Widescreen Gaming Forum

[quote]Just Cause 2 might make a good candidate for future testing. It seems to be up to date graphically and I believe the devs have commited to Eyefinity support. I've certainly been having lots of fun in the demo. :D

I'll have to look at that. I have the demo, though I haven't had a chance to fire it up because of all the testing. Will need to see if I can find a benchmark run that is easily repeatable. Will look at that for the future.

I believe they just released a patch for the demo that should add a benchmarking utility. Other features include an alterable FOV setting and more...

http://store.steampowered.com/news/3617/

I don't expect you to put in more work now, but in the future please consider 3 x 2560x1600 for another resolution (I have 3 x Dell 3008wfp ready to go) and metro 2033 as an additional game. I definitely expect nothing more than you have time to do though. Thanks.

I don't think Ibrin has quite enough cash for three 2560x1600 panels...

I didn't notice this before, but ATI had this chart of performance for 1GB vs 2GB. Now, as I always do with Nvidias charts, I have to take it with a grain of salt but if it were even half true, it indicates decent performance gains for the 2GB 5870 over the original 1GB at Eyefinity resolutions.

http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-hd-5830/1gb-vs-2gb.gif

I am a little saddened to learn that the card is being held back due to....

Although AMD was able to present six displays to Windows Vista as a single, large surface ready for use in 3D accelerated games, making that happen in Windows 7 involved an additional technical hurdle. Win7 would allow for up to four 3D-accelerated displays, but not six.

It would be awesome for those of us (all of us?) intending to only use 3 displays if the card were to be released in it's current state, and 4+ monitor support were added later in a driver/BIOS update. :wink:

I suspect the 4 display limit in Windows 7 is an issue with Microsoft, not AMD, firmware, hardware or drivers. It wouldn't be the first time that Microsoft have changed the goalposts on something important. But I do find it interesting that WDDM1.1 has a limitation that WDDM1.0 doesn't, given how much Microsoft were shouting about the "improved" WDDM...

I suppose the question is though, why didn't they know about this 'limitation' sooner...

They've probably been busy trying to sort it out without worrying potential purchasers and financial analysts.

Very few businesses will come out and say, "Houston, we have a problem," until there is no possible way around it.

[quote]I don't expect you to put in more work now, but in the future please consider 3 x 2560x1600 for another resolution (I have 3 x Dell 3008wfp ready to go) and metro 2033 as an additional game. I definitely expect nothing more than you have time to do though. Thanks.

I don't think Ibrin has quite enough cash for three 2560x1600 panels...
This is the case. The WSGF has just gotten to where it brings in a little money every month (largely due to the fact that our hosting is now donated). Over the years, the WSGF has basically broke even or lost a bit of money. So, shelling out $4k on monitors isn't something that I can do.

Also, I really don't see 3x2560x1600 as a viable option (IMHO). I've seen how performance craters at 3x1920x1200 on newer more demanding games. Considering that the intermediate resolution on the 3x30" panels is 3x1680x1050, I'd figure you're most often left with sub-par performance or a lot of scaling.

My testing is at 4xAA and max settings, but I figure you'd have to drop quality settings quite a bit to get 3x2560x1600 to work well in most anything modern.

I suppose that "SuperSample" Antialiasing (the type that renders double, quad, octo the desired res then scales it down) wouldn't be an approximation for 2560x1600 performance?

Would someone with a 30"er run a game at 2560x1600 0xAA 16xAF, then 1280x800 2xSSAA 16xAF and report the numbers back? :)

They've probably been busy trying to sort it out without worrying potential purchasers and financial analysts.

Very few businesses will come out and say, "Houston, we have a problem," until there is no possible way around it.

Granted. But Windows 7 was out when Eyefinity was launched and they launched demo'ing the 6 model. Would have thought they'd have least thought, let's give it a go on 7. Hopefully they'll sort this otherwise I assume we're looking at going back to Vista...

Also, isn't there a Eyefinity 5 model out (already?, XFX? - not sure) - why did they do a 5 model and not a 6 by the way?

EyeFinity5 is a Sapphire model; it's not a reference board design from ATi, but a custom job by one of their partners.

...

And the EyeFinity6 demonstration was likely running on Vista - the 24 screen wonder was running on linux.

While I don't dislike Vista all that much, I far from Win 7, so there's no way I'm going back to the old OS.