-
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.
3 monitors on a single card?
- Thread starter P4Clock
- Start date
Soldato
Yes that would be fine.
Assuming you aren't chasing 60fps constant and max settings (including AA) you will be fine with single 780/970/290/290X/780TI class GPU.
I have been running Eyefinity / Surround for the last few years on a few different cards and haven't had any real performance issues. In my experience a mildly clocked 290X is a little bit quicker than a "stock" 780TI (780 running at 1200/7000 as a proxy). Currently running a Titan and have no issues.
Assuming you look at any of these cards you can run them without additional adaptors (ignoring passive adaptors depending on the cards outputs).
Be aware that Eyefinity and Surround work slightly differently - althought achieve the same basic featre parity. A high level way to look at it:
Surround - When enabled it creates a "virtual" desktop at the desired resolution. Windows can be maximised to a single monitor or spanned - controlled by the driver. Resolution in game controls whether you see Surround or just a 1080p output (selecting 1080p in game just outputs on the centre monitor whilst the other two remain blank). Certain applications ignore the maximise option you select which can be an annoyance (steam for one).
Eyefinity - Controlled via profiles in the CCC. You can switch between normal extend mode or spanned (Eyefinity) using hotkeys or by selecting them manually. This gives you more flexibility but isn't as "plug and play" as Surround. I have experienced numerous issues with this approach although nothing that couldn't be rectified (think of them as annoyances). In game you can't switch back to outputting on a single screen by selecting the resolution (in my experience it just stretchs). If you want to run single screen you have to manually switch back from spanned mode.
Overall both have their positives and negatives although I would personally lean more towards Surround for the more straight forward approach for the end user (fit and forget in many respects).
I have been running Eyefinity / Surround for the last few years on a few different cards and haven't had any real performance issues. In my experience a mildly clocked 290X is a little bit quicker than a "stock" 780TI (780 running at 1200/7000 as a proxy). Currently running a Titan and have no issues.
Assuming you look at any of these cards you can run them without additional adaptors (ignoring passive adaptors depending on the cards outputs).
Be aware that Eyefinity and Surround work slightly differently - althought achieve the same basic featre parity. A high level way to look at it:
Surround - When enabled it creates a "virtual" desktop at the desired resolution. Windows can be maximised to a single monitor or spanned - controlled by the driver. Resolution in game controls whether you see Surround or just a 1080p output (selecting 1080p in game just outputs on the centre monitor whilst the other two remain blank). Certain applications ignore the maximise option you select which can be an annoyance (steam for one).
Eyefinity - Controlled via profiles in the CCC. You can switch between normal extend mode or spanned (Eyefinity) using hotkeys or by selecting them manually. This gives you more flexibility but isn't as "plug and play" as Surround. I have experienced numerous issues with this approach although nothing that couldn't be rectified (think of them as annoyances). In game you can't switch back to outputting on a single screen by selecting the resolution (in my experience it just stretchs). If you want to run single screen you have to manually switch back from spanned mode.
Overall both have their positives and negatives although I would personally lean more towards Surround for the more straight forward approach for the end user (fit and forget in many respects).
i would like 60fps tbh. want a nice smooth experience. i dont run AA now so wont be too bothered if i have to turn it off.
Sadly you are looking at a Titan X as a minimum then.. (Even that won't be able to hold 60FPS+ constant in everything)
A 295X2 might be an option but you are reliant on crossfire profiles to get the performance. Not sure how big an issue that is but FC4 was missing a profile for quite a while after launch (IIRC 4 months).
A 295X2 might be an option but you are reliant on crossfire profiles to get the performance. Not sure how big an issue that is but FC4 was missing a profile for quite a while after launch (IIRC 4 months).
Associate
Running a 280X on 3 1080p screens. Not really had a problem with eyefinity till GTA V.
This isn't accurate. You can always choose the 1920 x1080 option (asusming that's your monitor resolution), and it will output on the central screen leaving the others blank. You may have to change the Aspect Ratio (in the game's video settings) from Auto to 16:9 or "Widescreen" to be able to select normal resolutions, but I have never played a game where they aren't there.
If you are planning to game on 3 screens, with modern games, you have to accept some compromises, or go for two or three graphic cards in CF/SLI.
You might be able to achieve 60fps in most modern games with a top-end single card, but you won't be able to run at maximum video settings. It's a trade off between the visual quality you are willing to lose vs the frame rate you are willing to lose.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 476
Does this still stand today ?
if you were buying a single card or a pair of amd cards what would your choice be ?
I am running 2x7950's and in need of an upgrade..
Cheers
The number of pixels at 5760x1080 eyefinity sits between 16:9 2560x1440 and 21:9 3440x1440. Not a lot of reviews will put figures in for eyefinity but you can kind of work out the performance based on that. Personally I have ran eyefinity on 2x 6950's a few years back and it worked OK, I did have to drop the details down to get decent frames for some games. At the moment I am running 21:9 3440x1440 on a 295x2 which offers good performance for me but of course does rely on Crossfire profiles to get the full benefit. Personally, with Vulkan and DX12 figures looking nice for AMD I would see about getting a price drop Fury or 390x. 295x2's can be had relatively cheaply second hand as a backup option.
Pixels:
3840x2160 - 8294400
3440x1440 - 6220800
5760x1080 - 4953600
2560x1440 - 3686400
1920x1080 - 2073600
Pixels:
3840x2160 - 8294400
3440x1440 - 6220800
5760x1080 - 4953600
2560x1440 - 3686400
1920x1080 - 2073600
I think you got the 3440x1440 and 5750x1080 pixel numbers wrong way around.
Anyway to run 3x1080 monitors in current games maxed out at 60fps with single card there really is only one choice GTX 1080.
Also thanks to simultaneous multi projection included in pascal gpus side monitors won't be stretched.
Last edited:
I second this, right now a GTX 1080 is the only option for 60 fps gaming on three screens.
I played with three 27 inch 1080p displays for years now. At first with a R9 290 then upgraded to a Fury X once it was released.
A 290X will not deliver a smooth 60 FPS experience. Sorry.
I did switch "back" to a single curved 34 inch 3440x1440 freesync display now though. The problem with three times 1080P is that while you have an incredible wide display you still have a pretty low resolution you'd want to run a lot of AA with. Good luck with that on a 290X.
Edit: Totally forgot: Also ran 2x R9 290 in CF for a while. Good performance but not enough game compatibility. Runs like hell if it runs though.