Why is it so difficult.....?

[chilipeppersc]

to find a 120hz monitor with thin bezels and awesome image quality for surround/eyefinity between 23-27''? Everything I look at seems to be 3d based selling jargon, or 120hz but superhuge bezels?

Its as if companies know that if they feed us the good stuff, the 120hz IPS high resolution stuff, that we wont buy another monitor for 4-5 years, and instead are slow producing monitors so that we will upgrade every year or two.....

The LG DM92 has got me interested but it seems asthough its not 120hz.....what a dissapointment. Thin bezel + 120hz + awesome image (doesnt matter TN or IPS tbh)... where can any be found?

Thin bezel = <5mm, any more is tolerable but it gets stupid after 7mm imo.

Does the samsung 950D model support Nvidia 2d surround? with thin bezels?

 

[chilipeppersc]

does anyone know what the bezel width's on the 950 and 750 are?

 

[chilipeppersc]

also the nvidia 3D surround wont work I presume? But what about the built in 3D? would that work over the 3 monitors?

 

[chilipeppersc]

According to PCM2's very in-depth review here the 27in version of the 750D has a 15mm bezel and the 950D has a 10mm thick bezel.

As for Nvidia 3D on these monitors, iI don't think it works (at least not very easily) as it isn't 3D vision certified and relies on a displayport connection to do 3D.

However, the S27A950D does have a dual-link DVI input, so even though it isn't officially supported by 3D vision, this thread on the nvidia forums suggest that it does work, after a bit of messing around.

If you can get the S27A950D working with 3D vision via the dual-link DVI connectors then I would imagine that you can also get it working with Nvidia 3D surround. However, you may need to get a ~£75 active DP to dual-link DVI adapter so you can plug in all monitors using the dual-link DVI.

I reckon the reason we don't see more 120Hz thin bezel monitors is due to lack of demand. Thin bezel is nice, but only really important if you use multiple monitors. With these 120Hz monitors the main users (I'm assuming) are PC gamers, so they are unlikely to get two of these monitors - instead it will be one or three. However, as these monitors already cost ~£250-300 each then to get three costs ~£750-900, never mind the cost of the graphics cards needed to run modern games well at high framerates (ideally over 60FPS) at the massive 5760x1080 resolution. Therefore, I think it's fair to say that the market for PC gamers willing to spend this much on their monitors+GPUs is rather small - so the companies have taken the view of catering mainly to the gamers that only want one gaming monitor and at as low a cost as possible.

Thanks for the help, I am in no rush to buy I was just hoping to use the 10% discount to my advantage, but waiting is better (I will use it on peripherals to a smaller discount).

I can see your perspective on things, but for me it is a case of once again screwing the purchaser and prolonging technology. If one company offered a fantastic quality monitor, with slim/non existent bezels, at 23,24 and 27'' size, and make less profit (less greedy more forward thinking), they would surely saturate the market much to their advantage. Those that buy such a monitor would say Holy ***, my friend has 2 of these and they are so awesome in eyefinity/surround, and they work in 3d!(It really doesnt matter if it does or not to me), i think i will get another one for Xmas/birthday etc or maybe 2!

Every monitor seems the same, even though better technology exists. There is very little that sets monitors apart in the single monitor industry, but closing a monitor off to double, or even triple monitor compatibility is a big mistake.

3d seems like a fad, but in reality 3 monitors would be a much more lucrative thing to normalize. I think companies are more worried about long term profits, and as every company does, they SLOWWWWWW release their products just to keep pace with competitors, and no more.

LG DM92 will be interesting, if its 120hz I may well be tempted into 3 depending on the price ofcourse. Even for single monitor owners, bezels just look stupid! They are practically unnecessary in todays world, make everything more bulky, and are probably cheaper to manufacture that way.

 

[chilipeppersc]

Lol, a thin bezel but a border? Thats pointless for gaming, you will still be looking at something black. The bezel here isnt really the issue then, its more of the image being split into 3 with 'massive' (subjective) gaps in between.

What we gamers are looking for (obviously) is to have a continuation of image throughout the entire resolution with minimal 'split'/ gaps between images to increase immersion. At present it looks like you are playing the game inside a frame, which is ok I guess for some car games where you are driving and pretending the frames are roll bars or whatever (I bet some people justify bezels this way....lol), but when playing a shooter you will miss the guy behind the bezel, either that or the image will lack realistic continuation and half of the guy will be split with a 1.5cm gap in between.

Additionally, 23'' is too small. After playing on 27'' monitors and 32'' TV's you simply dont want to get used to such a small size even in surround/eyefinity. 27'' surround sounds awesome, but its got to have that immersive feeling. As someone on another thread said, 5mm is tolerable with bezel overlap, 7mm pushing it, anything more and I cannot justify the cost for the feeling of immersion or 'wow' factor.

I guess its a wait and see thing. June/July time will be the decider depending on what is out. Heres hoping for 120mhz ACTUAL thin bezel design (not fake...i mean why do that?) with a good quality picture. In fact the only thing putting me off the Asus 27'' is the lesser quality of picture (for a single monitor), and the lack of its thin bezel.