# Any triple monitor gamers here?



## troyguitar (Nov 28, 2012)

I ended up getting a good deal on a pair of monitors last weekend and they arrived last night. My desk is now rocking 3x 23" monitors but I don't have cables/adapters to actually use them yet 

I'll post a pic tonight if my cables finally arrive so I can power everything up, it's pretty epic looking. I'm worried I'll need to add a second video card to keep up with all those pixels though, currently rocking a single GTX 670. Anyone else use a 3+ monitor setup? What video cards do you run?


----------



## Winspear (Nov 28, 2012)

Pretty sure that card can do it as I know my 570 can.
You need at least one of the connections to be Display port. 
So you can do 2x VGA/DVI + 1x DP for example. But 3x VGA/DVI wont work. etc

That's with regards to connections. I have no idea about the processing power as mine is just for the DAW.

You probably know this already as you ordered cables, haha

It will depend on your other specs too..I expect my 570 would be fine with it as I can run 1920 Guildwars 2 on full res with no performance issue whatsoever, but I have 32GB RAM and a 3730k


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 28, 2012)

Yeah it will be able to run stuff, it will just be a question of how much I'll have to turn down the settings. With a single monitor I can run everything on full detail plus full AA in basically every game at somewhere around 60 fps minimum. I'm wondering if tripling the size will cut the framerate to a third as well - meaning down to 20 fps minimum with everything maxed out.

I'm rocking the 3570k at 4944 MHz and grabbed a 3770k for a super deal on Monday so I'll keep whichever chip runs better and sell the other on ebay. Either way processing power will not be an issue!


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 28, 2012)

Holy shit this is badass. 670 gets 35-45 fps with settings fully maxed at 5760x1080!


----------



## Winspear (Nov 30, 2012)

Triple screen WoW? Looks badass! How is the game these days?


----------



## HighGain510 (Nov 30, 2012)

I tried running triple monitors with my cockpit and ended up hating it. Found a single large monitor to be better for my gaming experience personally, especially for FPS games since the radar was in the FAR left corner of the monitor so to see it I literally had to turn my head. However that being said, I was also using three 27" monitors so that could have been part of the problem....  With smaller monitors it might not have been as bad, but the resolution would have been way less so I opted to return to my single 27" monitor setup.


----------



## Winspear (Nov 30, 2012)

Yeah it would depend on the game for me. For something more relaxing like an MMO I'd like it (not in boss fights though).


----------



## Alex6534 (Nov 30, 2012)

You guys aren't helping me, I'm currently researching to build a pc and loving the idea of three monitors, thought gear GAS was bad enough, this is going to ruin me


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 30, 2012)

I thought about getting a single bigger monitor but I really like the idea of having peripheral vision available in games. So far it's awesome but it will take some time to really adjust to it. I think it will be great for FPS and racing games too whenever I get around to trying some. The Logitech G27 wheel is calling my name - it's on sale right now at newegg for 'only' $240


----------



## Maniacal (Nov 30, 2012)

I have an Eyefinity setup, 3 x 24 monitors, surround sound etc. 

Dragon Age Origins, Crysis, Skyrim etc all look amazing on it.


----------



## Webmaestro (Nov 30, 2012)

Hmm, I'd love to use 3 monitors, but I'm not sure I can justify it for World of Warcraft (really, the only game I play). Looks freakin' sweet though. I may still do it one day.


----------



## Webmaestro (Nov 30, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> Holy shit this is badass. 670 gets 35-45 fps with settings fully maxed at 5760x1080!



Hmm, on second thought...


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 30, 2012)

Maniacal said:


> I have an Eyefinity setup, 3 x 24 monitors, surround sound etc.
> 
> Dragon Age Origins, Crysis, Skyrim etc all look amazing on it.



^ What are you running for video card(s)? I upgraded from an AMD 7770 to the GTX 670 recently for like triple the performance but even that seems like it's about the bare minimum for gaming at 5760x1080.


----------



## synrgy (Nov 30, 2012)

Always wanted to. Can't ever seem to justify the expense.

Particularly interested in doing so with the Xbox 360/Forza Motorsports games:


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 30, 2012)

For me, an additional pair of decent 23" monitors to flank my existing one was actually cheaper than a single decent 27-30" so it was a no-brainer. The only downside is some games don't support it, mainly RTS's and older games. 

I'll absolutely be picking up a wheel/pedal/shifter set and some racing games next year (most likely Dirt 3, F1 2012, rFactor 2). That was the main reason I wanted the triple monitor setup in the first place, I just got the monitors early since there was a good sale on black friday.


