GTX 480 Unigine and 3D Vision Surround Demo (GF100)

[BenSkywalker]

So if you'd ask me between a 30" 2560x1600 monitor or a 46" 1920x1080 TV I'd always, prefer the monitor.

I'd take an XBR8 over any 30" monitor I've ever laid eyes on for gaming in an instant- there is no comparison for overall IQ outside of pixel pitch(which is adjusted by distance to the screen). Contrast on monitors by comparison is terrible, color quality is either significantly behind or they are very slow and of course the size advantage helps. You start moving down into the run of the mill POS TVs and things change, but comparing the best to the best for gaming, absolutely I'd go with the TV. BTW- tested it out, I have no problems seeing individual pixels on my 23" monitor from 1/2 a meter away- do people actually sit that close to their screens?

One thing I have not been able to do though is get an accurate pixel count on the bezels of any of my displays. No matter how long I stare at them, and how close I look, they still just look like the same black plastic

 

[dug777]

I'd take an XBR8 over any 30" monitor I've ever laid eyes on for gaming in an instant- there is no comparison for overall IQ outside of pixel pitch(which is adjusted by distance to the screen). Contrast on monitors by comparison is terrible, color quality is either significantly behind or they are very slow and of course the size advantage helps. You start moving down into the run of the mill POS TVs and things change, but comparing the best to the best for gaming, absolutely I'd go with the TV. BTW- tested it out, I have no problems seeing individual pixels on my 23" monitor from 1/2 a meter away- do people actually sit that close to their screens?

One thing I have not been able to do though is get an accurate pixel count on the bezels of any of my displays. No matter how long I stare at them, and how close I look, they still just look like the same black plastic

We get it. You don't like eyefinity (and I am presuming you have some considerable experience with it, given your unequivocal dislike of multi-display gaming over a single big display?).

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion at the end of the day...

I haven't tried eyefinity so I will reserve my judgement until I have tried both. It doesn't sound impossible or implausible that the bezels would quickly become effectively invisible to you as the screens on either side offer more 'peripheral' vision, as has been stated by one person in this thread, but I just don't know.

 

[hdfxst]

If you stop the video at 1:06 you can see it's version 1.1 and not 1.0.They dont say which version they used on the 5870,might not be a difference but when you see this http://twitter.com/binstream/status/9518230933 it makes you wonder.The reviews can't get here fast enough.

 

[BenSkywalker]

and I am presuming you have some considerable experience with it, given your unequivocal dislike of multi-display gaming over a single big display?

ATi is the last one to the multi monitor gaming market; although their PR department did the best in getting their fan base in a frenzy about it by far(M and n didn't put much effort into it ever)- and yes, have used several different versions of it and every one of them sucks. Badly. One thing they all have in common? The equal of ~3000 dead pixels clouding up your FoV. Pay a huge premium for a display setup that is certain to have ~3K worth of dead pixels? Not my thing.

 

[badb0y]

ATi is the last one to the multi monitor gaming market; although their PR department did the best in getting their fan base in a frenzy about it by far(M and n didn't put much effort into it ever)- and yes, have used several different versions of it and every one of them sucks. Badly. One thing they all have in common? The equal of ~3000 dead pixels clouding up your FoV. Pay a huge premium for a display setup that is certain to have ~3K worth of dead pixels? Not my thing.

I think that it's being touted as a big feature because it takes one card to power 3 monitors. I think before you would need 2 graphics cards to do this (Even now I think nVidia requires 2 cards but I am not sure). It's actually quite nice to be honest. 2 displays kinda killed it for me since the bezels were right in the middle but 3 displays is pretty sweet, the bezels (for me) hust kinda disappear.

 

[BenSkywalker]

I think that it's being touted as a big feature because it takes one card to power 3 monitors.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/43/17

That is a review of tripple monitor gaming on a single card in 2002. The idea sucked then when it was Matrox, hasn't changed much

http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html

That link has a couple of nV boards that support up to four displays per card, still same effect though

Eyefinity isn't anything remotely like anything new, and it has nothing at all to do with what vendor supports it. ATi is the last one to come to the more then two monitors at once party, the others just never had any success with it. Maybe ATi will and it will push display manufacturers to come with monitors better suited for it(at which point I would be a *lot* more interested). I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, but we have had this technology for about a decade and it still has exactly the same problem it did back then.

