Triple Monitor Setup - Advice

[Roadster-2]

I didn't want to butt in on Charles' thread (Triple Monitor Help) but after reading a couple of the responses there I'm not sure which way to go. Current System :-

Asus Crosshair IV Formula AMD 890FX ATX Motherboard
AMD 11OOT 3.2 GHz Phenom II X6 Processor (Corsair Water Cooled)
8 Gb Corsair Dominator memory
2 x ATI Radeon HD5770 1Gb PCI-e Graphics in Crossfire (O/C to 900 MHz GPU / 1400 MHz memory)
Corsair 950W Power Supply
3 x 24" Acer 1920 x 1200 monitors

FPS on F1 2011 was exceptionally poor, averaging around 20fps, but have now come across forum postings re F1 2011 and Eyefinity and have recently updated the drivers. Now getting around 40fps so playable but still not too good and I expected much better. C.A.R.S. was running around 40-50fps but has dropped since the latest 124 release to around 30-35fps.

I want to improve the fps and have been considering a move to 2 x MSI R6870 Hawk cards. Using an AMD processor I shouldn't have the same problem with Eyefinity as Alex had (using an Intel processor) but have been surprised to see the postings from members using a single HD 6950 card, running a triple screen setup and getting huge fps figures in comparison to mine.

I can't do much until I sell my Nixim GT Racecraft rig but I would like to get a good idea of what to go for to achieve a good increase in fps without having to sell body parts to raise the cash (not a banker you see !!).

Advice would therefore be appreciated. Mostly run C.A.R.S., GTR-2 and F1 2011.
Thanks

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Not trying to hijack this thread, but I can't hold out for Tri-Monitors any longer! And I also need some advice on this very subject (ref OP post)

I have already a single 580 and have just managed to win another matching one for £220 on ebay. I was looking at replacing the one I have for a 7970 as it is deffo faster than a 580 and is trimonitor capable on it's own, but having had ATI before, know of the CF issues (thinking ahead)... they do eventually get sorted, but not for a long time... whereas nVidia SLI seem to have 'less' issues from the outset... and looking at the online reviews on 7970, it still comes below 6990 and 590 GTX.... which are all below 580 GTX on Tri-monitor resolution.

So... next step... (OP - Roadster-2, tell me if you want me to start a new thread an I'll take it there, but thought you would get value from this too ) ... monitors. Don't want to break the bank, but deliberating over 24" 1080p IPS 60hz, 24" 120Hz (3D capable) or 27" 1080p ... don't want 1440p as this would be too much burden even on 580 SLI..... any advice appreciated.

If you already own a 580, then logically adding another 580 would be the best deal. The 580´s is one of the best card on the market without a doubt. I have 2 of them and run 3 120Hz screens.

Also important, buy 120Hz rather then 60Hz because you will eventually have to sell the 60Hz in the near future anyways.
If 120Hz is too expensive for you now, wait a while, they are goin down in price.

I have XL2410T, screen specifically made for gaming with the help of some of the best CS-players of all time.
It has almost halfed it´s price here in Sweden atleast compared to when i bought it.

 

[Ramónizer]

So... next step... (OP - Roadster-2, tell me if you want me to start a new thread an I'll take it there, but thought you would get value from this too ) ... monitors. Don't want to break the bank, but deliberating over 24" 1080p IPS 60hz, 24" 120Hz (3D capable) or 27" 1080p ... don't want 1440p as this would be too much burden even on 580 SLI..... any advice appreciated.

24" ( 16:10 ) 120hz doesn't exist. If you don't need mounting then i'd go with these

http://computers.pricegrabber.co.uk/flat-panel-lcd-monitors/SA700-S23A700D-23-inch-3D-LED-Monitor-10001-250cd-m2-1920x1080-2ms-HDMI-Dual-Link-DVI/m921777111.html/search=samsung+s23a+700

If you order it from germany you pay alot less http://geizhals.at/eu/654986

It's way better than any other 120hz in this pricerange for eyefinity because it has a smaller bezel and picture quality. Picture quality is like the higher series ( 750d, 950d ), they use the same chrystal clear panel ( semi glossy ) to enhance contrast, the 700d just lacks the flashy design and is made of plastic, tech is the same.