----------



## Maniacal (Nov 30, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> ^ What are you running for video card(s)? I upgraded from an AMD 7770 to the GTX 670 recently for like triple the performance but even that seems like it's about the bare minimum for gaming at 5760x1080.




2 x 5870 overclocked. Its works well for most games, I can't max out on games like Crysis but it still works. 

I just got an iMac but when I build my next PC I want a setup like this. 

Slim bezels just look so much better.


----------



## Webmaestro (Nov 30, 2012)

Maniacal said:


> Slim bezels just look so much better.



Agreed. I don't think I could ever go to 3+ monitors unless they had super-skinny bezels like that.


----------



## troyguitar (Nov 30, 2012)

Yeah I grabbed the thinnest bezeled monitors I could that were still cheap, they do make a big difference.

I don't think I would like portrait mode after years of looking at widescreen stuff, but you never know. Phone and tablet screens are kind of set up to run in portrait mode so maybe it wouldn't be a big deal.


----------



## axxessdenied (Nov 30, 2012)

I plan on adding 2 more 27" monitors to my set up for a triple set up as well. I got 2 x 2gb 6950s in my rig so should be handle it pretty well. I play everything maxed out at 1080p no prob.

Looks awesome


----------



## SnowfaLL (Nov 30, 2012)

I know a lot of professional online poker players who've been playing with 3 monitors since 2006ish.. That can be like 10-16 tables at a time or so! (if your average profit is a moddest $3 an hour at each table with a safe-hand system of betting, thats $30 an hour average just betting only top hands..) 

I am tempted but I dont think more than one monitor would work well for Starcraft.. too distracting. I'll stick with my one monitor =] Or maybe a 2nd just to have a screen for my winamp open so I can switch songs in the middle of a game, or check facebook or something stupid lol.


----------



## Xaios (Nov 30, 2012)

Yes, that's a real thing. No, it doesn't seem like the make them anymore.


----------



## axxessdenied (Nov 30, 2012)

main thing i want triple monitors for is my DAW. I thought 2 monitors would give me plenty of real estate... which it does. But... MOAR WOULD BE NIIIICE


----------



## SirMyghin (Nov 30, 2012)

I don't, it would give me really bad headaches I bet, for the same reasons I can't play shooters on big monitors for more than short spurts. Too much going on in the peripheral I think. 

That said I prefer a main monitor and ancillary monitor setup, main monitor always dead front and center or I get some neck cramps after a while. 

I run 2x 24, using an IVY bridges capability to support one monitor, the other through my discreet.


----------



## MFB (Nov 30, 2012)

You know that the only games you'll be allowed to play now are those of racing/mech (Steel Batallion anyone?) as those are the only ones where it would replicate the actual cockpit feeling

If desiring to play anything else, please turn in triple-monitor card. Thank you.


----------



## Maniacal (Dec 1, 2012)

Other games still work, Crysis looks great with 3 screens.


----------



## axxessdenied (Dec 1, 2012)

MFB said:


> You know that the only games you'll be allowed to play now are those of racing/mech (Steel Batallion anyone?) as those are the only ones where it would replicate the actual cockpit feeling
> 
> If desiring to play anything else, please turn in triple-monitor card. Thank you.



Seriously? Strategy games on triple monitor? fuck yes.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 1, 2012)

MFB said:


> You know that the only games you'll be allowed to play now are those of racing/mech (Steel Batallion anyone?) as those are the only ones where it would replicate the actual cockpit feeling
> 
> If desiring to play anything else, please turn in triple-monitor card. Thank you.



It's great for anything with a first person view really. RTS games are the main thing that don't really benefit, though it does mean I can have email up on one screen, the game in the middle, and itunes on the third.


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 1, 2012)

I have 3x27" displays, for 7680x1440.. Unfortunately, the other 2 display's are in storage atm.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 1, 2012)

Wow that's a lot of pixels, like 2x GTX 680 4GB territory!

I've noticed that 5760x1080 already uses up the entire 2GB of RAM in my 670 when playing WoW, so if I ever go to SLI I'll probably try to switch to 4GB models.


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 1, 2012)

The current generation of nVidia's suck at extreme resolution, when compared to AMD. The memory bandwidth of even a GTX680 is a huuuuggggeee bottleneck to push that many pretty pixels through. AMD's won this round - overall faster cards (especially for very high res) for less money AND drivers that don't suck 

With that said, I have 2 HD7970's.


----------



## MFB (Dec 1, 2012)

axxessdenied said:


> Seriously? Strategy games on triple monitor? fuck yes.



Uh, there was copious amounts of sarcasm in there which is normally what I imply when I keep things in a single line of text unless the response is just really short. If it sounds like BS/sarcasm from me - it usually is.



troyguitar said:


> It's great for anything with a first person view really. RTS games are the main thing that don't really benefit, though it does mean I can have email up on one screen, the game in the middle, and itunes on the third.



