1900x1200 (or higher.. 30"?) displays coming? Please? Pleeeease? :(
  2 / 2    
[quote name='Righthooks' post='1140477' date='Nov 1 2010, 02:50 PM'][i]You can accomplish 120Mhz+ refresh with an LCD/LED HDTV in terms of a display source if the refresh is your goal, however, this is capped at 1080p. In order to exceed that resolution I would suggest the newly revised Dell 30" LCD monitor. [/i][/quote]

I was actually thinking of getting a 30" screen (and the nece$$ary hardware) but then I started reading about 3D gaming.. I'm starting to consdier that perhaps gaming on a 24" LCD at 1920x1080 with 3D could be a lot more visually awesome than gaming at 2560x1600 on a 30".

I think I must be mis-reading you though. As far as I know the new Dell 30" LCD is only 60Hz and cannot do 3D. Is that not correct?

I suppose I was hoping for some sort of win-win scenario, such as a 120Hz 30" screen, where I could get the high resolution AND/OR (depending on graphics investment) get the 3D performance. With older games I could probably get both, and with newer games at least I'd be able to switch back and forth (3D, low res vs. 2D high res) and play at whichever looked best or suited the mood.

[quote name='Bloody']27" 120Hz 3D-capable monitors are coming soon, but they will be 1920x1080, I seriously doubt that someone will develop a 1920x1200 3D-capable LCD panel.[/quote]

Got it.. 27" would be something. How does the higher dot pitch look, though? I'm at a 24" right now with 1920x1200, so maybe those extra inches of screen wouldn't be visually worth it.

One other question (sorry for the rambling)... are there other good reasons in terms of display technology to wait 3 months or so before nabbing a 120Hz display? I hear the LED backlit models may be coming out soon, but I also hear that depending on the actual implementation of the tech, LED backlighting may or may not be anything worth waiting for.


... really bummed about no 1920x1200 models, but I figured that was the case.. Also a little bummed that there are still no 2560x1600 screens. I wish there was a fast forward button for consumer tech!
[quote name='Righthooks' post='1140477' date='Nov 1 2010, 02:50 PM']You can accomplish 120Mhz+ refresh with an LCD/LED HDTV in terms of a display source if the refresh is your goal, however, this is capped at 1080p. In order to exceed that resolution I would suggest the newly revised Dell 30" LCD monitor.



I was actually thinking of getting a 30" screen (and the nece$$ary hardware) but then I started reading about 3D gaming.. I'm starting to consdier that perhaps gaming on a 24" LCD at 1920x1080 with 3D could be a lot more visually awesome than gaming at 2560x1600 on a 30".



I think I must be mis-reading you though. As far as I know the new Dell 30" LCD is only 60Hz and cannot do 3D. Is that not correct?



I suppose I was hoping for some sort of win-win scenario, such as a 120Hz 30" screen, where I could get the high resolution AND/OR (depending on graphics investment) get the 3D performance. With older games I could probably get both, and with newer games at least I'd be able to switch back and forth (3D, low res vs. 2D high res) and play at whichever looked best or suited the mood.



Bloody said:27" 120Hz 3D-capable monitors are coming soon, but they will be 1920x1080, I seriously doubt that someone will develop a 1920x1200 3D-capable LCD panel.




Got it.. 27" would be something. How does the higher dot pitch look, though? I'm at a 24" right now with 1920x1200, so maybe those extra inches of screen wouldn't be visually worth it.



One other question (sorry for the rambling)... are there other good reasons in terms of display technology to wait 3 months or so before nabbing a 120Hz display? I hear the LED backlit models may be coming out soon, but I also hear that depending on the actual implementation of the tech, LED backlighting may or may not be anything worth waiting for.





... really bummed about no 1920x1200 models, but I figured that was the case.. Also a little bummed that there are still no 2560x1600 screens. I wish there was a fast forward button for consumer tech!

#16
Posted 11/01/2010 08:11 PM   
[i]
Only 3D ready displays are compatible with 3D glasses and acceleration. I used the Dell 30" as a resolution comparison, and to display what the best image option for single screen is. If it is your desire for 3DVision/3Dvision Surround, you have only a handful of selections available at the time that are non-3D HDTV screens. Be warned in advance, these configurations consist of 3,000US in hardware and greater for optimal conditions. Although not as bleeding edge as it was last season, it takes a hefty toll on your frames-per-second in any scenario.