 

[MrPix]

Thanks Guys, some great advice and feedback, but I am an impatient so and so, and the finance minister approved the spend yesterday so I went with 1920x1200 IPS 60hz Dell monitors in the end. I really like the Dell 2407WFP I already have (already been replaced with a new/refurbished one under warranty for a dodgy button after 18 months use, next day delivered and collected by same person) and hope that the 3x U2412M's will give me a similar smile on my face and comfort that if even 1 pixel goes off or bright or I have any quibbles with picture quality, the next day I will have a replacement and all this for 3 years. Managed to get them for just under £250 each too Not many manufacturers will do that as part of the retail price.

All in all I figured I'm adding 1 card and 2 screens, so my FPS will drop a little due to the increased pixels. my logic is as follows (please don't think I am an expert, this is just my logic and it may not be correct) and without any other considerations for graphics rendering engines ingame/OS, optimised drivers etc.... just raw maths...

1 card/1 screen (Current setup) 1920x1200 = 2304000 pixels, vsync on to avoid tearing @ 60hz = 138240000 pixels per second to render

2 cards/3 screens (new setup) (1920x3)x1200 = 6912000, vsync on to avoid tearing @ 60hz = 414720000 pixels per second to render (x3 my current demands and I have only doubled my capability at very best so may reduce my FPS capability by 33% minimum)

if I went 120hz for the above (1920x3)x1200 = 6912000, vsync on to avoid tearing @ 120hz = 829440000 pixels per second to render (x6 my current demands and I have only doubled my capability at very best so may reduce my FPS capability by 66% minimum)

A lot of the older games/sims I play/race now are fine as I'm pushing over 120 fps on a single card (sometimes by a lot), but other generally newer ones I am just about hitting 60fps... I do play on max presentation (Ultra, very high etc) on everything with at least 4xAA and as much AF as the game/sim will allow to be fair, but if I wanted pixelated graphics, I'd get a PS3! so I know that I'm taking a gamble by going tri-screen to start with and I may have to drop a level or two of detail, or accept 40fps as a standard, I don't know yet.


In summary and according to my logic, 120hz would just mean my setup would have to deliver twice the amount of FPS to get a similar effect to what I'm used to on a single card, single screen... on top of increasing the pixels 3 fold already by going tri-screen.

Sorry for the walls of text, you'll get used to my banter hopefully!

 

[Ramónizer]

The dells are nice, good choice too! Easy to modify to a smaller bezel for eyefinity as well http://widescreengamingforum.com/fo...ions/18530/bezel-less-diy-also-valuable-users

Anyway, the good thing about 120hz besides more fluidity in gaming is that you don't need vsync to prevent tearing, just lock/cap the fps of the game to 120. Vsync introduces input lag, that's the reason 120hz monitors are popular among gamers because you can play without vsync and have no tearing. Of course you need the power to deliver 120fps constantly ( min fps ) wich can make your system very expensive for new titles.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Vsync is not good if you are chasing time.

I´d also guess that IPS is the worst type of screen you can buy for gaming due to latency.

 

[Danny Asbury]

What's the best type of screen then?

 

[glight]

Guys, looks like you have enough info but I wanted to clear a few things up here:

1. There are no issues running an AMD GPU with an Intel CPU. I run 2 6950's (2GB) with an OC'd i5 2500k @ 4.4GHz and have not had poor performance at all. I have no reason to believe I would get better performance from an AMD chipset/CPU. In fact AMD's equivalent CPU's cannot match intel's current offerings.

2. When talking about CF/SLI setups everyone should keep in mind that the CPU becomes much more important in yielding the maximum gain in FPS (even from 2 slower cards like the 5770's). An AMD 955BE will not be able to handle the CPU overhead involved in a CF/SLI setup as well as an intel i5 2500k. Overclocking your CPU is also important to get the most out of a dual GPU setup.

