• 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.

Eyefinity vs. 3DVision - immersion in a game.

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,626
I'll be intrigued to hear people's views (no pun intended!) on this.

I'm sure we all agree that games are going to change a lot over the coming years, with a final solution probably being large screen + 3D / holographic (before neural implants / VR).

However, in the here and now, which do you think is going to give a more immersive experience?

1) 22" Monitor + 3DVision = ~£400 for monitor + glasses + £x for the GPU if you don't have one already.

2) Eyefinity + 3 x 24" monitors = ~£750 + GPU (if you don't already own multiple monitors).


I myself am tempted with option 2, adding another 2x 24" Samsungs to my setup and a 5850.

For me personally, they work out about the same price (about £750), since I would need to buy an Nvidia GPU to get 3DVision working.

So which do you think would be more immersive? 22" of 3D or ~72" of 2D?

I'm trying not to be biased, but I feel like I'd be peering into a 3D world through a window, rather than being surrounded and therefore more immersed...

(I suppose alternatives would be a large LCD TV, but the resolution would be a problem, or a projector, but the usual caveats apply there).
 
Permabanned
Joined
30 Jun 2008
Posts
1,225
option 1 easily. 100" 120hrz, 1080p projector in 3d is godly unlike a few tiny monitors with bars separating them. you only listed the 22" monitor. you just need a projector, tv of any size at 120hrz.

3d gaming is something that you need to experience, you cant judge from pictures or videos. like everyone says: "once you go 3d there is no going back"
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
3 Aug 2005
Posts
178
Location
somewhere in the middle
option 1 easily. 100" 120hrz, 1080p projector in 3d is godly unlike a few tiny monitors with bars separating them. you only listed the 22" monitor. you just need a projector, tv of any size at 120hrz.

3d gaming is something that you need to experience, you cant judge from pictures or videos. like everyone says: "once you go 3d there is no going back"

agreed +a bazillion.

plus until they start making monitors with thin bezels eyefinity doesn't look that good, i'd rather play my games without big black lines running through the middle of my games thanks ;)
 
Permabanned
Joined
14 Sep 2009
Posts
53
Logically it should be the 3D as you are adding an extra dimension and therefore making it seem "more real", hence more immersion. However, I can imagine an Eyefinity set-up where all you can see is screen being pretty immersive also! It's a tough call, but 3D would just shade it for me.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,675
Unless some manufacturer releases monitors with no visible frame I don't really see the fuss about Triplehead/Eyefinity, I would rather just use a single 40" LCD TV than feel like I'm looking through a few small window panes.
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
Joined
15 Nov 2008
Posts
6,968
3 22" monitors is better than one 40" though, the point of them is, particuarly is FPS, that you see more of whats around you, in addition to straight ahead view, you can look left and right without actually having to turn in game, a 40" mnitor would just be a bigger view of the straight ahead image
Ive never seen 3d, not since the days of crappy blue/red glasses in cinema back when first came out, and I wasnt impressed then, I have seen multiple monitor set ups and once you start playing you dont notice the bezel
 
Associate
Joined
14 Jun 2008
Posts
2,363
option 1 easily. 100" 120hrz, 1080p projector in 3d is godly unlike a few tiny monitors with bars separating them. you only listed the 22" monitor. you just need a projector, tv of any size at 120hrz.

3d gaming is something that you need to experience, you cant judge from pictures or videos. like everyone says: "once you go 3d there is no going back"

How much would that set you back then? (protip: a lot more than both of the OP's configurations combined). Plus gaming on a projector brings all of its own hassles, a road I for one do not want to go down again.

3D displays need to get larger and cheaper, while multi-displays need to sort out the bezel issue.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,626
I agree that both have drawbacks. The bezels on the multi-monitor setup wouldn't be too much of an issue, at least not unless you go for a six-screen setup, in which case the bezles are straight across the middle!

Whilst I agree that a 120Hz projector would be awesome, it's not practical for me (and many people I would assume - mounting + screen + darkness + bulbs).