My apologies for poor clarification on my original post.[/i]

-Hooks


Only 3D ready displays are compatible with 3D glasses and acceleration. I used the Dell 30" as a resolution comparison, and to display what the best image option for single screen is. If it is your desire for 3DVision/3Dvision Surround, you have only a handful of selections available at the time that are non-3D HDTV screens. Be warned in advance, these configurations consist of 3,000US in hardware and greater for optimal conditions. Although not as bleeding edge as it was last season, it takes a hefty toll on your frames-per-second in any scenario.



My apologies for poor clarification on my original post.




-Hooks

QUOTE (The Professor @ Oct 31 2010, 04:59 AM)

*Jeremy Clarkson face*



So we must hand it over to our tame PC tweaker. Some say he sticky tapes a block of uranium to his dinner before eating it and that he sucks moisture out of ducks. All we know is, he's called Hooks.



"Eye of the Storm" Window Mod Tutorial <> "Inside Crysis 2" <> Top Tier Water-Blocks 2011 <> SSD Unlimited Storage Tutorial

#17
Posted 11/01/2010 10:00 PM   
[i]
Only 3D ready displays are compatible with 3D glasses and acceleration. I used the Dell 30" as a resolution comparison, and to display what the best image option for single screen is. If it is your desire for 3DVision/3Dvision Surround, you have only a handful of selections available at the time that are non-3D HDTV screens. Be warned in advance, these configurations consist of 3,000US in hardware and greater for optimal conditions. Although not as bleeding edge as it was last season, it takes a hefty toll on your frames-per-second in any scenario.

My apologies for poor clarification on my original post.[/i]

-Hooks


Only 3D ready displays are compatible with 3D glasses and acceleration. I used the Dell 30" as a resolution comparison, and to display what the best image option for single screen is. If it is your desire for 3DVision/3Dvision Surround, you have only a handful of selections available at the time that are non-3D HDTV screens. Be warned in advance, these configurations consist of 3,000US in hardware and greater for optimal conditions. Although not as bleeding edge as it was last season, it takes a hefty toll on your frames-per-second in any scenario.



My apologies for poor clarification on my original post.




-Hooks

QUOTE (The Professor @ Oct 31 2010, 04:59 AM)

*Jeremy Clarkson face*



So we must hand it over to our tame PC tweaker. Some say he sticky tapes a block of uranium to his dinner before eating it and that he sucks moisture out of ducks. All we know is, he's called Hooks.



"Eye of the Storm" Window Mod Tutorial <> "Inside Crysis 2" <> Top Tier Water-Blocks 2011 <> SSD Unlimited Storage Tutorial

#18
Posted 11/01/2010 10:00 PM   
trajanx, to do a quick summary and hopefully answer all your questions:

-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.

-You can also do lesser 3D on larger screens, including:
[list]
[*]1280x720 @ 120Hz with a DLP projector (Acer H5360, Optima HD66, Viewsonic PJD6210, etc).
[*]1920x1080 @ 24fps with a 3D ready HDTV through Nvidia 3DTV Play (I assume 120Hz on the glasses, just poor framerates). I believe this also has a 720p @ 120Hz mode.
[*]1920x1080 @ 120Hz / 2 for checkerboard DLP (like the older Mitsubishi TVs).
[/list]
-2560x1600 @ 60Hz is currently the best single monitor resolution (mostly the 30" displays).

-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.

-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.

-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.
trajanx, to do a quick summary and hopefully answer all your questions:



-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.



-You can also do lesser 3D on larger screens, including:


  • 1280x720 @ 120Hz with a DLP projector (Acer H5360, Optima HD66, Viewsonic PJD6210, etc).
  • 1920x1080 @ 24fps with a 3D ready HDTV through Nvidia 3DTV Play (I assume 120Hz on the glasses, just poor framerates). I believe this also has a 720p @ 120Hz mode.
  • 1920x1080 @ 120Hz / 2 for checkerboard DLP (like the older Mitsubishi TVs).


-2560x1600 @ 60Hz is currently the best single monitor resolution (mostly the 30" displays).



-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.



-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.



-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.