3. AMD's lack of drivers and CF profiles is not as dire as it sounds. CF can be forced in most games using the RadeonPro utility and setting the CF mode as AlternateFrameRendering. Ultimately, AMD do need to get their act together with drivers though.

For me, the 6950 was an almost perfect choice. I needed a card with more than 1GB of memory since I wanted to play games at resolutions upwards of 4924x900 (4.5MP more than double the res. of 1920x1080).

Last March this gave me the choices of 6950's(2GB), 6970's(2GB), 570's(1.28GB) or 580's(1.5GB). The 3GB 580's were out the question for me since they were well over $600 and very low stock (at the time). So for a dual GPU setup with more than 1GB of VRAM I was looking at around $600 for the 6950's vs. $800 for the 570's and $1000 for the 580's. Now the 6950 is not comparable to the 580 in performance but for me that was OK since I was saving about $400 (enough to buy my CPU, mobo and RAM!).

I cannot say whether AMD or Nvidia is better, they both have their pros/cons. If money is no object then I would have said Nvidia is the way to go but the 580 has some serious competition with the 7970 and we are all wondering what Nvidia has in store for us soon with their next gen GPU's. Overall, AMD is more value if you can deal with the driver issues.

4. For eyefinity on one card the bare minimum is a 6950 2GB, I would be more comfortable with a 6970 though. Keep in mind you will probably not be able to go past 4800x900 resolution, 2xAA and Medium settings on most modern games. Should be fine for sims like rFactor etc. though since they are not as graphics heavy. Triples with Nvidia can be done cheaply by pairing a 570 or 580 with a cheapo DVI gpu and using triplehead2go. A 460SLI setup would be quite nice if you don't mind the 1GB memory.

5. You should never do CF/SLI with a mid range card (5770, 6870 etc). Always buy the best single card GPU for your needs. The only time you should go dual GPU is if your needs exceed the performance of the fastest single GPU. (on a new build, dual GPU is OK if you are adding a 2nd card later on in your PC's life though not the best idea imho)

6. If you are going triple monitors get 3 identical 24" 1920x1080's. 120hz is nice if you can afford it for the 3D but if this is not a feature you want then don't buy 120hz. Also be aware you will need some serious computer hardware (top of the line) if you want to run triple in 3D @ 120fps! For me, it would far too expensive to go that route.

7. IPS vs. TN panels: I'm running 3x Samsung BX2350's 24" TN panels @ 1920x1080. Now, given the choice of a free monitor I would go with IPS but they are very expensive and I don't have any complaints about image quality on my monitors.

 

[Ramónizer]

@ Danny Asbury

Depends what you're after, if you're a modding guy producing stuff, who races occasionally than a IPS would be the better choice due to color fidelity. If your goal is maxing out the competivity of your rig having no disadvantage to anybody else then go TN 120hz. If immersion and realism is your main concern go with projectors, head mounted displays or TV's with low input lag.

 

[MrPix]

Thanks guys some interesting feedback there, although a few of the posts are conflicting against my years of being in the most fortunate of situations and having high end graphics cards and my own experience with vSync and hence my opinion only. To be very clear, I'm not saying you are wrong at all, just that I have a different view that works for me. let me explain.

I use vSync to limit my framerate to that which my monitor can display..... for instance if my graphics card is waivering between 104 and 143 FPS my graphics card is rendering too many frames for my Monitor to display and I am very sensitive to the tearing that this produces in some games, If I limit the FPS to the refresh rate of my monitor by turning on vsync in those games, I get a better smoother experience.