 

[GaiaHunter]

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/43/17

That is a review of tripple monitor gaming on a single card in 2002. The idea sucked then when it was Matrox, hasn't changed much

http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html

That link has a couple of nV boards that support up to four displays per card, still same effect though

Eyefinity isn't anything remotely like anything new, and it has nothing at all to do with what vendor supports it. ATi is the last one to come to the more then two monitors at once party, the others just never had any success with it. Maybe ATi will and it will push display manufacturers to come with monitors better suited for it(at which point I would be a *lot* more interested). I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, but we have had this technology for about a decade and it still has exactly the same problem it did back then.

Sometimes an idea is only bad or good because of its timing.

Circumstances change, bad ideas become good and good ideas become bad.

Not sure if it is the right time still, but considering all things, it seems a much better idea now than it was before for several reasons, from the power of available GPUs to the cost of monitors.

 

[badb0y]

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/43/17

That is a review of tripple monitor gaming on a single card in 2002. The idea sucked then when it was Matrox, hasn't changed much

http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html

That link has a couple of nV boards that support up to four displays per card, still same effect though

Eyefinity isn't anything remotely like anything new, and it has nothing at all to do with what vendor supports it. ATi is the last one to come to the more then two monitors at once party, the others just never had any success with it. Maybe ATi will and it will push display manufacturers to come with monitors better suited for it(at which point I would be a *lot* more interested). I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, but we have had this technology for about a decade and it still has exactly the same problem it did back then.

The first link is quite interesting because I hadn't seen it before but your second link leads to a Quadro NVS information site. The Quadro cards from my understanding are buisness orientated so I wouldn't throw them in competition with Eyefinity. The Matrox article is quite interesting but I think they didn't really sell the idea much at the time because I think monitors were more expensive back then.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Sometimes an idea is only bad or good because of its timing.

Circumstances change, bad ideas become good and good ideas become bad.

Not sure if it is the right time still, but considering all things, it seems a much better idea now than it was before for several reasons, from the power of available GPUs to the cost of monitors.

Better suited monitors too. When Matrox first tried to push the idea they showed 3 huge and bulky CRTs side by side...and people complain about the LCD bezels...

But yeah, the Parhelia was prohibitively expensive, not nearly powerful enough to drive 3 monitors (it was barely fast enough to drive new games on one), and the monitors of the time (CRTs) were too big/bulky/expensive to reach a large enough consumer base.

TripleHead2Go solves the problem of graphics horse power because you can pair it with a more suitable video card, but the problem was that it added ~$300 to your setup (much like nVidia's 3D attempt adds $200 for the special glasses and thus won't take off) and it was first introduced at a time when monitors were still too expensive to really make the the whole setup attainable to a large enough audience.

Eyefinity is the first time multimonitor gaming has approached anywhere near the realm of practicality.

 

[ScorcherDarkly]

http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadronvs.html

That link has a couple of nV boards that support up to four displays per card, still same effect though

Eyefinity isn't anything remotely like anything new, and it has nothing at all to do with what vendor supports it. ATi is the last one to come to the more then two monitors at once party, the others just never had any success with it. Maybe ATi will and it will push display manufacturers to come with monitors better suited for it(at which point I would be a *lot* more interested). I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, but we have had this technology for about a decade and it still has exactly the same problem it did back then.

Those are Quadro boards, made for business productivity. The first one listed in that little chart costs $450 for dual GPUs with 256 MB of DDR3 each. It's a friggin reference board, for cryin out loud. I'd looove to see you drive Crysis on 4 monitors (or even 1) with that.

ATi didn't invent the idea of driving multiple monitors off one card, no. The technology has existed before in various forms. They DID make it actually useful for gaming, and affordable. That's what's new about it. The lack of bezel-less monitors is a flaw at the moment, but if you read Anand's article about the development of the 5000 series, you'll understand why that is the case.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'd take an XBR8 over any 30" monitor I've ever laid eyes on for gaming in an instant- there is no comparison for overall IQ outside of pixel pitch(which is adjusted by distance to the screen). Contrast on monitors by comparison is terrible, color quality is either significantly behind or they are very slow and of course the size advantage helps.