Intel i7-4770k
EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC
ASRock Z87 Extreme4
8GB DDR3, 240GB Intel SSD, 3TB HDD
Cooler Master Siedon 120M Liquid Cooling
Dell 3007WFP-HC 30" 2560x1600
Alienware OptX AW2310 23" 1920x1080 with 3D Vision
Acer H5360 720p Projector with 3D Vision
ONKYO HT-S5300 7.1 Sound System
Logitech G19 Keyboard, G9 Mouse, G25 Wheel
Saitek X52 Pro and Rudder Pedals

#19
Posted 11/02/2010 06:28 PM   
trajanx, to do a quick summary and hopefully answer all your questions:

-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.

-You can also do lesser 3D on larger screens, including:
[list]
[*]1280x720 @ 120Hz with a DLP projector (Acer H5360, Optima HD66, Viewsonic PJD6210, etc).
[*]1920x1080 @ 24fps with a 3D ready HDTV through Nvidia 3DTV Play (I assume 120Hz on the glasses, just poor framerates). I believe this also has a 720p @ 120Hz mode.
[*]1920x1080 @ 120Hz / 2 for checkerboard DLP (like the older Mitsubishi TVs).
[/list]
-2560x1600 @ 60Hz is currently the best single monitor resolution (mostly the 30" displays).

-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.

-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.

-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.
trajanx, to do a quick summary and hopefully answer all your questions:



-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.



-You can also do lesser 3D on larger screens, including:


  • 1280x720 @ 120Hz with a DLP projector (Acer H5360, Optima HD66, Viewsonic PJD6210, etc).
  • 1920x1080 @ 24fps with a 3D ready HDTV through Nvidia 3DTV Play (I assume 120Hz on the glasses, just poor framerates). I believe this also has a 720p @ 120Hz mode.
  • 1920x1080 @ 120Hz / 2 for checkerboard DLP (like the older Mitsubishi TVs).


-2560x1600 @ 60Hz is currently the best single monitor resolution (mostly the 30" displays).



-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.



-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.



-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.

Intel i7-4770k
EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC
ASRock Z87 Extreme4
8GB DDR3, 240GB Intel SSD, 3TB HDD
Cooler Master Siedon 120M Liquid Cooling
Dell 3007WFP-HC 30" 2560x1600
Alienware OptX AW2310 23" 1920x1080 with 3D Vision
Acer H5360 720p Projector with 3D Vision
ONKYO HT-S5300 7.1 Sound System
Logitech G19 Keyboard, G9 Mouse, G25 Wheel
Saitek X52 Pro and Rudder Pedals

#20
Posted 11/02/2010 06:28 PM   
Formula, thanks for the very helpful summary. I think everything I was asking is now pretty much answered. I do have some follow up questions if anyone has info, although I can probably guess the answers..

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']
-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.
[/quote]

Theoretically, though, there's no reason the screen couldn't be larger as long as it stayed at 1920x1080, right? It sounds like there are rumors of 26" or 27" 1080 displays coming. Is there anything more concrete out there?

I'm 99.99% sure now that 1920x1200 is R.I.P. for good.. /tearywave.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tearywave:' /> But.. since hope never dies.. Could Dual Link DVI stretch to cover that resolution at 120hz if a manufacturer wanted to make a display? Or would that require Display Port (or HDMI 1.4a?) I get now that Display Port is not (yet) in use and HDMI 1.4a is newborn or thereabouts.

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']
-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.
[/quote]

Sort of a similar question.. but has anyone heard any rumors of manufacturers working on 2560x1600 @ 120Hz screens? With Display Port, of course.. It sounds like this is years away, but.. maybe a rumor?

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.

-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.
[/quote]

The first part I had figured out but the second part was something I have been wondering about for a long time! I wasn't thinking about this at all as a solution for myself, but I had been scratching my head trying to figure out why some of the LCD TVs are 120hz yet *not* 3D capable. This explains it. Thanks!
Formula, thanks for the very helpful summary. I think everything I was asking is now pretty much answered. I do have some follow up questions if anyone has info, although I can probably guess the answers..



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.





Theoretically, though, there's no reason the screen couldn't be larger as long as it stayed at 1920x1080, right? It sounds like there are rumors of 26" or 27" 1080 displays coming. Is there anything more concrete out there?



I'm 99.99% sure now that 1920x1200 is R.I.P. for good.. /tearywave.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tearywave:' /> But.. since hope never dies.. Could Dual Link DVI stretch to cover that resolution at 120hz if a manufacturer wanted to make a display? Or would that require Display Port (or HDMI 1.4a?) I get now that Display Port is not (yet) in use and HDMI 1.4a is newborn or thereabouts.