I was tempted by the 120hz benefits such as fast response times, but IPS really appeals to me as the super viewing angles of the screens without fade etc are also an important factor, If I'm at 45 degrees or less to a screen I want it to look the same as if I'm looking at it head on, not start fading colour and/or contrast which some of the other technologies are prone to such as TN panels. I am making a monitor stand currently with 45 degree angles for the side monitors, which will largely be in my periphery so this is important in my opinion. I already have a second screen (TN in portrait reate at 160 degrees on the vertical) that starts to fade at anything more than 15 degrees of headmovement. My main monitor is a S-PVA panel at present and it is noticeably better at obtuse angles than the 120hz LED Backlit screens in the house that I use for TV at keeping the colour/contrast at some dodgy angles and IPS only imporves on this factor. The input lag has a very low score on these monitors (lower is better), from some reviews it seems to come in at sub 10ms and as it can only display frames every 16ms (60hz) and GTG is rated at 5ms (so better latency than my current 6ms monitor which seems to be great to me), I'll be lucky to notice anything at all on the input lag side of things. My current monitor is prone to a much hicher input lag score so it will definitely be an improvement. Those 120hz monitors you (Ramónizer) linked to also have a low input lag rating of around 12ms (around 3ms higher than the IPS that I have chosen so carefully) so I think they would have been a good choice... if I could guarantee my GTX580 SLI 1536MB setup could render over and above 120Hz....ALL the time... so I didn't get tearing and I could put up with the TN's limitations on viewing angles

As my research has pushed me to estimating having around 40-60fps with this setup on newer games, 120hz didn't make sense to me.... not saying I'm right, it's just logical to me.

(I have had both SLI and Cross fire and dual GPU cards previously BTW, I'm not just guessing entirely, but a couple of generations of enjoying fast gaming on single cards on, I'm going back to SLI)

I'm happy to give honest feedback once I have set it up and gamed/simmed/raced and tweaked for a few days... I'll also quite happily eat humble pie if I have it wrong too! (of course this means explaining myself to the finance minister so fingers crossed that I have it right as I've been deliberating and researching this path for the last 18 months (moving technology target got in the way), but it is rF2 that has made the decision for me to finally go for it (that and the fact the missus said yes)!

Wish me luck!

 

[Alex Ball]

I use IPNs and they are great. I am a picky bugger, too.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

What's the best type of screen then?

Anything but IPS i´d say. Latency is getting better but in 99% of the cases it´s still way to slow. Most are made for pictures, not games.

Should also mention that 120Hz screens is not only for 3D like some seem to believe. For a true gamer that wants performance, 120Hz screens are the way to go and will do a massive difference in racing or FPS games due to refresh rate.
Having 3 of them requires alot of power to keep the FPS at 100+ but it´s well worth the money.

It´s up to the user. Do you want maximum performance? Then get 120Hz, 2ms screens and no Vsync.
Do you want to play a game where everything reacts much slower? Get 60 or 75Hz screens and run with Vsync.

 

[Ramónizer]

You don't miss what you haven't tasted, keep it in mind with 120hz monitors, wich btw. can't be compared with 100/120hz TV's because ones are native 120hz and others du to frame interpolation of a signal.

I personally don't rely on 120hz either, because i'm not after tight competition mainly when i'm simracing, paying more attention to immersion, but i know that 120hz can be important if you need to be competitive.

Back in the days playing lot of CS on a CRT, 60hz meant that you're just cannon fodder with that because your input is not as smooth and precise. I'm pretty sure that 120hz can matter if you're running open wheelers competing on the edge in iracing or FSR just because you're running smoother and see your environment more stable than somebody without. And this has nothing to do with inputlag at all.

 

[Danny Asbury]

Damn it all, I'm running moniitors with 60 and 50 hz... >.> sheesh.

Will have to work on an upgrade after I get the rest of my computer build done. Can two 6970s in CF with 2 GB of Vram hold up against a triple 120hz setup? (Intel 2600K paired with Asus p67 deluxe)

 

[Ramónizer]

If you're not running CARS at full detail or pick the wrong driver than it should be enough. Anyway, if if you prefer more detail in your focus view/ center monitor you can use Soft TH and run the sidemonitors at a lower resolution. Many do it this way because detail in periphal vision is not soo important

I'd go with a 7970 and maybe later add another one ( if you're buying new ), they sorted out the jaggies so that now you get even equal picture quality compared with nvidia, using less PSU power

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Should be mentioned that 7970 is a better card then 580 but it's a different generation.
Nvidia's competitor to 7970 haven't been released yet.

