Large screen 3D gaming monitor setup(more than 27 inches)

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 1:58 am

Hi. I just signed up. This is my first post here. Looking forward to learn a lot about 3D gaming and unravel the mystery.

I want to buy a 3D gaming setup. I already have an AMD HD gaming setup which I wold like to upgrade.

I know the latest nvidia vision 2 asus monitor that is 27 inch. Is there any other gaming monitor that is more than 27 inches(preferable more 32 inches or more so that I can also use it as a 3D TV)?

My present config is
Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 940BE
Motherboard: BIOSTAR TFORCE TA790GXB
Ram: Transcend 4gb ddr2 800mhz
Graphics card: powercolor hd 4870 1gb
SMPS: corsair vx450
Cabinet: CoolerMaster Centurion 590
Monitor: Samsung 22inch 2233SW

I certainly would need a better graphics card and a more powerful SMPS in addition to the monitor. But can the others(mobo procy and ram) remain same without affecting gaming performance?

Thanks

Post by **WiredEarp** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:05 am

I don't know anything about AMD specs. However, I believe 27", 1920x1080, is the highest resolution and size you can get in a 3D Vision compatible monitor currently. Of course, if you dont mind it looking a bit blocky, you could just use a 3DTV as your monitor....

Post by **cybereality** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:29 pm

First off, the monitors that work with Nvidia 3D Vision will *ONLY* work with Nvidia graphics cards. Samsung has a 27" monitor that will work specifically with AMD (S27A750D).

There are currently not any 3D monitors larger than 27". Once you go bigger, then that gets into HDTVs and they are NOT the same. HDTVs cannot play games at 1080P due to a limitation with HDMI chipsets. With HDMI 1.4a you are limited to 720P @ 60Hz or 1080P @ 24Hz (ie for Blu-Ray 3D). You could go with 3D Vision 2 and the Asus VG278H. I also tested the Acer HN274H, and I thought that was pretty good (although somewhat dark). Of course if you go with 3D Vision, you need to get a Nvidia card.

If you want to go Nvidia, then you probably need at least a GTX 470 (thats what I have). Maybe a GTX 570 would be better as an upgrade. For AMD you need at least a 5000 series card, preferribly in the 6000's. Something like the 6970 would be a good choice. You would probably also need a better power supply. RAM is not hugely important, but if you are running Windows 7 64-bit, then you might as well go to 8GB.

Hope that helps.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:46 pm

I know that nvidia 3D vision works only with nvidia graphics card. I dont think buying AMD card is a good option since Nvidia 3D vision supports a majority of games when compared to AMD( a quick look at GG3D confirms my opinion).

I can wait till April if there are any larger monitors scheduled for release. Is there anything releasing?

And I hope I dont need to change processor and mobo. My mobo has only one slot for graphics card so I cant go for a sli or crossfire. So I need a single powerful card that can play 3D at HD resolution(1080p) and at high/ultra settings.

Post by **cybereality** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:12 pm

Your CPU should be OK. The biggest factor is the video card.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:38 pm

Thanks for the quick replies.
So is there any large monitors scheduled for release before April?

And just out of curiosity. Why there is no full HD 3D monitors larger than 27 inch. Is there some technological barrier?

Post by **WiredEarp** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:57 pm

I dont think HDMI supports the bandwidth it needs, and DVI needs a dual link cable just to get 1920x1200 @ 120hz. Higher resolution monitors use this same cable to get 2650x1600 or something like that, but only @ 60hz. I think the cable bandwidth is the limiting factor currently. Of course, there could be a bigger 1920x1200 monitor that supported 3D (IE, a 32" or something), but generally its considered that going over 28" with a 1920x1200 monitor starts to make things look a bit blocky.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 2:28 am

If DVI(dual link cable) can support 1920x1200 @ 120hz, I don't see any barriers to produce larger 3D monitors(more than 27 inches).
Whatever be the size of the monitor I am content with 3D gaming at 1920x1080(or 1920x1200).
What I need is a larger size monitor that supports 3D with full HD. Can I expect any releases before April?

