Why AMD is known as one of the brand that perform well in 3 monitors setup?

[Sevantynaug]

Hi Guys,

Why AMD is known as one of the brand that perform well in 3 monitors setup? and What is so good about Radeon 7970 that everyone is recommending it for a 3 monitors setup to play Crysis 3 ?




SevantynauG

 

[Bubbleawsome]

It has a high pixel fill rate, so high resolution and AA are it's strong points. And the 3GB VRAM doesn't hurt.

 

[KingFatty]

I haven't heard anything negative about Nvidia, so maybe it's just coming down to the amount of video ram making people prefer the bigger number 3 that AMD has compared to the smaller number of 2 that Nvidia has?

 

[SiliconWars]

AMD developed Eyefinity and it took Nvidia a year to get their own competing multi-monitor setup, and it's sort of stuck that AMD is best at it because of this.

The 7970 has more bandwidth and memory than the 680 and this helps it to win more easily at Eyefinity sized resolutions. For single card multi-monitor it's no contest unless you are willing to spend a lot on Titan or a 780.

 

[Lonbjerg]

AMD developed Eyefinity and it took Nvidia a year to get their own competing multi-monitor setup, and it's sort of stuck that AMD is best at it because of this.

The 7970 has more bandwidth and memory than the 680 and this helps it to win more easily at Eyefinity sized resolutions. For single card multi-monitor it's no contest unless you are willing to spend a lot on Titan or a 780.

People THINK it's like that, when infact NVIDIA have surpassed AMD in multi-monitoring *shrugs*

it's th same when people compare the GTX680 with the 7970...on current drivers:
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/03/...iver_performance_summary_review/#.UbSROyHU99M

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

 

[bystander36]

Eyefinity does offer a few different multi-monitor options, that Nvidia Surround does not. I'm not sure what is best in actual performance in the tradition 3 profile or landscape setups though, which may be more important for most people.

 

[-Slacker-]

People THINK it's like that, when infact NVIDIA have surpassed AMD in multi-monitoring *shrugs*

it's th same when people compare the GTX680 with the 7970...on current drivers:
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/03/...iver_performance_summary_review/#.UbSROyHU99M

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

I must be going bonkers, because all I see in those benches are 1080p single monitor runs... Weirdly, the thread does not seem to be about single monitor performance...

 

[Lonbjerg]

I must be going bonkers, because all I see in those benches are 1080p single monitor runs... Weirdly, the thread does not seem to be about single monitor performance...

Perhaps you should read the link again...and understand what you read this time.

 

[joshhedge]

Perhaps you should read the link again...and understand what you read this time.

It doesn't seem overly relevant as their performance at multi monitor, higher resolution, is not tested in that article.

 

[blackened23]

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

You will just never change, i'm afraid. Just so you know, eyefinity*does* support quite a few desktop features which nvidia surround does not, and I could go on to state that AMD allows surround spanning in 3d applications/games with only 2 monitors while nvidia requires 3; AMD eyefinity supports 5x1 while nvidia only supports surround with 3 screens (1 accessory). Hotkeyed changes are supported by AMD, and last I checked it isn't with nvidia surround. I could go on with this, but I won't. You're looking at merely one aspect of multi monitor, and as usual, you're making completely ridiculous inflammatory statements without bothering to check the context of the arguments presented before you, and not bothering to check your facts completely. Status quo for you - inflammatory statements, check. Dot dot dot dot, check. Vague statements, check. Improper spelling and terrible grammar, check. If you ever think you're helping sway minds with your arguments, perhaps you should actually read your statements now and then. If you ever think your statements do anything but make you look worse in the eye of the reader, you should think again. No offense but your posts get more laughs while they should be generating critical thought and discussion.

 

[Schmide]

Pretty much a wash sans TiT'n

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/149864-triple-monitor-madness-gtx-titan-gtx-680-and-radeon-7970-go-head-to-head-at-5760x1080/3

 

[Jaydip]

AMD developed Eyefinity and it took Nvidia a year to get their own competing multi-monitor setup, and it's sort of stuck that AMD is best at it because of this.

The 7970 has more bandwidth and memory than the 680 and this helps it to win more easily at Eyefinity sized resolutions. For single card multi-monitor it's no contest unless you are willing to spend a lot on Titan or a 780.

That is technically incorrect.Quadro had that feature for a long time.Your other points remain valid.

 

[bystander36]

What I'd like is a review that would test compatibility issues. What setup tends to work more often. This isn't something done very often. Typically, games which don't work on one or the other get dropped from the test suite. I can only recall one article that I've seen recently that mentioned which ones worked or didn't, and left them in the review, and that one actually had better results from Nvidia, but 5 games does not represent 3 monitor gaming very well, so I'd like to see one that does.

 

[amenx]

Hi Guys,

Why AMD is known as one of the brand that perform well in 3 monitors setup? and What is so good about Radeon 7970 that everyone is recommending it for a 3 monitors setup to play Crysis 3 ?

Probably because Nvidia see 3-monitor setps as such a tiny, insignificant segment of the market that they wont alter or incorporate design features in their 'lesser' cards that may cater to it (nor see a point in doing so). For those who can afford hefty 3 monitor setups, the 780s and Titans should do fine or exceed what the competition has.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I'd also suggest that AMD's reputation comes from the fact that since the 58xx series, AMD has had eyefinity that handled 3+ monitors very well.