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.





Sort of a similar question.. but has anyone heard any rumors of manufacturers working on 2560x1600 @ 120Hz screens? With Display Port, of course.. It sounds like this is years away, but.. maybe a rumor?



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']



-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.



-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.





The first part I had figured out but the second part was something I have been wondering about for a long time! I wasn't thinking about this at all as a solution for myself, but I had been scratching my head trying to figure out why some of the LCD TVs are 120hz yet *not* 3D capable. This explains it. Thanks!

#21
Posted 11/02/2010 07:20 PM   
Formula, thanks for the very helpful summary. I think everything I was asking is now pretty much answered. I do have some follow up questions if anyone has info, although I can probably guess the answers..

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']
-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.
[/quote]

Theoretically, though, there's no reason the screen couldn't be larger as long as it stayed at 1920x1080, right? It sounds like there are rumors of 26" or 27" 1080 displays coming. Is there anything more concrete out there?

I'm 99.99% sure now that 1920x1200 is R.I.P. for good.. /tearywave.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tearywave:' /> But.. since hope never dies.. Could Dual Link DVI stretch to cover that resolution at 120hz if a manufacturer wanted to make a display? Or would that require Display Port (or HDMI 1.4a?) I get now that Display Port is not (yet) in use and HDMI 1.4a is newborn or thereabouts.

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']
-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.
[/quote]

Sort of a similar question.. but has anyone heard any rumors of manufacturers working on 2560x1600 @ 120Hz screens? With Display Port, of course.. It sounds like this is years away, but.. maybe a rumor?

[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.

-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.
[/quote]

The first part I had figured out but the second part was something I have been wondering about for a long time! I wasn't thinking about this at all as a solution for myself, but I had been scratching my head trying to figure out why some of the LCD TVs are 120hz yet *not* 3D capable. This explains it. Thanks!
Formula, thanks for the very helpful summary. I think everything I was asking is now pretty much answered. I do have some follow up questions if anyone has info, although I can probably guess the answers..



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-Currently, the best resolution you can do in 3D is 1920x1080 @ 120Hz. This is limited to 24" (23.something?) and smaller monitors.





Theoretically, though, there's no reason the screen couldn't be larger as long as it stayed at 1920x1080, right? It sounds like there are rumors of 26" or 27" 1080 displays coming. Is there anything more concrete out there?



I'm 99.99% sure now that 1920x1200 is R.I.P. for good.. /tearywave.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tearywave:' /> But.. since hope never dies.. Could Dual Link DVI stretch to cover that resolution at 120hz if a manufacturer wanted to make a display? Or would that require Display Port (or HDMI 1.4a?) I get now that Display Port is not (yet) in use and HDMI 1.4a is newborn or thereabouts.



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']

-2560x1600x60 is a similiar amount of pixels as 1920x1080x120. These resolutions are bandwidth limited by the Dual Link DVI, HDMI, and Display Port standards. Display Port 1.2 should have enough bandwidth for twice that (i.e. 2560x1600 @ 120Hz), but no hardware actually uses it yet.





Sort of a similar question.. but has anyone heard any rumors of manufacturers working on 2560x1600 @ 120Hz screens? With Display Port, of course.. It sounds like this is years away, but.. maybe a rumor?



[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='02 November 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1288722504' post='1140697']



-You must have at least 120Hz to do 3D, 60 Hz will not work.



-TVs that claim 120Hz or more but not 3D compatibility only refresh the screen at this rate, but cannot change the picture or take an input at this rate, so cannot do 3D.





The first part I had figured out but the second part was something I have been wondering about for a long time! I wasn't thinking about this at all as a solution for myself, but I had been scratching my head trying to figure out why some of the LCD TVs are 120hz yet *not* 3D capable. This explains it. Thanks!

#22
Posted 11/02/2010 07:20 PM   
If DVI single link can do 1920x1200@60Hz then DVI dual link will do the same @120Hz, but so far no such monitors have been announced.

Hdmi1.4a does not target computer monitors, it's been very clear from the beginning it only cares about TVs, BluRay3D and 3DTV broadcasts.
It does have plenty of bandwidth to do stereo 1920x1080@60fps, the problem is that support of such bandwidth is not mandatory, so no TV manufacturer supports it (it like when they announce support for 4K displays, it's just on paper if someone some time wants to do it, the device will be futureproof relative to a possible version of the hdmi specification that would require this feature.