I agree with Ben on this one 100%. And this is comparing an LCD monitor to an LCD TV. Compare a 46 or 50 inch Panasonic or Samsung plasmas to 30 inch LCD monitor for movies and games and its not even close!

But Ben I am not sure what you meant by ATI being the last one to the multi-monitor gaming market? Other than Matrox, didn't ATI beat NV in providing support for 3 monitors for gaming from a single videocard?

 

[shaolin95]

Thanks for the link, the 3d Vision technology is once again a copy from Ati's Eyefinity technology, but honestly how many users are going to buy those shades to play a game? It won't work.

Are you kidding or trolling?
So 3D vision surround is a copy of Flatfinity? Do you mean the Eyefinity which is the same users have been doing with TripleHead and even with SoftTH? Yeah very original ATI.
Also, unless you are living under a rock, or just see RED, you may have notice that the WHOLE world is finally going 3D...no matter how you put it, 3 flat images do not make a more immersive experience than REAL 3D gaming.....
Our games are 3D, they have been for a long time so it is about freakin time with see the games in real 3D so ATI better get up with the times cause monitor stitching is not enough.

 

[Blue Shift]

Very nice Unigine showing! The rest of this year could be interesting...
I'm really liking Tesselation right now.

Are you kidding or trolling?
So 3D vision surround is a copy of Flatfinity? Do you mean the Eyefinity which is the same users have been doing with TripleHead and even with SoftTH? Yeah very original ATI.
Also, unless you are living under a rock, or just see RED, you may have notice that the WHOLE world is finally going 3D...no matter how you put it, 3 flat images do not make a more immersive experience than REAL 3D gaming.....
Our games are 3D, they have been for a long time so it is about freakin time with see the games in real 3D so ATI better get up with the times cause monitor stitching is not enough.

In all fairness, TripleHead2Go costs as much as a 5850, and you still need to buy a better video card afterwards. Compared to that, EyeFinity is a massive step up.


I do think that 3dVision is awesome, but I don't think that "the whole world is going 3-d" is a particularly valid statement. How do you know if it will really catch on? Have you personally used a 3-d setup in your home before? Have you talked to movie producers and convinced them to buy fancy new cameras? Weren't people saying all of this back at the turn of the last decade, when they were bundling polarized glasses with everything?

I'm hoping that 3dVision is really as awesome as they say. TWIMTBP could be all that's needed to ensure s-3d support in future games... Look at Crysis 2, for example! However, until I see on of these setups in person, I will remain somewhat skeptical.


Oh, and "seeing [red/green]?" NO U.

 

[Rezist]

Well 3d gaming has sucked since the virtual boy in all forms just a copy of a crappy Nintendo technology.

 

[shaolin95]

Well 3d gaming has sucked since the virtual boy in all forms just a copy of a crappy Nintendo technology.

Then you need to get on with the times amigo...you are talking ultra lame there.
Even the Sega master system had better 3d than that. lol

 

[shaolin95]

Very nice Unigine showing! The rest of this year could be interesting...
I'm really liking Tesselation right now.



In all fairness, TripleHead2Go costs as much as a 5850, and you still need to buy a better video card afterwards. Compared to that, EyeFinity is a massive step up.


I do think that 3dVision is awesome, but I don't think that "the whole world is going 3-d" is a particularly valid statement. How do you know if it will really catch on? Have you personally used a 3-d setup in your home before? Have you talked to movie producers and convinced them to buy fancy new cameras? Weren't people saying all of this back at the turn of the last decade, when they were bundling polarized glasses with everything?

I'm hoping that 3dVision is really as awesome as they say. TWIMTBP could be all that's needed to ensure s-3d support in future games... Look at Crysis 2, for example! However, until I see on of these setups in person, I will remain somewhat skeptical.


Oh, and "seeing [red/green]?" NO U.