120hz screens is also not just for being more competitive. It does loads for immersion in general playing as well.
You really have to get one then switch from 60 to 120 to notice it the best.
It's a subtle difference but on the other hand massive, you just need to train the eyes to see it.
Some won't see a diff from 60-120 but that's a personal issue.

 

[Alex Ball]

Damn it all, I'm running moniitors with 60 and 50 hz... >.> sheesh.

Will have to work on an upgrade after I get the rest of my computer build done. Can two 6970s in CF with 2 GB of Vram hold up against a triple 120hz setup? (Intel 2600K paired with Asus p67 deluxe)

If you do go this route, keep me updated with the framerates. I got dismal framerates with my setup which is v similar.

-a

 

[MrPix]

Aside from my racing habit, I will be using the monitors for watching movies and also in my dayjob, but I do soem photgraphy, CAD and programming too, so will asses my decision over the next month or so..... the monitors are not that long in release so if i Have made a mistake, I'll sell them on and replace with a better solution.

As it is, I'm happy with choosing IPS, it will be a massive step up in immersion from where I am just to go SLI and triple monitors, regardless of monitor type so as long as this is not spoilt by my decision, I'll be over the moon.... it also gives the 120hz monitors a chance to be devloped more and become mainstream and thus cheaper. Great input from all on this thread and a big thanks to the OP for letting me and others hijack it.... hope it's useful all round.

 

[Ramónizer]

I'd keep the Dells in your situation anyway, surely not a mistake and one of the best, if not the best allround monitor you an buy for that price atm

 

[MrPix]

Well, I thought it only fair and polite to update as I hijacked the thread a week or so ago......my 3x Dell IPS monitors arrived last week and I have been busy setting them up and making a 'triple monitor wall mount', which by all accounts is a success and cost me under £50 which pleased me greatly... I think it looks ace, but the missus thinks it is a monstrosity .... I can't see it as I'm the other side of 3 floating monitors and a few hundred quid well in by not investing in a professional one!! ... which is a good thing, because I think I may need to watercool the SLI'ed 580's as they not only get loud driving the 5910x1200 bexel corrected resolution, but they get really hot.... and so does the room... so much so that I have had to install baffles under my desk to direct the heat away from me and out of the room!

I'm very impressed with the monitors all round and glad I went with a brand I know and love (only for monitors mind... PC's and laptops are a different kettle of fish!) They were incredibly easy to setup and Nvidia surround seems OK once coupled with Matrox Powerdesk software for non-game use.

All 3 monitors displayed a different colour balance at factory default, but a few twiddles here and there and they are now close enough for me to each other that I can't tell any difference.

I can't really use rFactor2 as a benchmark as it's still in development, but in most other games/sims I play, I'm getting very decent framerates with everything on max.... nearly always over 60 and sometimes 200+ on the Race07+ series.

I've had to reduce the eye-candy settings on rFactor2 to get a decent framerate over 60fps, and in some instances it drops to 39, but I'm holding hope on some coding optimisations from ISI and driver improvements from Nvidia in the future.

The monitors perform well in all other aspects and they get 5 stars from me..... I'm curious how I would have gotten on with 120hz... considering all but a few of the framerates but just couldn't bear the thought of 1080 high... I've been so used to the 1200 for 4+ years.

Racing in triple screen has opened up a whole new world for me, just got to tweak the settings in all the racing sims to make the most of it (mainly FOV)... I have this sussed in rFactor2 and the codemasters set, but am on a learning curve with the simbin titles.

So... in summary, I'm very pleased to say that it's no humble pie for me today.

 

[Roadster-2]

Hi Paul. Glad that things are working out Ok. Driving with a triple screen setup is just a whole new experience.

As the new Radeon HD7970 is now available I'm looking to see if the HD 6970 drops in price, or an upgrading user has one for sale. I'll update this thread as and when .....