Recommendations for 27" Monitor?

[Splinter]

I posted a few weeks ago, looking for some recommendations for a 27" monitor to fit on the HD Triple Stand XL
I must have upset the forum gods because my post is no longer here, I lost my password and whatever, now a few weeks later my post is gone, I did mention one monitor in the post maybe they thought I was spamming?
I'm building a rig to have 3 screens, since the HD Triple Stand XL says 27" will fit does anyone have any suggestions based on experience or first hand knowledge or if there is another post regarding this please reply with a link.

[Skid]

You post wasn't deleted, it was lost, please read the homepage, namely this post -> http://www.wsgf.org/news/oops-wsgf-had- ... base-issue

Sorry for the inconvenience.

[Oraijon]

The one i always see recommended everywhere is the Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM. From what i read and hear it's very high quality while remaining somewhat affordable.

[blackrat]

The one i always see recommended everywhere is the Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM. From what i read and hear it's very high quality while remaining somewhat affordable.

Shluld you be interested in this monitor, I have some data for you:

Pixel distance for FullHD @ 27" ist 0.311 mmm, for the resolution of the Dell is only 0.233 and for a 23" with fullHD would be 0.265. So this monitor has a lower pix distance than a 23" FulHD, in other words is more "rectina display like' than a 23" FullHD.

So, I recommend, either choose this or the HP or the Korean Crossover, all at the resolution of 2560 x 1440 as a 27", or a FulHD one at about 23" or 24" monitor.

These monitors should fit on this stand-

[Splinter]

Thanks for the update on the forum, I had a difficultly getting back in, this explains it.

Thanks for the posts or re-posts regarding the 27" monitors.

I'm looking to keep the budget under for the stand and 3 monitors under $1400

[DigiHound]

Are Asus' VG278's supported with the triple-stand? I've been using those for testing, and they play quite nicely with both AMD and NV. They're TN panels from Asus -- newer models have a 144Hz maximum refresh rate. $449 each at Newegg.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824236293

[Splinter]

The one i always see recommended everywhere is the Dell Ultrasharp U2713HM. From what i read and hear it's very high quality while remaining somewhat affordable.

Shluld you be interested in this monitor, I have some data for you:

Pixel distance for FullHD @ 27" ist 0.311 mmm, for the resolution of the Dell is only 0.233 and for a 23" with fullHD would be 0.265. So this monitor has a lower pix distance than a 23" FulHD, in other words is more "rectina display like' than a 23" FullHD.

So, I recommend, either choose this or the HP or the Korean Crossover, all at the resolution of 2560 x 1440 as a 27", or a FulHD one at about 23" or 24" monitor.

These monitors should fit on this stand-

Is a Single Geforce GTX 690 capable of running 3 screens at 2560 X 1440 each (3 X 1) or should I stay with 1920 x 1080?

Would there be significant compatibility issues with the higher resolutions with most games at this time?

[DigiHound]

I'd look to Titan for a screen resolution that high -- you're going to need RAM, and lots of it. 3x 2560x1440 is going to push even a single Titan -- I've been benchmarking one at 3x 1920x1080, and while it can drive Crysis 3, it can't drive it maxed out with AA enabled.

For 3x 2560x1440, I think you'd want dual Titans. You'd definitely want dual Titans over quad-SLI with two GTX 690s. Scaling above 2 GPUs isn't great, and you run into increased microstuttering problems.

[LuckyNoS7evin]

I'd look to Titan for a screen resolution that high -- you're going to need RAM, and lots of it. 3x 2560x1440 is going to push even a single Titan -- I've been benchmarking one at 3x 1920x1080, and while it can drive Crysis 3, it can't drive it maxed out with AA enabled.

For 3x 2560x1440, I think you'd want dual Titans. You'd definitely want dual Titans over quad-SLI with two GTX 690s. Scaling above 2 GPUs isn't great, and you run into increased microstuttering problems.

The problem is if you went dual Titans you are still not getting any memory increase. I mean 6GB is a lot for a single card but as you mention at those resolutions you are soon going to hit the barrier on textures for 3 screens.

Take for example one of the "recent" games I played on 3 (ish) different setups and that's BF3, examples are Ultra settings no other fancy stuff.
1920x1080 on a single or twin 1GB 560Ti set to max fps of 60 = memory limit reached and fps drops rapidly after 5 minutes of gamesplay
1920x1080 on a single or twin 3GB 7950 = 1.2 - 1.5GB of used VRAM over an hours gameplay
5760x1080 on twin 3GB 7950s = about 2 - 2.2GB of used VRAM over an hours gameplay
these are not exact numbers

I have no idea about scaling of VRAM in games over 3 screens but it doesn't triple the numbers which is good. The issue you are going to have is 2.2GB is taken with 6 million pixels, you are asking the card to do almost double that at 11million. In theory BF3 will only take 4.5GB but then it's heading towards a year and a half old, You have things like Crysis 3. I may test this later on Ultra and see what my VRAMs on single and triple wide but you're right in saying it will probably push the 3GB I have at 5760x1080 and on a set of Titans would push the 6GB on those at 7680x1440.

[DigiHound]

Anything that pushes Titan is going to push the GTX 690 a lot harder. Dual Titan's in SLI give you 6GB, dual GTX 690's give you 2GB and increased microstuttering. Since all data has to be duplicated across each GPU, the GTX 690's RAM is more properly stated as 2x2GB, not 4GB.

