http://www.newegg.com/Pro...aspx?Item=N82E16824236122
http://www.newegg.com/Pro...aspx?Item=N82E16814999032

Yes, a monitor in one of the setups cost "$250" and up.
And yes, an active display port adapter "are quite expensive".
Right, if this article was written maybe 2 years ago, when the technology haven't been matured yet but now everything is "more affordable".

WTH is this bullshit? Why don't you put the [PR] tag in this?

You come saying that AMD's approach is expensive because of the monitors, takes to much space, consumes energy... WTF? When did nvidia started giving monitors for free? Where do I sign for their "we will pay your energy bills" program?

And you come with an "unfortunately, this is not all yet. You see..." and bash AMD for offering "only" two displays "no matter what" the protocol. "If you 'want' another monitor", you need to buy a Displayport adapter... And you say that is a DRAWBACK? (you follow it with "on the positive note..." ) Why didn't you mention the FLEX brand (and maybe others), which doesn't need that? (SPECIALLY when you took your time to mention gtx590 in the nvidia section)

The malicious intention of the writer are all over when you see how he writes the nvidia part: "unlike their competitors... (Nvidia) do not expect the users to invest extra money in adapters". Sure! They expect you to buy ANOTHER GRAPHIC CARD! Does the PR-stunt-man even underlines that in the next sentence? (after all, it makes SENSE to do it now) NO! He comes with a "Nvidia expects you to have three identical displays... (which) isn't necessarily a huge disavantage..." Sure! Then why did you said that AMD's way is expensive because of the monitors and dumbed-down when Nvidia asks you to throw away your old one?

That's not all! The unprofessional guy even says that there's "another LITTLE issue or what some MAY EVEN consider a disavantage" of Nvidia, because they need two GPUs... But don't worry! There's the gtx590 and you can even choose to run an SLI setup... You literaly waited for the last sentence to inform how this means in investing into ANOTHER graphic card, (possible ANOTHER) SLI-ready mainboard and possibly (ANOTHER) more powerful PSU (besides the negligible configuration bit).

And I wouldn't even comment how you started your nvidia part saying that "Unlike their competitors... (nvidia) give you an additional feeling of involvement and supremacy". And, also, I won't even comment the numbers, like comparing a gtx560 Ti SLI system ($500) with a single HD6970 ($340, both from newegg) and not pointing that out.

Man... Seriously. WTF? Don't you have any shame? How could you spin that SO HARD?

$25.99 is expensive?

and what the gent above me said. This is either "X-Bit, brought to you by Nvidia..or you don't do any research. even a cursory look around various vendors would have you realizing that active display adapters can be had for $25 a copy...I know this first hand. I have a 3x1 eyefinity setup with my $25 active adapter in place.

Why is the starting tone of the article so biased towards NVIDIA? I know the AMD technology allows multiple (3 or 6 depending on the exact card you get) mixed monitors NATIVELY, only requiring possible adapaters if your monitors don't have the right inputs, yet their technology is described as "not so rosy" and having "a few problems to overcome". Also the way it is written make it seem that the fact AMD can connect 6 monitors (which NVIDIA can only dream of) is a disadvantage because of the powerbills... The fact that NVIDIA requires TWO graphic cards (or one very expensive flagship card) for more than 2 monitors is written of only as a "slight inconvenience" (which by the way increases the powerbill more in an otherwise equal 3 monitor setup...) . I am neither an AMD or NVIDIA fanboy, but I'd like these reviews to be an objective comparison so I (and other readers with me) can make up my own mind in an informed way.

My advise: Start with a general introduction describing benefits and disadvantages (including placement/wallmounting etc) of multi-monitors, then dive into a comparison of the different offerings.

update: oops, only after posting the other comments unfolded, I see I'm late/redundant with my reply... sorry.

active mini-DP adapters are around $30 on amazon.com

edit: damn, late to the punch lol.

It's not a "stupid adapter" it has active circuitry that allows you to use much less expensive monitors without active Display ports.



Oh I did, and they are...

http://www.overclockers.c...duct.php?prodid=CB-047-OK
http://www.amazon.co.uk/g...04VVMNZ4&linkCode=asm

Doesn't the big black borders between screens spoil things somewhat?

How is a $20-$25 active DP adapter expensive? Compared to the money you will spend on two or three displays and/or a new GPU it's relatively nothing.