I didn't think of doing Command & Conquer on three screens though ...hmmm. I'd reconsider using iTunes on one monitor as the new layout from what I've heard is atrocious.


----------



## axxessdenied (Dec 1, 2012)

MFB said:


> Uh, there was copious amounts of sarcasm in there which is normally what I imply when I keep things in a single line of text unless the response is just really short. If it sounds like BS/sarcasm from me - it usually is.
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't think of doing Command & Conquer on three screens though ...hmmm. I'd reconsider using iTunes on one monitor as the new layout from what I've heard is atrocious.



Don't mind me. Worked 17 hours yesterday and I'm at it for 18 hours today and only got 4 hours of sleep. Brain does't work the greatest 

Civilization V or any of the Total War games on triple monitors would be bananas!


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 2, 2012)

Itchyman said:


> The current generation of nVidia's suck at extreme resolution, when compared to AMD. The memory bandwidth of even a GTX680 is a huuuuggggeee bottleneck to push that many pretty pixels through. AMD's won this round - overall faster cards (especially for very high res) for less money AND drivers that don't suck
> 
> With that said, I have 2 HD7970's.



More memory bandwidth, but a 7970 can only MATCH a 670. AMD winning this round is a good joke though. Only pulls ahead of the 670 slightly in larger open world type games, and very slightly at that. I went from green to red after a good 4 years this cycle for a reason . The bottleneck on the 680 is often considered to be its power consumption though, regarded as too low for optimal performance, and is speculation as to why the 670 nearly keeps up with it.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 3, 2012)

I got my 670 for the price of a 7950 so it's hard to complain. With a moderate overclock it's pulling 30-60 fps in all Pandaria content at 5760x1080 full ultra settings with 8x MSAA. Didn't check the framerate in Skyrim but it's smooth on the same settings as well.

Depending on how it performs in other games, I probably will just wait until the 780/790 before upgrading. Who knows when they'll even be out though and how they will perform...


----------



## flint757 (Dec 3, 2012)

I'll be running sli 3d surround in a few weeks. Should be spanktacular. I've got 2 gtx 580 classified at 3gb each. 

3D makes my one monitor feel bigger, way more depth. Love it!!! More can only be better.


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 3, 2012)

SirMyghin said:


> More memory bandwidth, but a 7970 can only MATCH a 670. AMD winning this round is a good joke though. Only pulls ahead of the 670 slightly in larger open world type games, and very slightly at that. I went from green to red after a good 4 years this cycle for a reason . The bottleneck on the 680 is often considered to be its power consumption though, regarded as too low for optimal performance, and is speculation as to why the 670 nearly keeps up with it.


I'm sorry, the GTX680 is obviously scoring lower.





Also, your precious GTX670 is no longer the best value. The HD7950, which is also faster, is now the best bang for buck.


----------



## axxessdenied (Dec 3, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I'll be running sli 3d surround in a few weeks. Should be spanktacular. I've got 2 gtx 580 classified at 3gb each.
> 
> 3D makes my one monitor feel bigger, way more depth. Love it!!! More can only be better.



Crossfire scaled MUCH better than SLI for multi-gpu set ups. I haven't payed much attention to the new series of cards coming out so that might have changed 

I have 2 x 2gb 6950 that I bought on sale over a year ago now. I run everything maxed out at 1080p. The only game that gives my machine any kind of real work so far is Shogun 2: Total War.

Skyrim, Dishonored, The Witcher 2, those game are a piece of cake


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 3, 2012)

Eh, here's the game I play most:






On average the 7970 is a little better than the 680 at this resolution, but not in WoW.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 3, 2012)

axxessdenied said:


> Crossfire scaled MUCH better than SLI for multi-gpu set ups. I haven't payed much attention to the new series of cards coming out so that might have changed



Apparently SLI is better now...






That's not even looking at 4GB 670's.


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 3, 2012)

Old benches from nvidia fancompanies are old. Lets see benches using 12.11 Catalyst drivers - Crysis 3 uses the latest drivers, because its a very recent game still in Alpha. 
Also, 7970 CFX isn't plagued with microstutter that can't be seen in benchmarks.

Also, by default, a 4GB GTX670 will have a little less memory performance than a 2GB version, because memory timings have to be loosened for the increase in size.


----------



## axxessdenied (Dec 3, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> Apparently SLI is better now...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nope. HARDOCP - Conclusion - Fall 2012 GPU and Driver Comparison Roundup



That's the conclusion of the article. Seems like the 7970 is the card to get


----------



## flint757 (Dec 3, 2012)

Benchmarks and real world gains are rarely the same. A slight increase on a benchmark will go relatively unnoticed with regular game play. Expensive hobby to get obsessed with anyhow. 