I have 3d vision with a 60" DLP and I have been gaming since the Pong days, Atari 2600, Tandy COCO, C64, you name it, so I have seen it all and nothing has been more immersive or impressive than my current 3d vision setup.
I was not gaming a lot lately until I got 3D again....
If you cannot see how this is different than ever before then you are no trying too hard.
Did we have 3D TVs before like we have now...Video game consoles going 3D, PC of course, Hollywood pushing 3D, BluRay going 3D...I mean really, how can you even compare this to old red/blue crappyness? Lets be realistic now mate

 

[blanketyblank]

I have 3d vision with a 60" DLP and I have been gaming since the Pong days, Atari 2600, Tandy COCO, C64, you name it, so I have seen it all and nothing has been more immersive or impressive than my current 3d vision setup.
I was not gaming a lot lately until I got 3D again....
If you cannot see how this is different than ever before then you are no trying too hard.
Did we have 3D TVs before like we have now...Video game consoles going 3D, PC of course, Hollywood pushing 3D, BluRay going 3D...I mean really, how can you even compare this to old red/blue crappyness? Lets be realistic now mate

It hasn't always been red/blue. The better 3d movies used shaded glasses, but to be fair I only saw that at a movie theater. Then again I haven't been all that impressed by the nvidia 3d glasses display I've sseen at stores. Sure it works, but it just kind of makes the game look like a popup book (this was in WoW).

Maybe some good 3d games could change this, but I think the developers actually need to put some thought into this and not just have characters rendered a set distance from the background. Not sure if it's possible or what the limits are, but perhaps they could actually create depth and use that in gameplay.

 

[shaolin95]

Actually that is the main issue, lack of information.
You are able to tweak the depth and convergence to make it look the way you prefer so some users like going very deep inside the tv while others prefer to pop out effects, it is a matter of taste but the options are there to tweak it so the experience better fits your preferences.
The depth is already there for 3D games although yes some work better than others but it is a beauty to take a freakin old game and suddenly see it in 3D, a completely different way of playing it again for sure.
If we had to wait for 3d games specifically created for the glasses then that would suck but thankfully that is not true.
With the consoles now joining the 3d world and the (unfortunate) usual way of PC users getting console ports, I expect games to be more compatible as time goes by.
Regards

 

[bfdd]

I thought WoW looked pretty cool with the 3d tech. Saw it at Blizzcon, got to talk to some people from NV about it, it's actually really cool and if 1. the monitors came down in price and 2. the setup came down in price from NV I would jump all over it.

 

[shaolin95]

I agree on pricing, I think they can offer a much lower price on the glasses...I guess as I have no actual idea of the costs for them of course.
I have never played WOW so I wouldn't know.
One this is for sure, I love the DLP a lot more than my LCD for 3D....I wish it was 120HZ though.
My GTX295 is strong enough for pretty much anything out there but I wouldn't mind having the same power in a single card so that I can SLI instead of Quad SlI.

 

[SolMiester]

it wasn't designed in like it was for ATI, for nvidia they just flipped the switch on the driver and made it so. That's why you need 2 cards for Nvidia, and only 1 for ATI.

Only thing the ATi card is the extra ouput, quadro has had this for years....besides which how many gamers can afford the card and 3 like monitors, plus the games to go with it all...

 

[soccerballtux]

Only thing the ATi card is the extra ouput, quadro has had this for years....besides which how many gamers can afford the card and 3 like monitors, plus the games to go with it all...

2 more monitors is only $150 for 2x1080p 23.6" TN panels from Staples, they had that deal for like 2 weeks and it comes back pretty consistently.

That means if you have a 5870 already, you can buy a much better gaming experience for only $150. Further, you might consider stepping from a 6850 to a 6870 if it means you'll be able to play your older games on your 3 monitors. But with Nvidia it means you have to not just step but but buy a whole second card.

No thanks.

 

[3DVagabond]

I think they are both pretty cool ideas. Right now, I think ATI has an edge with eyefinity because they actually have the cards available NOW and you don't need to buy $1000+ (going by the only published prices we've seen for Fermi) worth of video cards to do it.

I went to a Sony product knowledge meeting a couple of weeks ago. They were demoing 3DTV. (The 3DTV did look like a pop-up book. Very well described.) They also talked about 3D PS3. It should be available soon and when it does arrive it'll just be a firmware update for older PS3. Seems like 3D isn't that big a deal to implement if it can be retrofitted with a simple firmware update to a 4yr old console.

Anyone who doesn't think 3D is going to be big though, I'll disagree. The major players in TV are going all in on it. People will just be inundated with it. Sony will make sure there's enough on the programing side of the equation.