Post by **WiredEarp** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 3:33 am

I don't think you'll see any releases at all. Like I said, the perception is it gets blocky after 28" and therefore I doubt many manufacturers will therefore release a monitor in this size, barring higher res ones that don't support 3D.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:19 am

I don't understand what you mean by blocky and how it suddenly appears when screen gets bigger than 27 inches.

For example if my graphics card is capable of rendering games at full HD(1920x1080) the frames displayed will look the same irrespective of the size of the screen(as long as the monitor supports full HD). Logically this should apply for 3D also.

So I dont understand why monitors larger than 27 inches that support 1920x1080(1920x1200) @ 120hz can't be manufactured

Post by **Fredz** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 10:22 am

narasimhan wrote:I don't understand what you mean by blocky and how it suddenly appears when screen gets bigger than 27 inches.

It's because of the visual acuity of the human eye. For a person with normal visual acuity (20/20) and given a specific display resolution and viewing distance, there is a minimal screen size that is required to not be able to see individual pixels.

Here you can see what is this minimal viewing distance for a given screen size (1920x1080 resolution) :
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/view ... lator.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For a 27" diagonal it says 3.5 feet which is probably quite close to the distance most people watch their monitor from. For lower viewing distances a higher resolution would be needed, that's probably why 27" monitors in 2560x1440 are available.

For a 32" it says 4.2 feet which is probably higher than the usual viewing distance for monitors, so in this case a higher resolution is needed. The problem is that dual-link DVI is technically limited to 1920x1200 at 120Hz, so it's currently not possible to have 3D at higher resolutions.

narasimhan wrote:So I dont understand why monitors larger than 27 inches that support 1920x1080(1920x1200) @ 120hz can't be manufactured

I think it's only an arbitrary market segmentation between monitors and TVs, larger monitors can surely be made. Some time ago the biggest diagonal for monitors was 24", now it's 27". It will probably go higher in the future if there is enough customer demand for that.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 10:55 am

Thanks.
So I guess lack of customers is the main reason why they didn't release any larger 3D monitors.

For me HD resolution(1920x1080) is sufficient and my favourable viewing distance is 5 feet(for watching movies and gaming since I have a xbox360 wireless controller for windows). At this distance I feel my current 22 inch Samsung LCD full HD monitor is small and I am forced to sit closer(say 2-3 feet from monitor). So I need a larger monitor. And now due to the 3D buzz I'm planning to buy a 3D one.

Post by **Fredz** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:29 am

narasimhan wrote:So I guess lack of customers is the main reason why they didn't release any larger 3D monitors.

That and the fact that monitors with higher diagonals also need higher resolutions as I explained, which is not possible to do in 3D for now.

We'll see what CES brings, maybe 32" 3D TVs will incorporate the new HDMI transmission chips that will allow 1080p at 120Hz.

Post by **cybereality** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 12:21 pm

27" is also huge for a desktop monitor. In my case, I sit about 1.5 feet (or less) from the monitor so there is not much need to go higher than 27". I think this is the logic that companies are using for why they don't go bigger.

Post by **WiredEarp** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 9:12 pm

Yep, I have a 26" and its a good size... don't really need bigger.

narasimhan, if you want REALLY big 3D gaming, 720P projectors are where its at currently, and apparently they have the best 3D (virtually no ghosting). Bit more expensive than a monitor however, and not as versatile.

Post by **narasimhan** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:21 am

Projector wont suit my room. Moreover I would like to have 1080p minimum. I'll wait for a couple of weeks and then decide. If there are no releases then I'll think of the latest 27 inch asus(Nvidia 3D vision 2 kit) with GTX 590 and corsair HX750 power supply.

Thanks for your help guys.

Post by **Dom** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 3:05 pm

Why don't you get 3 projectors or three 27 inch monitors for nvidia 3d surround and two nvidia gtx 590. You can go more than 1080p with 3d vision surround eh.

