• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

CES 2010: AMD and Eyefinity6

mathwat

mathwat

mathwat

Associate
Joined
6 Mar 2008
Posts
692
Location
scotland (born in wales)!
Eyefinity from AMD allows three monitors to run on one 5000 series Radeon card. Eyefinity6 doubles that.
loupe.gif
Zoom

Eyefinity from AMD allows three monitors to run off of one Radeon 5000 series graphics card. Now, AMD has doubled the the numbers of monitors with Eyefinity6. Al you need for Eyefinity6 is one of the yet to be released 5000 series cards (the series is obviously available but Eyefinity6 isnt supported on existing cards yet), and of course the money to buy six compatible monitors.

In the above picture, Eyefinity is running on six Samsung ultra-thin bezel MD230 monitors. The total monitor setup goes for about $3100 (or $1900 for three).
Click to expand...


source :- http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/AMD-Eyefinity6,news-32549.html

mathwat
 
problem is, you now have an even number of screens vertically, meaning the center of the screen is once again on a bezel, need 9 screens to be useful, or you could extend them round to the edge of your peripheral vision and get mega wide screen :)
 
Utterly pointless, as if 3 monitors wasn't expensive enough, 6 is outrageous.. and ideally you want 120Hz screens for 3D use (when ATI finally release a 3D solution comparible with NV).


Plus the bezel is in the middle of the screen again, making it useless.
Even if bezel-less screen come, there will always be a bezel ion the top or bottom.
 
D.P. said:
Utterly pointless, as if 3 monitors wasn't expensive enough, 6 is outrageous.. and ideally you want 120Hz screens for 3D use (when ATI finally release a 3D solution comparible with NV).


Plus the bezel is in the middle of the screen again, making it useless.
Even if bezel-less screen come, there will always be a bezel ion the top or bottom.
Click to expand...

To be fair its still an advancement in tech (regardless if its been done before),
You could argue PhysX is pointless but its still there and people will have uses for it.
 
pointless as it may be.... it looks damn cool. but as someone said crosshair on a bezel again so its going to be a 3x3 array of screens....but then the aspect ratio is out.....

get a projector :)
 
jakspyder said:
pointless as it may be.... it looks damn cool. but as someone said crosshair on a bezel again so its going to be a 3x3 array of screens....but then the aspect ratio is out.....

get a projector :)
Click to expand...

But the FOV, and resolution will be nowere near the same ;)

People keep forgetting the point of Eyefinity :rolleyes:
 
Its looks impressive I'll give them that, but I cant see how anyone can put up with 7, let me say again seven! half inch wide and two feet long black lines on the screen. The other problem is talking someone in to parting 3-4K for the privilege, six times the failure rate and quite possibly a shed load of dead pixels.
 
what we need is panels that have removable bezels... so we can use them on their own, or clip off the bezels and use them multimonitor, either that, or people start using tools on the things :)
 
Whats wrong with just one high res screen ? I don't see the problem why we haven't got high spec monitors.

If I could buy a screen with something around a 3840 x 2400 resolution, I wouldn't be able to get my hand in my pocket quick enough. I would even consider running a pair of video cards (Ive just thrown up a little bit) and thats saying something.
 
jigger said:
Whats wrong with just one high res screen ? I don't see the problem why we haven't got high spec monitors.

If I could buy a screen with something around a 3840 x 2400 resolution, I wouldn't be able to get my hand in my pocket quick enough. I would even consider running a pair of video cards (Ive just thrown up a little bit) and thats saying something.
Click to expand...
cables have limited bandwidth, and they would be very expensive to produce for a very small market. way too much chance of dead pixels too ever be feasible
 
Well bandwidth is easily solved and it must be comparable to buying and running six screens. But what price would people pay for getting rid of lead window effect of the six screen setup.

I don't honestly know if the pixel failure rate is less when spread over more panels compared to one large panel. You may be right about that and it could well be the reason why.

Whats the resolution of this set up ?
 
jigger said:
Whats wrong with just one high res screen ? I don't see the problem why we haven't got high spec monitors.

If I could buy a screen with something around a 3840 x 2400 resolution, I wouldn't be able to get my hand in my pocket quick enough. I would even consider running a pair of video cards (Ive just thrown up a little bit) and thats saying something.
Click to expand...

Cost. One 3840 x 2400 screen will cost more than the 6 screens in the link.
 
jakspyder said:
the display port v1.2 allows for some very high resolutions and some very hight refresh rates. have a look in this forum section somewhere.


Edit: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18100558 have a read of the pdf its quite interesting.
Click to expand...
from what I've found it can do 3840x2400@60hz(as jigger said seemingly) which is pretty nice :) but what kind of resolutions are we getting with eyefinity? you could, theoretically, put 6 of these screens together. as soon as you make a big screen, why not get more and make an even bigger screen :)

3x1920x1200 = 6912000 pixels
3x2560x1600 = 12288000 pixels
1x3840x2400 = 9246000 pixels

yes, a single screen on DP would be better (especially if they make crazy widescreen ones) if you're planning on 3 1920x1200 screens, but moving up into larger screens at we hit a bandwidth problem once again.
 
jigger said:
Whats the resolution of this set up ?
Click to expand...

7680 x 4800 :eek:

Imagine how much a 66" 7680 x 4800 display would cost? £10k anybody?

EDIT: I still think projectors are the way forward with games removing the bezels altogether.
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
7680 x 4800 :eek:

Imagine how much a 66" 7680 x 4800 display would cost? £10k anybody?

EDIT: I still think projectors are the way forward with games removing the bezels altogether.
Click to expand...
where did you pull that number from? All I can find is that the monitors are 1920x1080 (not sure on this though) making the overall resolution 5760x2160

EDIT: engadget say 2560x1600 per screen, making it 7680x3200; unless you want a 3x3 setup :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom