• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Eyefinity Vs. 3D

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
iRaiden said:
I don't NEED to be told which route to take. I'm simply gathering the opinions of others to see what they would do in my particular situation.

I just don't see how a single 24" screen in 3d could be as immersive as 81" of real estate surrounding you.
Click to expand...

You're probably gathering opinions on people that probably haven't tried both.
 
iRaiden said:
If I were to go 3D, I would go with Nvidia, as they are far ahead of AMD as far as that standard goes. AMD forces you to use third party software that doesn't work nearly as well.

Since I can't afford three 3d monitors or the graphics power to run that, that option wouldn't be very practical.
Click to expand...

Since you liked multi-monitor gaming and accustomed to it, the decision seems pretty easy. 3d offers much more immersion to me than playing a 3d game on a 2d screen but it's not mature yet and many more sacrifices and frustration, too. There are limitations but when it shines, it shines very much so.

Their two different features -- not very apples-to-apples but both very welcomed. For me, having both is ideal but based on your posts, how can you go wrong buying a more appealing multi-monitor set-up?

Even IZ3d and DDD software have their strengths as well over what nVidia offers by offering more flexibility with convergence.

I think its great when gamers try to improve their immersion -- it's not about just nVidia or AMD but really about features that improve gaming titles to me.
 
iRaiden said:
I don't NEED to be told which route to take. I'm simply gathering the opinions of others to see what they would do in my particular situation.

I just don't see how a single 24" screen in 3d could be as immersive as 81" of real estate surrounding you.
Click to expand...

Those 81" of screen real estate will be be like wallpaper once you've properly experienced 3D gaming. Like Sirpauly said, you're just gathering opinions on people who haven't experienced both (and from people that are against 3D gaming based on old experiences, never having tried 120hz or HDMI 1.4 3D gaming). Noticed I said properly, because a bad 3D configuration will just about turn off anybody (including myself when I first started).

I have two 3D setups on home. First is an office gaming rig connected to an IZ3D monitor. I mainly used ATI cards for this setup, however the IZ3D drivers worked just as well for my GTX275 when I had it installed. My primary gaming rig is on a Samsung 46" LED 240Hz 3DTV powered by a newly built Sandy Bridge Core i5 2500 PC gaming cube (temporarily equipped with a Radeon 5870 from my old setup). I can use either IZ3D or Tri-def drivers. The notion that you can only 3D game with Nvidia is absurd, and shows ignorance. IZ3D generally has the best feature set out of all 3, Nvidia's 3DPlay/3Dvision generally the best performance. Tri-def somewhere in the middle. Don't take my word for it, just visit mtbs3d.com

For me personally, NO EYEFINITY setup I've seen in person (3*3 at a local computer store) compares to 3D gaming on my 46" TV (I'd imagine 55" would even be better). Even on my (now retired) 1680*1050 IZ3D monitor, I would not give up 3D gaming just for "peripheral" vision that having a 3*1 setup would have. I wouldn't even want both (surround 3D gaming) unless the bezels were somehow removed completely.

You can have different types of 3D settings. Some prefer mild 3D, or the "just barely 3D", and some prefer the 3D that makes everything in good 3D but look like miniature toys (dollhouse effect). I use 3D settings to make everything "lifesize", or make the TV/computer monitor a window pane into another world. This typically requires stronger than usual 3D settings (high convergence coupled with high depth). Once you experience this kind of 3d, you wouldn't want to go back from this kind of immersion...the difference between 2D gaming is suddenly like night and day, black and white and color. No wall of screens in 2D will ever give the same sense of immersion. This is about the closest you'll get to "the holodeck" compared to a stack of 2D monitors, and the bigger the screen the better.

Here's an old post with screenshots I did a while back. If you know how to view these screenshots in cross-eyed view, you can get a sense of the 3D effect of these games. Of course, these are just tiny screenshots, and don't compare to full resolution, in motion 3D gaming, but the depth perception is powerful enough to give an insight.

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33945031&highlight=stereoscopic

(be sure to click on the image heading to expand the image a little bigger for a better 3D effect).
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I wish I could change my username so it matches lol. I tried creating a new account but it recognized my email address, then I realized I created this account a long time ago to just to ask a question :lol:.
 
Ha ha Testking. That's cool. Using what what I believe is crosseyed method (never heard of it before) it looked like 3d. Now you got me wanting to play some games in 3d again. I've just been playing most things in 2d lately at 120hz. Time to break out the glasses again.
 
Lonbjerg said:
If you have to ask other people....neither.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense
Lets say it is time to get a new car after owning my current one for 11 years. Now I have driven a Toyota Camry before and like it but I really like that the new Prius gets 48MPG. Hmm which should I get? 🙄

By your logic I shouldn't get either car because I need to ask someone.
 
OILFIELDTRASH said:
Ha ha Testking. That's cool. Using what what I believe is crosseyed method (never heard of it before) it looked like 3d. Now you got me wanting to play some games in 3d again. I've just been playing most things in 2d lately at 120hz. Time to break out the glasses again.
Click to expand...

Definitely time to break out those glasses again, 3D gaming on a big screen is just pure 😀

I would say for someone just starting out, Tri-Def would be the easiest to get started in 3D with. Works with AMD3D and Nvidia, and is easy to configure. I like IZ3D better because I'm so used to the controls and its easy for me to find the best possible 3D setting (although, tri-def does have better default starting profiles for existing games).
 
mnewsham said:
That makes no sense
Lets say it is time to get a new car after owning my current one for 11 years. Now I have driven a Toyota Camry before and like it but I really like that the new Prius gets 48MPG. Hmm which should I get? 🙄

By your logic I shouldn't get either car because I need to ask someone.
Click to expand...

I am to old for car analogies, come back when you have something relevant.
 
You can do surround gaming on Nvidia without 3d or with.
You just need to use SLI-upfront, unless you buy a dual-gpu card
of which there are only 2 'new' models.
gtx 590
gtx 4602win

You have to figure what resolution you hope to do with eyefinity, and how much gpu power you need. I would think the IQ at less than the monitors native resolution , suffers ? Is that true ?
 
I plan to have 3 27" monitors all at 1920x1080.

I'll get a reference 6950 2GB.

I'll add another one when funds are available.

No nvidia cards can match the price/performance ratio of a 6950 2GB.
 
iRaiden said:
I plan to have 3 27" monitors all at 1920x1080.

I'll get a reference 6950 2GB.

I'll add another one when funds are available.

No nvidia cards can match the price/performance ratio of a 6950 2GB.
Click to expand...
Really ?
Then why the Original Post ?
 
This thread helped me make that decision.

And I can't do Nvidia surround because I have an AMD motherboard. SLI isn't compatible without some tweaking I don't want to do.
 
Another thing about 3D vs Eyefinity is that Eyefinity will actually give you a slight advantage in MP games, especially FPS.

I tend to play SP games in 3D (except for racers because you get an awesome sense of speed in eyefinity) and MP with Eyefinity
 
True. FPS has been one of the things that have fallen short in eyefinity. The whole FOV thing being stretched out in most gets kind of annoying. Oh well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top