I think 27 inch will have roughly the same height as a 32 inch and with 3 27 inch monitors it will give the span of like two 32 inch monitors.

I am not sure if you could fit two gtx 590 cards in your computer, or what your totally aiming for in an upgrade. You might have problems with a gtx 590 in a ddr2 motherboard. AMD now has 8 core cpus AM3+ and you can get 8 gigs of ram for like 50 bucks, I'd be putting in 16 gigs too if you decide to upgrade your motherboard.

At least if you get your gtx 590, use your current spec system and get a 3d vision 2 kit and 27 inch monitor you could technically put in 2 more monitors later in the year. I am just not sure if asus sells those monitors without the glasses, but then you would have more glasses too which they sell for around 99 bucks.

I'm sure you know whats right to get, hopefully you get what you need for imersion.

Post by **narasimhan** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:44 am

^I really can't afford that.

I might even settle for gtx580 if I cant get everything(monitor, graphics card and smps) under $1.5k.

Why a gtx590 might have problems with ddr2 mobo?

And will my current transcend 800 MHz 4GB ram really be a bottleneck?

Post by **Dom** » Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:09 pm

Well the ddr2 is not nearly as fast as ddr3 for one thing, things are not going to load as fast. A gtx 580 or gtx 590 might even and probably won't even work after awhile and you'll have to upgrade later anyways. Does you mobo have pci-express x16 2.0 or 2.1? Thats another huge factor. I'm not trying to nit pick on your system. I'd just be carefull on using slower and backwards compatable hardware.

I hope I am not ruining your 3d information with upgrade talk. Its that 3d takes alot of push and you should have a system that is stable. Anyways thats just me, cause i am always in upgrade mode. I have like 7 computers and constantly upgrading.

Post by **narasimhan** » Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:27 am

Thanks for the info regarding the pcie 2.0 and 2.1.
My mobo supports 2.0. I searched and found that gtx590 is 2.1(but some reviews say it is 2.0). But most comments say there is no performance difference between 2.0 and 2.1 and they are compatible. Or did you run into any problems?

I was thinking that ddr3 or ddr2 ram wont make any big difference in gaming performance. Moreover I already have a 4GB and feel that it is not fully used by the games. That said I am willing to add 2GB more if I'll have better gaming performance.

The reason I'm not willing for any major upgrade is that I bought my current PC 2 yrs back(for $1.5k) and would like to just concentrate on the 3D part now. I'll consider a new high performance PC 3 yrs down the line(while still retaining the 3D monitor if possible).

Of course I'll be forced to upgrade if my processor and RAM will be a bottleneck or if my mobo will have problems with the new graphics cards.

Post by **WiredEarp** » Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:05 pm

Your mobo will not have enough lanes to support what is basically 4 GTX570's / 4 underclocked GTX580's, unless you have one of those motherboards that have that Nvidia chip that multiplexes your PCIE lanes.

I believe 3 SLI'd 580's beat 2 SLI'ed 590's, simply because theres really only enough bandwidth for 3 cards to work fully and the 590's are clocked lower than the 580's.

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=925437&mpage=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't think the 3GB cards are worth getting over the 1.5GB cards, at least they weren't when I got my 580.

I built my setup to handle 3 3D monitors, but I've put the extra 580 and the 2 other monitors on hold for now (thinking of getting a HMZ-T1 instead).

Post by **Dom** » Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:32 pm

Yeah I would just put in that new hardware and see what happens, its mostly speculations untill you can see how your computer will do. I'd also email biostar support team and ask them what they believe is the best thing to do. They should give you a hopefully honest answer.

I've had some terrible things happen to me with computers and what I thought should be working does not. Like my computers going voodoo on me for its own perpose. I've managed to get all my computers working from new and old spare parts that would not work normally without a purchase.