I love the detailed benchmarks in the article but there's no mention of online gaming. I play Team Fortress 2 and other FPS quite frequently and I can tell you from experience that Eyefinity is amazing. You can see much more of the battlefield and enemies coming up on your flanks that you can't see on a single display. It's not all about image quality and eye candy.

Problems I have with the article accuracy:

#1: NVIDIA's solution requires two GPUs. AMD only requires one GPU.
#2: NVIDIA's solution can only do 3x1. AMD's solution can do 2x1, 3x1, 4x1,5x1,3x2.
#3: NVIDIA's solution requires no extra active adapters. AMD's solution requires $25 active adapters for displays 3 or more.
#4: The article has no clue about the surround-screen origins and how Matrox really pioneered consumer triple screen gaming with the TH2G years before.
#5: They focus on "expensive" $25 adapter needed for AMD and totally omit that a second NVIDIA GPU would be a bit more than $25...
#6: There are more Dual GPU NVIDIA cards capable of surround than just the 590. Both variations of the 295 and EVGA's dual 460 card also can.
#7: And lastly, vram is an important part of surround screen performance. You should have no less than 2GB.

once again u didn't put to the test, moron, the gtx 580 in SLi... but u used 6970 in xfire, smart move, moron!

Yaroslav Lyssenko is an Nvidiot.

For those of you who are curious, this dutch site did a good objective review: http://nl.hardware.info/r...ia-surround-gaming-review . Use Google translate or skip to the benchmark bit to get an impression of performance of different setups ( http://nl.hardware.info/r...estaties-tom-clancys-hawx ).

Their conclusion (translated): For good performance you'll need 2x 6850 or 1x 6970 (AMD) or 2x 460(possible)/560(safer)(NVIDIA). Going the AMD route is the cheapest solution, allowing for a 710,- euro triple-screen setup (including 1x DP-DVI adapter).

For those wondering about the black borders: both solutions offer an option for bezel correction, letting the image continue behind the bezel, so the images seemlessly line up (see roll over image on http://nl.hardware.info/r...g-review-bezel-correction ) . Recommend for racing and flying, not so much for shooters, as targets are able to hide in the "hidden pixels" between two screens.

Wow, the amd fanboys are really mad here.

Well, they LOST ANYWAY - according to the review benches they lost NINE and won only five.

GTX590 is FASTER - GTX590 WINS !

I feel sorry for the reviewer with the full force of the sour graping amdati fans spewing their complaints in this thread.
That's why often reviewers just give in, and go with the red amdati bias - just to shut up the endless complaints when the reds lose fair and square.

It must be HORRIBLE being a reviewer and telling the truth.

Let's not forget the CRAPPY AMD drivers in comparison to NVIDIA and it's massive game coverage - another gigantic problem the new amd ceo ain't gonna solve unless amd comes up with a couple hundred million or a billion and like 200 NEW HIRES to go about the world to all the game making comanies and work with them LIKE NVIDIA DOES ALL YEAR ROUND FOR YEARS ONGOING.

Yes, NVIDIA HAS LITERALLY HUNDREDS, and amdati has "a few".

Nice try this time amd at least you finally got cf working halfway decent for the first time ever, made a new shader core that wasn't just a multiplied clone stamd of HD2900's version, and brought the PATHETIC DX11 FAIL performance caving up to perhaps what might be considered a "respectable level" after all the blabbering of being the 1st dx11 cards to market 8 mos. ahead of the competitor....( with total crap performance that did not work )

So, gosh, sure hope amd can make it's own eyefinity crap next time, not rely on 3rd party software and dongles, and also GET SOME NEW CORE going that isn't crap on drivers, low on 2d voltage or clocks, and filled with endless bugs that ME, the enduser, has to spend hour after hour "ironing out" with a thousand web link clicks and hacking up xml files and flashing bios' and all the rest - tweaking out msi afterburner after unlocking voltage - ETC... just for "stability". Oh gawd, I just got the mouse corner lockup again...

I hope Xbit are ashamed for this shill 'review'

The author should be fired/shot/murdered

This is one of the worst articles here on Xbitlabs I've read. Lots of spin, bias, and bullshit. I've been coming here (and a member of) Xbitlabs since 2004 and the articles were great. But I didn't expect this from Xbitlabs which is pathetic. Many others sites cite that AMD's solution is much more flexible, cheaper, and overall simply better than nVidia's solution to multiple monitors.

Get another write because this one is horrid and tarnishes Xbit's reputation.