As for the 120Hz TV, yes that's a realistic alternative and a quick Google seems to indicate you could pick up a 40" 120Hz for ~£600. Thinking about it, you could wall-mount the TV and just move the desk (with keyboard/mouse etc.) back from the wall. I think sitting in front of it like a monitor would be too harsh because of the (relatively) low resolution for such a large screen.

Interesting...

EDIT - I suppose other things to think about are performance and compatibility. With Eyefinity, assuming three 24" monitors, you're pushing around 7MP, but there are no compatibility issues. With 3DVision, you're halving the frame rate (which will probably be faster than tripling the resolution), but some current games might not work so well.

EDIT - I also have no doubt that the 3D offered by the proper shuttered eyeglasses is amazing, but I can't help wondering what being surrounded by the game would be like too. I suppose you could do both and get three 3D screens running over TripleHead2Go :p
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
8 Jun 2009
Posts
507
Location
Hull, UK
3dvision is at like 640x480? pretty pointless.

i choose eyefinity easily, and 3 monitors seem to be best choice, but then we need bigger desks lol and monitors without borders, becasue borders kinda ruin it for me
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,258
Location
Melksham
Personally I'd go for triple monitors, I don't think the bezels will be an issue as the main screen is the centre and it's just peripheral vision on the sides.

3D I've never tried, and depends how well it works really. For me I don't think it would be as good as triple monitors, I mainly sim race, as such the field of view offered by triple monitors is far more useful than a '3d' environment, this is also why a big screen really has no benefits over my existing 26" screen, it doesn't increase the usable FOV at all...
 
Associate
Joined
13 Dec 2007
Posts
1,708
Location
Essex
I remembered playing the xbox 360 on a projector at my friend's house when I visited him back in the states, it was great. I would get a projector but my living room is too bloody small = (

I've a 50" samsung plasma but havent really hook up to my pc and play game with it.

Option 2 for me probably because I already own a 24" monitor.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
31 Jan 2009
Posts
3,206
Location
Newcastle Upon Tyne
option 2 for me too...I already own a 24" LCD so getting another two would be a better option IMO. well for me anyway. But then I would have to wall mount the LCDs and position my desk to the middle of where it currently sits so its directly under the monitors...hmmm lots of planning ahead me thinks...
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,626
Associate
Joined
16 Nov 2006
Posts
753
option 1 easily. 100" 120hrz, 1080p projector in 3d is godly unlike a few tiny monitors with bars separating them. you only listed the 22" monitor. you just need a projector, tv of any size at 120hrz.

3d gaming is something that you need to experience, you cant judge from pictures or videos. like everyone says: "once you go 3d there is no going back"

IIRC 120hz on tvs/projectors is not like 120hz on monitors. 120hz is achieved by frame doubling/tripling/quadraupling etc. ie it won't accept a 120hz source like the monitors can. It was designed to reduce judder in movies or give a video like effect with frame interpolation.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Aug 2005
Posts
178
Location
somewhere in the middle
IIRC 120hz on tvs/projectors is not like 120hz on monitors. 120hz is achieved by frame doubling/tripling/quadraupling etc. ie it won't accept a 120hz source like the monitors can. It was designed to reduce judder in movies or give a video like effect with frame interpolation.

Yup, Nvidia have said this somewhere, though i forget where. Some of the newer 120hz LCD TV's coming will be true 120hz & "3D Ready"
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,626
IIRC 120hz on tvs/projectors is not like 120hz on monitors. 120hz is achieved by frame doubling/tripling/quadraupling etc. ie it won't accept a 120hz source like the monitors can. It was designed to reduce judder in movies or give a video like effect with frame interpolation.

Ah that explains why the quick bit of googling I did seemed to indicate that there were very few "3DReady" models.

Thanks for this.

Looking better for Eyefinity + 3 x 24" monitors for me then. At least until 3D becomes possible on a bigger screen.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
10,428
Location
Edinburgh.
I think you should try and get a demo of the 3D first instead of going by consumer advice. The posts I've seen alot of people saying it's not worth it; others saying it's a god send.
 
Top Bottom