Post by **narasimhan** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:45 am

@WiredEarp: What do you mean? I have neither the plan nor the finance to even think of sli(double triple etc). I just want a fast single pci-e x16 2.0 slot card( which I think is gtx 590) which could comfortably play all latest and upcoming games(atleast for next yr or two) in 3D at max settings and HD resolution(1920x1080 or 1920x1200). If a single gtx 580 1.5GB(or any lower card) can satisfy my above requirements then I'll be more than happy to get it.

@Dom: Thanks for the tip. I'll mail biostar right away. Anyway I'm in no hurry to buy(as I said before I'll wait for a month to see if there are any large 3D monitor release announcements).

Meanwhile will my amd phenom II x4 3 GHz processor and 800 MHz ddr2 4GB ram be a bottleneck if I get the above 3D setup(I have already raised this question but didn't get any satisfactory answers/explanation)?

Post by **WiredEarp** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:26 pm

Sorry, must have got confused with another post. If you only want a single card, I'd suggest a GTX590. I went with the 580 because you get better performance from 2 580's, but seeing as im not going for triple monitors now, a 590 would have been a better bet performance wise.

A GTX 580 however will run everything current in 3D at pretty damn good speeds. I have absolutely no complaints about its performance. However, the prices here for 590's are only another $250 or so, and that gives you 3 monitor outs, and about 50% faster speeds than the 580's.

Unfortunately, I know nothing about AMD processors. However, if you do have questions regarding hardware, I found pretty good support and info by posting on reddit.com/r/buildapc. Just post a question about your hardware etc and I think you'll get some good responses.

Post by **cybereality** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:33 pm

With a new CPU/RAM/MOBO you could get better framerates, sure, but I don't think you need to get a whole new computer. Just replacing the GPU should be enough to breath some life into the machine. 3D is very heavy on the GPU, not so much the CPU or RAM.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 5:27 am

ok thanks guys.

Anyway the frames will be limited to 60 by the vsync right? So if I get 60 frames then there is no need to get new cpu and ram right? And I am more than satisfied to get 45 frames. Only if it is less than 40 I feel a difference.

Post by **cybereality** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:51 pm

Just keep in mind that 3D normally takes a big hit on framerates (as much as half). So if you look at 2D benchmarks and a card is getting 60fps, you may only like 30 or 40fps in 3D.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 7:44 pm

As per this GTX 590 review the fps is more than 100 for many games and minimum is 77 in HD resolution(1920x1200). So I guess it'll provide min 40 fps in 3D. If it does not provide then I dont mind much reducing the textures or reflection and stuff.

By the way biostar replied in a single line saying gtx 590 is compatible and will work with my motherboard.

Post by **WiredEarp** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 8:45 pm

I think I get 45fps + in 3D mode in BF3, most games like Skyrim i'm running @ 60fps in 3D mode, and thats with a 580. I'd expect a 590 to hit 60fps with almost any well written game in stereo.
If you have a 3D/120hz monitor, your VSYNC can be up to 120fps, but you won't get that in 3D mode.

Post by **narasimhan** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:36 pm

Thanks. So I guess a single 590 will give me satisfactory 3D gaming experience for atleast 2 yrs. Then when I upgrade to a new proc, ram and mobo I'll add another 590 in sli which will serve me for another 2-3 yrs. And by that time glassless(or some motion detection 360 degree) 3D will take shape.
So that is my strategy for the next 5 yrs.

Post by **narasimhan** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:42 am

A few of my close friends have raised apprehensions about 3D tech. So I want to clarify certain points.
1. Can you clearly see the difference between 2D and 3D gaming(like when you compare 2D with 3D it should be

)? I don't want to end up buying something expensive and not feeling the difference. I know I should have asked this first but I just took it for granted that 3D will be cool and awesome. But it is never late to ask and get clarified.

2. Do you feel comfortable wearing the battery powered heavy glasses? Like do you get headache after an hr or so etc? I have corrective spectacles. Though I am alright wearing 3D glasses over my spectacles in theatres I just want to confirm since these(active glasses) are heavier than the ones in theatres. This will play a major role in my decision.