 

[-Slacker-]

Perhaps you should read the link again...and understand what you read this time.

Another smug, dismissive Lonbjerg post. I suppose Lonbjerg gonna Longjerg.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You will just never change, i'm afraid. Just so you know, eyefinity*does* support quite a few desktop features which nvidia surround does not, and I could go on to state that AMD allows surround spanning in 3d applications/games with only 2 monitors while nvidia requires 3; AMD eyefinity supports 5x1 while nvidia only supports surround with 3 screens (1 accessory). Hotkeyed changes are supported by AMD, and last I checked it isn't with nvidia surround. I could go on with this, but I won't. You're looking at merely one aspect of multi monitor, and as usual, you're making completely ridiculous inflammatory statements without bothering to check the context of the arguments presented before you, and not bothering to check your facts completely. Status quo for you - inflammatory statements, check. Dot dot dot dot, check. Vague statements, check. Improper spelling and terrible grammar, check. If you ever think you're helping sway minds with your arguments, perhaps you should actually read your statements now and then. If you ever think your statements do anything but make you look worse in the eye of the reader, you should think again. No offense but your posts get more laughs while they should be generating critical thought and discussion.

:thumbsup:

 

[KingFatty]

People THINK it's like that, when infact NVIDIA have surpassed AMD in multi-monitoring *shrugs*

it's th same when people compare the GTX680 with the 7970...on current drivers:
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/03/...iver_performance_summary_review/#.UbSROyHU99M

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

Hey I think it's cool, and I'm'ma let you finish, but are you saying there are some facts in your post here? I followed your link, but all I could see was some noise about single-monitor gaming back in 2012, so I'm a bit confused what your point was?

How did this have anything to do with multi-monitor, and how did your link help add any facts to the discussion?

I don't think there's anything wrong with Nvidia, but I don't see what features it has that puts it way above anybody else when it comes to multi-screen gaming?

 

[3DVagabond]

People THINK it's like that, when infact NVIDIA have surpassed AMD in multi-monitoring *shrugs*

it's th same when people compare the GTX680 with the 7970...on current drivers:
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/03/...iver_performance_summary_review/#.UbSROyHU99M

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

Current drivers? 12.11b's drivers are 6 months old. I also don't see any multi monitor resolutions tested. How is that article relevant to the OP or even your point?

 

[Mark Rejhon]

Don't forget the new triple LightBoost setups that have been occuring, such as CallSignVega's and L88tbastard's. LightBoost is an nVidia technology; and it's the way to get CRT-style triple monitor surrounds, without needing CRT's.

 

[hawtdawg]

Don't forget the new triple LightBoost setups that have been occuring, such as CallSignVega's and L88tbastard's. LightBoost is an nVidia technology; and it's the way to get CRT-style triple monitor surrounds, without needing CRT's.

There's one super-ultra-mega-huge difference. CRT's could display the color "black".

15 years later and LCD's still suck nuts compared to a CRT when it comes to contrast ratio and black levels.

 

[24601]

There's one super-ultra-mega-huge difference. CRT's could display the color "black".

15 years later and LCD's still suck nuts compared to a CRT when it comes to contrast ratio and black levels.

I wish I could still get affordable flat screen aperture grille 21+ inch CRTs with the square pixels arranged in RGB stripe.

Those were the best IMO.

 

[Mark Rejhon]

There's one super-ultra-mega-huge difference. CRT's could display the color "black".

Agreed. No kidding.

To be fair, AMOLED's suck in motion blur too. It's too bad that Playstation Vita and Samsung Galaxy S3 has more motion blur than 120Hz LCD's. The sample and hold problem creates motion blur even on 0ms instant displays. (See Why Do Some OLED's Have Motion Blur?). It's definitely a solvable problem for OLED, but, pay attention to developments...

Always compromises. No perfect display solution. Upcoming display tech have various kinds of defects, one way or another.

But do you dare try a triple surround setup with CRT's?

 

[Black Octagon]

it's th same when people compare the GTX680 with the 7970...on current drivers:
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/03/...iver_performance_summary_review/#.UbSROyHU99M

Facts suffer, because people don't correct their stances when facts schange.

I know this thread is about 3-monitor gaming, but EXCUSE me? You post a link like that TODAY? A link from a review whose testing (conveniently) only goes up to version 12.8 of AMD's Catalyst drivers?

Despite being written in March 2013, i.e., a full 2+ months after Catalyst 13.1 WHQL (12.11 Beta) came out, giving AMD significant fps boosts?

You're right...facts DO suffer when people don't correct their stances.

 

[Spike]

I think it really came down to who was there first, and in this case it was AMD. I'm sure nVidias surround gaming is pretty good and getting better, AMD is just known for having gotten there first. I relate it to the 3D field, I have no idea how AMD does with 3D but when I think 3D gaming on a PC I think nVidia because they got there first and did it pretty well.

Personally I've only ever run 3 monitors on AMD starting with my 5870, then 6970, and now with the 7970. My next card may go back to nVidia, since I'm not really bitcoin mining anymore, and if it does I'll get a chance to see how their surround works.