AMD Shows off 24 Panel Eyefinity on DirectX 11 Graphics Cards (VERY SEXY)

[ReGIONALS]

you guys are just now hearing about this?

ive been reading up on this for about a month now.

it looks good for games like flight simulator but really you not going to use it for anything other than flgiht games and games where you have a large field of veiw.

 

this card is also only about an inch longer than the 4870x2 as for as i know only the 5870x2's will do this.

 

 

also these are coming out on September 22nd ill tell you guys how it is

[Jager]

the issues is that in some of the screens (the wow one in particular) some of teh shadows are continuing as if you cut and pasted the parts together and other screens are showing the border interfereing in part of the screen.

 

either way it isnt something I would be using, short of having the frameless lcds and too much money, i would just use a projector and a 106" screen and game that way. tbh 28" (27.5")is about all the screen i can fit in view at a time without turning my head at sitting at desk distance. unless you were to back up in which case the projector again is a safer bet.

 

either way its a cool concept and will be interesting to see how or if its adopted as far as any gaming is concerned (supcom esc or otherwise)

[Akaru]

you guys are just now hearing about this?

ive been reading up on this for about a month now.

it looks good for games like flight simulator but really you not going to use it for anything other than flgiht games and games where you have a large field of veiw.

 

this card is also only about an inch longer than the 4870x2 as for as i know only the 5870x2's will do this.

 

 

also these are coming out on September 22nd ill tell you guys how it is

 

Of course we are just hearing about this now. No one is an AMD fanboy except you. AMD blows. 99% of the nation keeps up with Nvidia, not AMD. You are part of that 1%. I feel sorry for you.

[Tyler]

I want that many monitors on my wall it would be fun as hell

[Jager]

Of course we are just hearing about this now. No one is an AMD fanboy except you. AMD blows. 99% of the nation keeps up with Nvidia, not AMD. You are part of that 1%. I feel sorry for you.

 

this here is why so many true tech enthusiasts facepalm. nvidia and ati go back and forth on who is better and for what reasons. nvidia has the best card on the market, but ati's saves you money for what most people is not a very noticeable difference. tbh they occupy different areas, ati offers (or tries to) performance per dollar spent savings. because their overhead doesnt allow them to see profits on the 600+ dollar video cards. so instead of fighting with nvidia and losing they simply made cards that could compete where people have more money, the 2-400 dollar market, in which area currently neither has an appreciable lead or advantage of the other. both companies give you a hell of alot for your buck these days.

 

if you go back more then 2 -3 years ATI used to destroy nvidia and you'd hear people swearing by the 9800 cards all day. back then ATI actually did manage to pull a monster out of its hat. that all said, being a fan boy gets you very little from me as far as anything except a laugh when that person gets stuck with a crappy component because its from X company, they are better then Y in the past so i shouldn't ever pay attention and should just buy X all the time.

 

want to know an nvidia fanboy? they are the people that shelled out big bucks on the fx5 series of cards and got the worst performance per dollar spent in near video card history. or the people who are swearing by sli architecture when crossfire scales much better overall...

ATI was right behind them with the x1300 and x1500 cards too. and their major issues even getting a card that wasn't overpriced and underpowered in that era after the 9800s and x800s

[Akaru]

this here is why so many true tech enthusiasts facepalm. nvidia and ati go back and forth on who is better and for what reasons. nvidia has the best card on the market, but ati's saves you money for what most people is not a very noticeable difference. tbh they occupy different areas, ati offers (or tries to) performance per dollar spent savings. because their overhead doesnt allow them to see profits on the 600+ dollar video cards. so instead of fighting with nvidia and losing they simply made cards that could compete where people have more money, the 2-400 dollar market, in which area currently neither has an appreciable lead or advantage of the other. both companies give you a hell of alot for your buck these days.

 

if you go back more then 2 -3 years ATI used to destroy nvidia and you'd hear people swearing by the 9800 cards all day. back then ATI actually did manage to pull a monster out of its hat. that all said, being a fan boy gets you very little from me as far as anything except a laugh when that person gets stuck with a crappy component because its from X company, they are better then Y in the past so i shouldn't ever pay attention and should just buy X all the time.

 

want to know an nvidia fanboy? they are the people that shelled out big bucks on the fx5 series of cards and got the worst performance per dollar spent in near video card history. or the people who are swearing by sli architecture when crossfire scales much better overall...

ATI was right behind them with the x1300 and x1500 cards too. and their major issues even getting a card that wasn't overpriced and underpowered in that era after the 9800s and x800s

 

Totally agreed, but I just don't like how ReGIONALS spends half of his life over exaggerating what ATI is capable of. I agree that they have a better price to performance ratio, but when people compare cards, they usually just compare performance as the big thing and throw in noise, heat, price, etc. as a sidenote/feature. Ever since ReGIONALS has gotten his new ATI card, all he has been doing is posting about how great it is and in some cases, he has claimed it better than Nvidia. I don't want people on this forum to have a biased and incorrect answer. I want them to know the true answer and the true answer is Nvidia is better performance-wise.

[Jager]

but it isnt, depending on your budget and overall needs ati or nvidia may both have pros and cons to them. your monitors resolution your type and style of gaming, your budget, your other components, you amount of time to rebuy a newer card all come into play, and nvidia isnt the best in all of those cases. neither is ATI sorry

[Shadowex3]

Except that Nvidia's mid-range videocards are still better than ATI's and cost pretty much the same AND unlike ATI (unless that's changed recently) can be had with overclocker friendly lifetime warranties and 24/7 in-USA tech support.

[Akaru]

but it isnt, depending on your budget and overall needs ati or nvidia may both have pros and cons to them. your monitors resolution your type and style of gaming, your budget, your other components, you amount of time to rebuy a newer card all come into play, and nvidia isnt the best in all of those cases. neither is ATI sorry

 

When people compare 2 companies, it's their flagship product (I think that's the right term). No one is going to compare a Nvidia GeForce 6600GT with a ATI Radeon HD 4870. It makes no sense. It's their 2 best products. For the graphics card part, Nvidia has GTX 295 and ATI has 4870 X2. This makes Nvidia better than ATI.

 

Same goes for processors. No one is going to compare a Intel Pentium 4 to a AMD Phenom II X4; if comparing Intel to AMD. Intel has the i7 975 Extreme Edition and AMD has the Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition. This makes Intel better than AMD.

[Allan]

Woot I am 1/3 there currently running 2 monitors =D. But yea, that would be hella sexy to have.