AMD is betting a lot on DisplayPort, their latest cards support DisplayPort 1.2 Dual display daisy chaining at 2560x1600 60Hz on each of the two DisplayPort output, so you can be assured that they support stereo at that resolution.
There are no DisplayPort 3D monitors, available or announced, but AMD indicated that these displays will arrive some time next year. They'll probably be only 1080p during the first year but who knows... you might get a good surprise.
We'll get more answers on next year's 3D displays at CES in January.
If DVI single link can do 1920x1200@60Hz then DVI dual link will do the same @120Hz, but so far no such monitors have been announced.



Hdmi1.4a does not target computer monitors, it's been very clear from the beginning it only cares about TVs, BluRay3D and 3DTV broadcasts.

It does have plenty of bandwidth to do stereo 1920x1080@60fps, the problem is that support of such bandwidth is not mandatory, so no TV manufacturer supports it (it like when they announce support for 4K displays, it's just on paper if someone some time wants to do it, the device will be futureproof relative to a possible version of the hdmi specification that would require this feature.



AMD is betting a lot on DisplayPort, their latest cards support DisplayPort 1.2 Dual display daisy chaining at 2560x1600 60Hz on each of the two DisplayPort output, so you can be assured that they support stereo at that resolution.

There are no DisplayPort 3D monitors, available or announced, but AMD indicated that these displays will arrive some time next year. They'll probably be only 1080p during the first year but who knows... you might get a good surprise.

We'll get more answers on next year's 3D displays at CES in January.

Passive 3D forever
110" DIY dual-projection system
2x Epson EH-TW3500 (1080p) + Linear Polarizers (SPAR)
XtremScreen Daylight 2.0
VNS Geobox501 signal converter

#23
Posted 11/02/2010 09:44 PM   
If DVI single link can do 1920x1200@60Hz then DVI dual link will do the same @120Hz, but so far no such monitors have been announced.

Hdmi1.4a does not target computer monitors, it's been very clear from the beginning it only cares about TVs, BluRay3D and 3DTV broadcasts.
It does have plenty of bandwidth to do stereo 1920x1080@60fps, the problem is that support of such bandwidth is not mandatory, so no TV manufacturer supports it (it like when they announce support for 4K displays, it's just on paper if someone some time wants to do it, the device will be futureproof relative to a possible version of the hdmi specification that would require this feature.

AMD is betting a lot on DisplayPort, their latest cards support DisplayPort 1.2 Dual display daisy chaining at 2560x1600 60Hz on each of the two DisplayPort output, so you can be assured that they support stereo at that resolution.
There are no DisplayPort 3D monitors, available or announced, but AMD indicated that these displays will arrive some time next year. They'll probably be only 1080p during the first year but who knows... you might get a good surprise.
We'll get more answers on next year's 3D displays at CES in January.
If DVI single link can do 1920x1200@60Hz then DVI dual link will do the same @120Hz, but so far no such monitors have been announced.



Hdmi1.4a does not target computer monitors, it's been very clear from the beginning it only cares about TVs, BluRay3D and 3DTV broadcasts.

It does have plenty of bandwidth to do stereo 1920x1080@60fps, the problem is that support of such bandwidth is not mandatory, so no TV manufacturer supports it (it like when they announce support for 4K displays, it's just on paper if someone some time wants to do it, the device will be futureproof relative to a possible version of the hdmi specification that would require this feature.



AMD is betting a lot on DisplayPort, their latest cards support DisplayPort 1.2 Dual display daisy chaining at 2560x1600 60Hz on each of the two DisplayPort output, so you can be assured that they support stereo at that resolution.

There are no DisplayPort 3D monitors, available or announced, but AMD indicated that these displays will arrive some time next year. They'll probably be only 1080p during the first year but who knows... you might get a good surprise.

We'll get more answers on next year's 3D displays at CES in January.

Passive 3D forever
110" DIY dual-projection system
2x Epson EH-TW3500 (1080p) + Linear Polarizers (SPAR)
XtremScreen Daylight 2.0
VNS Geobox501 signal converter

#24
Posted 11/02/2010 09:44 PM   
  2 / 2    
Scroll To Top