The PC we're using for testing isn’t particularly important. However, the second 3D monitor we're comparing HP's to is. We have Samsung’s S23A750D, an active 3D monitor able to help emphasize the differences between the HP 2311 gt’s FPD-based technology.
As we began writing this review, Samsung’s S23A750D sold on Newegg for $310, but was recently deactivated. The most similar product that is available is the Samsung S23A700D, a panel with almost identical specifications, but no DisplayPort input.
| Test System | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E), 3.3 GHz, Six Cores, LGA 2011, 15 MB Shared L3 Cache, Hyper-Threading enabled. Overclocked to 4.25 GHz | |||||||
| Motherboard | ASRock X79 Extreme9 (LGA 2011) Chipset: Intel X79 Express | |||||||
| Networking | On-Board Gigabit LAN controller | |||||||
| Memory | Corsair Vengeance LP PC3-16000, 4 x 4 GB, 1600 MT/s, CL 8-8-8-24-2T | |||||||
| Graphics | Reference Radeon HD 7970 925 MHz GPU, 3 GB GDDR5 at 1375 MHz | |||||||
| Hard Drive | Samsung 256 GB (SSD) | |||||||
| Power | ePower EP-1200E10-T2 1200 W ATX12V, EPS12V | |||||||
| Software and Drivers | ||||||||
| Operating System | Microsoft Windows 7 x64, Service Pack 1 | |||||||
| DirectX | DirectX 11 | |||||||
| Graphics Drivers | GeForce: 301.42 WHQL Radeon: Catalyst 12.6 Beta | |||||||
| Monitors | ||||||||
| Passive (FPR) | HP 2311 gt | |||||||
| Active (AFS) | Samsung S23A750D | |||||||
Previous
Next
Summary
Ask a Category Expert
You mean 2D.
One thing you have to understand that the fact that even 3D models in a game for example get rasterized to a 2D screen. Are they a gimmick then since 3D or 2D graphics, they still end up being 2D anyway? 3D games give us the perception of a 3D world.
If these technologies can make us have the illusion of having a 3D view, like in real life, then I wouldn't say it's a gimmick. Are (better) in-game graphics a gimmick? A game world is also an illusion of something that isn't there, just like how it seems that you're saying 3D isn't there because it's a 2D screen.
BTW, it's 2 different frames from different perspectives shown at the same time, just like how your two eyes work. I assume you have two, if not, I apologize.
If you don't like stereoscopic 3D, then fine, voice out your opinions, but claiming those opinions of yours as facts is just not right. I don't mean to sound angry, but I felt obliged to "voice" this out. I'm open to debate and I don't mean to piss anyone off.
If anyone has better knowledge on this, please correct me. :-)
complete false advertising since it's on a 1D screen.
save your money.
You mean 2D.
dont you mean 12.7 beta?
and I liked the acer's 27inch polarized one because it doesn't need a software to convert 2d to 3d.
One thing you have to understand that the fact that even 3D models in a game for example get rasterized to a 2D screen. Are they a gimmick then since 3D or 2D graphics, they still end up being 2D anyway? 3D games give us the perception of a 3D world.
If these technologies can make us have the illusion of having a 3D view, like in real life, then I wouldn't say it's a gimmick. Are (better) in-game graphics a gimmick? A game world is also an illusion of something that isn't there, just like how it seems that you're saying 3D isn't there because it's a 2D screen.
BTW, it's 2 different frames from different perspectives shown at the same time, just like how your two eyes work. I assume you have two, if not, I apologize.
If you don't like stereoscopic 3D, then fine, voice out your opinions, but claiming those opinions of yours as facts is just not right. I don't mean to sound angry, but I felt obliged to "voice" this out. I'm open to debate and I don't mean to piss anyone off.
AMD cards can drive an Eyefinity of 6 (standard) monitors, so maybe 3 3D's doesn't sound to bad.
Again, I'm not sure. Just sharing my observations and deductions on this, and I could be very wrong. :-)
Nvidia supports 3D Surround, which is three identical monitors. I haven't seen it in action, but hear it's fabulous. Pretty sure it requires at least a couple of beefy GPUs running in SLI.
You're forgetting to consider third-party 3d drivers, like iZ3D and Tri-Def
"BTW, it's 2 different frames from different perspectives shown at the same time, just like how your two eyes work. I assume you have two, if not, I apologize."
One important difference to consider here: human eyes also focus the lenses based on distance, but with a 3d screen (whether active, passive, or even autostereoscopic like the Nintendo 3DS), one's eye lenses have to focus to the screen distance even when the 3d effect is simulating a different distance.
Yeah you're right, but what I also try to say is that the last years they almost only review screens like this, cheap ones, and considering this is a website mainly for enthusiasts it would be nice to read about some nicer ones as well!
For a few bucks more look at the still not stellar but better ASUS VG236H (~$330).
Bottom-line, if I have a monitor for years that I'm going to be staring at -- you're Damned Right it's worth spending the extra cash and getting something easy on the eyes. Otherwise it's like getting cheap shoes that are your only pair and suffering.
Our previous 3D Vision 2 vs HD3D review compared the newest 3D Vision monitor tech with the newest Samsung tech,. There hasn't been any notable changes to the 120 Hz 3d monitor market since.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-3d-vision-hd3d-steroscopic,3050-2.html
Of course for 3D shutter technology, I really want 240Hz (minimum)
I mostly agree. I went back to 1080p because my XHD3000 was outputting too much heat into my room, but an LED monitor with that resolution probably wouldn't be so bad. I'm somewhat regretting the 32 inch TV with passive 3d I recently bought (I had underestimated the issues with text based on TFT Central's article that discussed 3d display types