The 680 was released at the end of 1st quarter and by 2nd quarter they had released the 690. Chasing the dragon is just going to lead to bankruptcy. 

Physx and 3D are what keep me attached to nvidia. While AMD is open source last I checked it was overall worse in the 3D department (it might have gotten better over time ). AMD has always had nvidia beat when it came to having a ridiculous amount of monitors and high resolutions though. Unless I was going to do that portrait setup, though, more than 4 would be too much and I'd only use 3 in game so they come out equal here for me (high res monitors aren't cheap either ). I've been told that AMD works a lot better with coding too. From past experience nvidia has had the overall better drivers though. I'm sure as time goes on that is less and less of an issue for both though.

In any case better and great are not dependent terms. Even if the 7970 was better than the 670 they are both great cards.

[EDIT]

I hate that these tests max out everything including resolution. 2560x1600 monitors are ridiculously expensive. Unless someone knows a better place to look for some, then I'm listening.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 3, 2012)

Itchyman said:


> Old benches from nvidia fancompanies are old. Lets see benches using 12.11 Catalyst drivers - Crysis 3 uses the latest drivers, because its a very recent game still in Alpha.
> Also, 7970 CFX isn't plagued with microstutter that can't be seen in benchmarks.
> 
> Also, by default, a 4GB GTX670 will have a little less memory performance than a 2GB version, because memory timings have to be loosened for the increase in size.



So you're saying that we should have bought the AMD cards when they cost more and performed worse than the 670's because future drivers would change things? 

I'm guessing I should have bet on the Giants in the last Superbowl too...


----------



## iRaiseTheDead (Dec 4, 2012)

Alex6534 said:


> You guys aren't helping me, I'm currently researching to build a pc and loving the idea of three monitors, thought gear GAS was bad enough, this is going to ruin me



This. This exactly.


----------



## Xaios (Dec 5, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> So you're saying that we should have bought the AMD cards when they cost more and performed worse than the 670's because future drivers would change things?
> 
> I'm guessing I should have bet on the Giants in the last Superbowl too...



That's a very fair way to evaluate the situation, especially considering that in the realm of computer gaming, there's ALWAYS something better around the corner. When you were making your buying decision, of course it made sense to buy what was the best of the time. However, it should at least be acknowledged that, with AMD's October driver update (which actually had a fairly significant positive effect on performance), combined with recent price cuts, they've surged ahead in a big way. 6 months ago, I would have almost definitely recommended Nvidia over AMD. Now, the situation has been reversed. Nvidia had a comfortable lead, but they rested on their laurels and AMD took advantage of that fact.

With regards to Tom's Hardware, I used to read that site multiple times a day for several years. There's no question they tend to be Nvidia fanboys, even when AMD has a measurable performance lead in even their own charts. I would hope that they have enough integrity not to let it color their results, but they also consistently publish results that contradict a lot of other reputable sites. Or at least they used to, I haven't been a regular reader for about a couple years.

(The reason I don't read them anymore is the increasing tabloid-ization of their news, not to mention how they would report anytime an Apple employee went to the bathroom.)


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 5, 2012)

Yeah if I were to buy something now it would probably be a pair of cheap 7950's for the same price as a single 4GB 680. Hard to argue with the numbers being reported on the new drivers at $275 per card. I might still do that at some point and sell the 670 if I decide to go to dual cards, that thing might sell for $275 by itself. The only annoying thing is I would need to buy displayport -> dvi cables too since my cheap monitors only have dvi inputs


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 10, 2012)

Despite all that you've countered with, Crossfire 7000 series has always been smoother than SLI GTX600 series. I'll take a smooth 40FPS than a sporadic 60FPS any day. 

As for purchasing the cards 6 months ago, I'd have (actually, I did) bought the card with better hardware specs then what they're reportedly performing. Memory performance is a huugee factor and 256-bit bandwidth simply does not cut it - look at how badly it cripples the GTX680. 

Also, it would've been interesting to see what would have happened to your Toms Hardware bench if they used x16 AA 


EDIT: High-end Sapphire cards come with a plethora of little adapters - I think my 7970 came with Mini-DP > DVI, Mini-DP > HDMI, HDMI > DVI, DVI > VGA.. probably more.


----------



## troyguitar (Dec 10, 2012)

Itchyman said:


> Despite all that you've countered with, Crossfire 7000 series has always been smoother than SLI GTX600 series. I'll take a smooth 40FPS than a sporadic 60FPS any day.



Source?


----------



## Itchyman (Dec 15, 2012)

Me.


----------