And I am going to order it based on your comments only since I don't have any access to these to try them out. So I depend entirely on reviews and comments.

And any news on upcoming large 3D monitors?

Post by **Dom** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:50 am

Hi, sorry if it seems like the same old people talking to you about 3d but I wanted to tell you what I think of it mostly.

Most and all of the 3d in pc games and movies are 2d similar, which from what I see they look like you might as well watch and view it in 2d without 3dglasses. I guess it could depend on if you can converge your eyes good enough but not really and its that the software drivers have been made to reduce eye and brain fatigue but the offset is that the 3d is pretty well boring. I only use my 3d stuff on with glasses maybe once a month sometimes less depending on if theres anything really worthwhile viewing. So I would not get to excited about 3d as it now since you have your worlds doctors making the rules and not putting it better to see holograms stereoscopic glasses 3d.

The powered lcd glasses are ok I guess since I can watch a movie with maybe a 15 minute break. Playing games with them on I usually will stop using them after 45 minutes. It would be different if the 3d was better though. But i'd just take a 15 minute break every 45 minutes. The weight does kinda suck to and I can't wait for autostereoscopic.

Also you can get yourself some red/cyan glasses and play some games with DDD driver or iz3d and see how you like it. Its pretty much the same just with lcd it will be easier on your eyes.

Post by **narasimhan** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:22 am

Well thanks for the reply. Its sad to hear that the 3D is not too exiting. By your experience I feel my interest in 3D will fade away after a few weeks of using it.

But the red/cyan glass is something new to me(don't know how I missed it) and I'll certainly try it out. Thanks a lot for bringing it up.
So do you mean this method will work in my current rig(HD 4870 1GB and samsung 22inch LCD 2233sw monitor).
Will these glasses work(http://www.3dglassesreport.com/anaglyph ... d-glasses/) or should I buy something else?

Post by **Dom** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:21 pm

Yes using DDD or iz3d drivers in anaglyph red/cyan you can use your current setup. I think they are free to use in anaglyph mode. Cybereality usually recommends the anaglyph pro-anna glasses. Those you linked to should work too and I ordered three pairs from china for a total of 5 bucks free shipping and they worked too, from e-bay.

http://www.3dstereo.com/viewmaster/gla-proa.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; pro ana
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-Pairs-Red-Cya ... 1e6364b2e5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; similar to what i got

Post by **narasimhan** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:59 pm

Thanks. Since I live in India the pro-ana glass requires $9-15 for shipping. So can I buy the nvidia glasses that I said in my previous post?
And what games can I try?
I guess all the 3D movies will work with this method right?

Post by **Dom** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:10 pm

Yes you are correct, you can use those glasses you showed. I think you can play pretty much any game in 3d with iz3d or ddd drivers. You won't be able to use the nvidia 3d vision discover mode unless you have an nvidia gfx card, a new one.

Movies will work too you just need to get a stereo movie player like "Sview" which is free or "Stereoscopic player".

Post by **narasimhan** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:10 pm

Is this glass http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-Pairs-Red-Cya ... 1e6364b2e5 that you suggested better than the nvidia glass(in my previous post)?

Post by **Dom** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:21 pm

I don't think either is better. As long as your protective of them i guess and the 3d will show on any pair of red/cyan glasses.

Post by **narasimhan** » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:12 am

Thanks I'll buy the locally available nvidia then.

Post by **narasimhan** » Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:56 pm

Well I was not too impressed with the 3D effects of the red-cyan. So I decided to wait for a yr or two before investing. For now I decided to buy a 32 inch monitor(since I feel my 22 inch is small). After searching I find that even 32inch normal monitors are not available(more than 30 inch monitors). No wonder I couldn't find 32 inch 3D monitors

. First of all there are no 32 inch HD monitors. The max is 30 inch. Now I have no other choice but to buy 32 inch HDTV as monitor.