[T-Break] LG brings 21:9 Ultrawide Aspect to Desktop Monitors - Page 10

I would need to point out that 2560x1440 with x16 AA is roughly equivalent to playing at approx 59 MP. While you do need reasonably beefy rig for that you do not need 5000$ monster rig for that. Even the next gen consoles might be able to pull it off, considering that if it comes to consoles they seem to be content with 30 fps. Hell, even I can pull off 5400x1920 with x4 AA at 30 fps if I fine tune the settings for that purpose in most games (i.e., not Crysis or Metro 2033 and I dont play battlefield) which would be roughly equivalent to playing at 40 MP and I'm running atm just a 7870 at stock settings. If you take into consideration that console titles tend to be often more optimized towards that particular hardware then I have a feeling that even that hypothetical A10 + 7850 combination some rumors speak about would be capable of pulling off 40 MP at 30 fps.

Now as far as mobile hardware goes, then currently they would not be quite there indeed and probably not quite there within 5 years either, however, I kind of doubt that HUD's would start out at max human eye resolution anyway at first place - more likely something more modest would be the first implementation, like 720p (similar to the Kickstarter funded Occulus project which will be released within couple of years to mainstream) or perhaps 1080p.

You can find the peak theoretical pixel fillrates in here: http://techreport.com/review/22573/amd-radeon-hd-7870-ghz-edition/2 for example where you can see numbers for current and last gen higher end cards - these are between 26 and 37 gigapixels per second giving you the theoretical max framerate of 650 fps for 40 MP for 560 ti - ofc reality is not that optimized and stuff like memory bandwidth and bottlenecks in other locations bring that number down by an order of magnitude at least in practice.

Just to be sure I'm not talking crap, as I usually dont run any AA at all I ran an Half Life 2 tech demo "lost coast" with highest settings and with x4 AA at 5400x1920 resulting in average fps of ~157 fps.



Granted source engine is not exactly the latest and greatest, but as you can see, its also not particularly crappy looking either. First 2 screenshots show the picture quality and last one is the screen with the fps number.

Edit2: And for comparison a bit more demanding engine - a Crysis at High settings It's a bit less than 40 MP but as there is no x10 AA setting and I did not feel like hacking up a custom setting in Crysis benchmark tool I picked the closest one. As the memory usage was well below my limit then all that higher resolution does is making fps lower by propotional amount (~900 MB of vRAM used out of 2000 MB on that card). For some reason the benchmark tool does not let me run the benchmark in my native reso of 5400x1920 while the game itself is quite happy playing at that resolution.
Edited by Carniflex - 11/11/12 at 8:12am

So people don't have to multiply the 3 up to 9 and then the 7 to 21 just to compare the difference to 16:9. Marketing is about keeping things simple for the average consumer.

You do know that AA doesn't work like that right...


By your theory
2560x1440 (3.7MP) is MUCH easier to run, than 800x600 with 16x AA (7.7MP)

Depends on an AA type. The "classical" AA which renders at the "target" resolution and then downscales to the screen resolution is actually using the same amount of resources it it would take to run on that "target" resolution, ofc nowadays no-one is really using a "classical" AA and various tricks have been implemented to make the AA less resource hungry, stuff like MSAA and FXAA which, in a nutshell pick only specific parts of the scene to run AA on, usually just the edges of the polygons - os in that sense you are entirely correct pointing out that I should not be drawing up that kind of conclusion without saying what kind of AA am I running. However, in my defense I have to say that this was more intended as a rough ballbark figure to "make a point". Mainly bcos a Crysis benchmark was refusing to run t my native screen resolution of 10 MP.

Anyway - but I found out last evening how to run Metro 2033 benchmark. At 10 MP and in DX11 mode (the Source engine I was presenting earlier is DX 9 engine afterall) I managed to get 30 fps with medium settings, ~22 fps at high and ~15 fps at all dials maxed out - other than AA that is, although the engine was not offering option "none" for AA su dunno really, I piced the "AAA" option and other one was "MSAA".

I still have to stand by my claim though, that modern rig can play relatively fine at 40 MP - obviously one would have to make some compromises in image quality if doing so on a single 7870 card at stock settings. Stronger card(s) and stronger rig I'd imagine it should be possible to get even Metro 2033 playable at 40 MP in DX 11 mode, say medium settings or so.

Granted, for now the discussion about 40 MP remains purely theoretical, as max one can do is about 24 MP when running 6x 2560x1600 displays in Eyefinity. For that 40 MP to be relevant someone would need to come out with that "retina HUD" with resolution of approx 8000x5000 pixels.

Hi, I've always been interested in this 21:9 display ratio, however the ones I can afford are too small at only 29" or stupidly expensive at over £2k for 56" +

My idea was to cheat this by having 2 x Full HD 1080p projectors and merging them into a 21:9 I have the 2 projectors at a tidy £300 for the 2 which I found very affordable xD

My only problem now is that I can only choose between 4:3, 8:3, 4:6, 16:9, 32:9, 16:18, Theres no 21:9 in there at all

Is there any software at all that allows you to cutting certain parts of your screen in live transmission to create the 21:9 aspect ratio ?

Or better yet any software that can overlap an image on two screen so projector wise you could merge them a basic example ===+|+===
the ===+ being each screen and the + in the screen being the same image.

Any help would be greatly appreciated and thanks in advance

Make custom resolution of 1280x1080 on each, assuming you can adjust it. Not that experienced with projectors.

Why the thick bottom bezzle? Basically makes a eyefinity/surround view with them in landscape orientation a head ache...I don't like bezzles period which is why I don't connect my monitors into one display, but having almost no bezzle on one side with a large one on the other just doesn't make sense.