But there's actually another question waiting in the wings. While testing Titan (disclaimer: I write for PC Magazine, Extremetech, and Hot Hardware) I ran into an issue where multiple games only picked up Titan as having 3-4GB of RAM, not 6GB.

There's a reason for this. 32-bit games aren't picking up on the full 6GB of RAM. I don't know if that means they can't use it or not -- I've got a question for this in to NV. My understanding is that the GPU decides internally how to allocate VRAM, and so the fact that games are 32-bit shouldn't matter much.

[LuckyNoS7evin]

Anything that pushes Titan is going to push the GTX 690 a lot harder. Dual Titan's in SLI give you 6GB, dual GTX 690's give you 2GB and increased microstuttering. Since all data has to be duplicated across each GPU, the GTX 690's RAM is more properly stated as 2x2GB, not 4GB.

But there's actually another question waiting in the wings. While testing Titan (disclaimer: I write for PC Magazine, Extremetech, and Hot Hardware) I ran into an issue where multiple games only picked up Titan as having 3-4GB of RAM, not 6GB.

There's a reason for this. 32-bit games aren't picking up on the full 6GB of RAM. I don't know if that means they can't use it or not -- I've got a question for this in to NV. My understanding is that the GPU decides internally how to allocate VRAM, and so the fact that games are 32-bit shouldn't matter much.

That's interesting, have you managed to hit the 4GB then or was that just what the game was detecting? I don't know much about how VRAM works but I would have thought that a piece of software which is 32bit should only be able to reference only 4GB whether it's on a graphics card or a motherboard.

I wonder if we could write something in 32bit to fill as much VRAM as possible without it garbage collecting to see if it will go over or reference more than 4GB

[DigiHound]

It's difficult to say. The new Unigine Valley benchmark reports 4GB of RAM on the GTX Titan, while the game Shogun 2 (and several other titles) report 3GB.

The only time I've seen an out-of-RAM error in a game was when benchmarking Shogun 2 and the GTX 680. Using 5760x1080 with 8x MSAA and all detail levels maxed out caused the game to throw an "Exceeded available memory by 150MB" on the GTX 680. This only happened in the benchmark scene -- setting those levels in-game wasn't a problem.

The only game I can think of that shipped with a 64-bit binary was the original Crysis. While it might be possible to load up enough mods to use over 3-4GB of RAM (and thereby compare performance at 5760x1080), I'm not certain we'd see a difference. You need a certain amount of GPU horsepower before RAM becomes a bottleneck -- if the low frame rates in a given title were caused by pixel shader bottlenecks rather than RAM storage, then it wouldn't really matter -- even with Titan.

[DigiHound]

According to NV, the 32-bit limitation *does* apply. Next-gen games are expected to use 64-bit, so in the long term, this won't be a problem.

[Splinter]

Thanks for everyone's insight into 3 screen monitors, nvidia Titan GTX seems to be the way to go. I plan on going with Windows 7 64 bit.

Here are some possible 27" monitors:

Asus

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236294

or

Dell

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824260111

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824260038

or

HP
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824176242

Any recommendations or insight which would do better?

[DigiHound]

The only Asus monitors I've used have been members of the VG278 family I've got a 3D version and the 3x 27" displays I mentioned earlier. With that said, I like them quite a bit. The one feature they don't have, that I wish they did, was the ability to rotate into Portrait. I would've liked to use that mode in my testing.

It looks like the $699 models *do* have Tilt, Swivel, and Pivot. So that's good.

Check Anandtech for reviews, maybe?

[ugzz]

all the cheap top pics for monitors in the 27 range arent vesa compatible.
my top pics in the 27 range are the new LG panel IPS's that came out at the tail end of 2012

things like the aoc i2757fh and viewsonic vx2770smh.
Im also pretty partial to the LG apple panel korean models. like the shimian qh270 and the catleap q270.
nothing beats 2560x1440 for less than $400. but sadly none of those have vesa bracket mounts

i was / am in a similar boat as you, but ive decided to bag the stand, deal with either using the stands, fabbing stands, or propping them higher, and i'm going with the AOC.

its all about the budget for me though .
good luck finding something that suites your needs!

[Mogui]

First off, let me say congratulations for coming into the club

Ok, so here's my very biased suggestion on screens (since they are what I use):

Go w/ 3x Crossover 27Q LED (for example, but not limited to http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-CROSSOVER-2 ... 1c258965ec)

They are 2560x1440, amazing, and they have VESA mount for ease of install. I originally got one, and liked it so much i got 2x more!

Second, for video card, do not, i repeat, DO NOT get a vid card w/ less than 3bg of vram!!!!!! A 690GTX will NOT handle 3 of these due to 2gb of ram. I cannot stress this enough, you need 3gb+ of RAM, and 4gb+ would prob be preferable. I currently run 2x EVGA 670GTX 4GB FTW in SLI. I got these on release, so I didn't have a choice of Titan. The good thing about Titan is that its only 1 gpu, so you don't have to worry about SLI issues. It looks like Titan should be comparable if not faster than my 2x 670 (which i can play most things on max/high), so you'd probably be good. Only thing is you'd need to get a DP -> DL-DVI plug/adapter, which may be an issue.

Anyways, just some food for thought. Good luck on the build! I am currently looking at perhaps getting one of the WSGF stands, as they look a bit sturdier than my current ones. Although its obviously at a premium: $400 vs $90.