect frame rate?
Card: EVGA gtx 670 ftw.


I don't know offhand what the actual frame rates are, but I imagine 3D, contrary to popular belief, would actually reduce performance more. The GPU has to render from two completely independent points of view as opposed to rendering more from one. It also has to ensure that it releases these frames in exact timing with the monitor and shutter glasses, so it does what we call a "three-way handshake" with both. Also, if your card is only generating 60fps in 3D, you are only seeing 30fps, which by itself is still playable. When you start approaching 45fps, though, the choppiness will be noticeable.
m
0
l
July 20, 2012 10:37:41 PM

Hmmm. What are your thoughts on a single high res 27-30 in. monitor with a res. of like 2560x1440 vs. 3 1080p monitors? And could I still get some more frame rate info.? I've been scouring the internet and haven't found much.
m
0
l
July 21, 2012 12:03:07 AM

Yet again, you mention another consideration I made. 2560x1440 monitors are very expensive and usually take weeks to ship because they are sent over from Korea and typically not sold from domestic vendors. Your purchasing options become very limited after 1920x1200.

Your eyes, whether you realize or not, have a very wide viewing angle. A 48:9 aspect ratio is incredibly useful for any shooters or combat-oriented game. The extra 2 monitors are also great for multitasking. Everybody (including me) always says "Oh I'll just buy a bigger monitor and keep a movie open in part of it and use the other for browsing or work." But you never do. The urge to maximize is too great to resist, and you end up doing the same thing as if you had a smaller monitor.

You never realize just how limited your view is with one monitor until you've tried out surround. I made the mistake of trying it out, and now all of my free cash is going to chasing it, lol.

I'll look around for frame rates.
m
0
l
a c 468 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
July 21, 2012 2:14:59 AM

For a surround setup, just look at reviews for benchmarks at surround resolutions, 5760x1080, for example.

Then for 3D Vision, just look at benchmarks for normal 1920x1080, BUT halve the FPS since that's what happens with 3D Vision. Your video card is actually rendering two nearly identical images, so the FPS is cut exactly in half. See which one produces better framerates on a single GTX 670.

Sorry, no EVGA FTW, but this should be close:

Surround is faster, 44.6 FPS vs 39.45 (78.9/2) for 3D Vision.



m
0
l
July 21, 2012 2:20:10 AM

17seconds said:

Surround is faster, 44.6 FPS vs 39.45 (78.9/2) for 3D Vision.

Ah, but that 3D setup is running at 1920x1200 not 1080p, so the 1080p 3D would likely be just as fast as 1080p surround.

Very interesting, thank you.
m
0
l
a c 468 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
July 21, 2012 3:49:17 AM

RS1no2047 said:
Ah, but that 3D setup is running at 1920x1200 not 1080p, so the 1080p 3D would likely be just as fast as 1080p surround.

Very interesting, thank you.

It's a general estimate. Both will be playable at similar framerates.
m
0
l
July 21, 2012 4:07:30 AM

17seconds said:
It's a general estimate. Both will be playable at similar framerates.

Yeah so it really comes back down to what he wants for gameplay and everyday use. My opinion is pretty obvious, but I can certainly understand the appeal of 3D gaming.
m
0
l
a c 468 Î Nvidia
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
July 21, 2012 6:34:30 AM

I think 3D is pretty cool, and I still think there are ways to try it out fairly risk-free without having to make a final, expensive decision.
m
0
l
July 21, 2012 12:33:41 PM

Yeah, I agree.

Jay, if you want to try out 3D I would highly suggest buying your monitor off TigerDirect rather than newegg, and here's why.

First time assembling a computer I fried the crap out of it, and it was totally my fault. I sent everything back to Tiger and was given replacements free of charge. Also, newegg requires that any returns arrive 30 days after purchase. Tiger only requires that they were shipped within 30 days.

I find it amazing that everybody praises newegg's RMA when it's actually terrible in comparison. I'm getting a $36 restocking fee for a package I didn't even open, and I'm planning to give them absolute hell for it. If they don't refund it, I'll never use them again, plain and simple.

Do yourself a favor and bite the bullet on paying the tax at TigerDirect, and you won't regret it later when your product is defective or just unwanted.
m
0
l
July 22, 2012 1:21:50 AM

Ok, thanks for the info. so far guys. I seriously couldn't find the frame rate info. ANYWHERE lol.
So, surround is a single image stretched into 48:9 aspect ratio? As in the gpu only processes for a stretched image, instead of two seperate images?
Thanks.
m
0
l
July 22, 2012 1:23:52 AM

jaytrinitron said:

So, surround is a single image stretched into 48:9 aspect ratio?
Thanks.

It isn't stretched, remember that. It's increased viewing angle.
m
0
l
!