# 12K Resolution Gaming Setup Renders 1.5 Billion Pixels, Costs $17,000



## Over_Lord (Jul 26, 2013)

What do you call a person who sets up three 32-inch 4K (that's 3840 x 2160 pixels each) side-by-side, pairs three of ASUS's HD 7970 GPUs together to play games using AMD's EyeInfinity technology, all of which costs a whopping $17,000? Insane is one word, rich another or a crazy gamer? Perhaps a mix of all the three.

The setup consists of three Sharp PN-K321 4K monitors connected to three AMD HD 7970 GPUs which are together capable of pushing a mind-blowing 1.5 billion pixels on the combined 12K screen resolution, together with a Power Supply Unit that conks off in a few minutes, perhaps just not able to bear the pure awesomeness of the setup. Oh, to get the setup working, AMD put together some custom drivers to make sure that EyeInfinity works well. Before using the custom drivers, the whole rig was able to pull together a measly 8 frames per second, to be more accurate, a slideshow.











Do check out the video, for that's as close as you're ever going to get to such a glorious setup.



 

 

 

 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 26, 2013)

I only see 2 cards. Am I missing something?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 26, 2013)

I really wish people would stop calling it 4K... this set up is 24.8 megapixels.  By comparison, mine is 2.3 megapixels.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 26, 2013)

nice, crappy case though.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

As much as I want a 3840*2160 screen, I really don't right now considering my 7970 even struggles at 1080p in some games. ~140 PPI for each display is awesome, though.


----------



## Nordic (Jul 26, 2013)

I want one of those monitors. My price range is ~$300. Make it happen.


----------



## hckngrtfakt (Jul 26, 2013)

Crappiest setup ever for a tri-fire setup... :shadedshu

The case sucks, the PSU overheats because is probably a no-brand POS
and the CPU cooler ? really ,.. might as well use the stock one.... 

And am i missing something or does the article say "3 gpus" when i only
see 2


----------



## Over_Lord (Jul 26, 2013)

james888 said:


> I want one of those monitors. My price range is ~$300. Make it happen.



Sure. Gimme the $300. I'll see what I can do


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 26, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> As much as I want a 3840*2160 screen, I really don't right now considering my 7970 even struggles at 1080p in some games. ~140 PPI for each display is awesome, though.



You must be joking!! Name 1 (one) game that is struggling with your card at 1080p! One!


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

james888 said:


> I want one of those monitors. My price range is ~$300. Make it happen.



Add a zero, and then $2000 to that. 

It would be convenient if these became more sanely priced right around the time where GPUs are much more powerful than they are currently (I hope that comes true within a few years). I guess for strictly desktop/photo work they would be excellent aside from having a microscopic user interface.



Prima.Vera said:


> You must be joking!! Name 1 (one) game that is struggling with your card at 1080p! One!



Borderlands 2 (drops to ~80 FPS frequently, have to set my 120Hz monitor to 100Hz to minimize the drops), Tomb Raider 2013 (50-70 FPS), Planetside 2 (50-70 FPS), Far Cry 3 (50-70 FPS), etc. I haven't played any of the Crysis games in years but I might fire those up this weekend for shits and giggles, as they sucked on a 9800 GT back in 2009.


----------



## Nordic (Jul 26, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> You must be joking!! Name 1 (one) game that is struggling with your card at 1080p! One!



He plays at 120hz I think, and wants all 120fps. My 7970 at stock has yet to see a game give it trouble at 1080p.


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 26, 2013)

hckngrtfakt said:


> Crappiest setup ever for a tri-fire setup... :shadedshu
> 
> The case sucks, the PSU overheats because is probably a no-brand POS
> and the CPU cooler ? really ,.. might as well use the stock one....
> ...



Erm, there ARE 3 cards there if you haven't noticed. One with black aftermarket cooler all the way above and 2 with reference cooler below it...


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 26, 2013)

hckngrtfakt said:


> Crappiest setup ever for a tri-fire setup... :shadedshu
> 
> The case sucks, the PSU overheats because is probably a no-brand POS
> and the CPU cooler ? really ,.. might as well use the stock one....
> ...



Get your eyes cheked bro there are 3 gfx the top ones all black , , you cant see the cpu cooler at all and for that setup an ax1200 would be on its kneees flat out.
I also look upon this with envious eyes though I too would bin that case


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

james888 said:


> He plays at 120hz I think, and wants all 120fps. My 7970 at stock has yet to see a game give it trouble at 1080p.



You're correct. I settle for 60ish in the newest games but a few of the games dip below that occasionally. Some of the cutscenes in Tomb Raider where Lara Croft's hair flips out with TressFX on causes drops into the sub-20 FPS range.


----------



## lyndonguitar (Jul 26, 2013)

Pretty bad investment for a $17,000, 
I could have bought a monster 1080p rig, pre-ordered an Xbox One and PS4 + 1080p HDTVs, have a Steam Store shopping spree, a gaming laptop, Hell, I still could even buy a cheap car with the remaining $$$ and buy myself a few boxes of pizza and cases of beer.

Besides, I don't think my eyes can benefit that much anymore from have a 4k resolution instead of the normal 1080p, unless I'm far way in a couch, plus I like having more FPS more than a better resolution quality. I prefer seeing things move smoothly rather than seeing them more clearly.

That's why I game at my 1366 x 768 monitor instead for very demanding games, and I rarely use my HDTV. This practice started off when I was young, I got a pretty weak GPU(HD 3650) and can't play games like Crysis to the fullest, What I'd do is crank down the resolution but turn up the graphics to the highest(except AA), and then I could play the game smoothly.

But who am I to judge? If he got that much money to waste, Why not?


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 26, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> Borderlands 2 (drops to ~80 FPS frequently, have to set my 120Hz monitor to 100Hz to minimize the drops), Tomb Raider 2013 (50-70 FPS), Planetside 2 (50-70 FPS), Far Cry 3 (50-70 FPS), etc. I haven't played any of the Crysis games in years but I might fire those up this weekend for shits and giggles, as they sucked on a 9800 GT back in 2009.



Common man, that's no "struggling". Struggling is if you were playing the games in less than 25fps. 
Personally I even play the games at 60fps with vsync on to prevent heating and keep the noise down.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 26, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Common man, that's no "struggling". Struggling is if you were playing the games in less than 25fps.
> Personally I even play the games at 60fps with vsync on to prevent heating and keep the noise down.



Im the same +1 but clearly some have crazy perception of struggling


----------



## hckngrtfakt (Jul 26, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Get your eyes cheked bro there are 3 gfx the top ones all black , , you cant see the cpu cooler at all and for that setup an ax1200 would be on its kneees flat out.
> I also look upon this with envious eyes though I too would bin that case





RejZoR said:


> Erm, there ARE 3 cards there if you haven't noticed. One with black aftermarket cooler all the way above and 2 with reference cooler below it...



Got my eyes checked and based off that video, i only STILL see 2 GPUs running the game


----------



## Nordic (Jul 26, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> You're correct. I settle for 60ish in the newest games but a few of the games dip below that occasionally. Some of the cutscenes in Tomb Raider where Lara Croft's hair flips out with TressFX on causes drops into the sub-20 FPS range.


I never played Tomb raider so I cant comment on that... but that is tressfx. A special feature.


hckngrtfakt said:


> Got my eyes checked and based off that video, i only STILL see 2 GPUs running the game
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=52001&stc=1&d=1374858744








That was for the trifire eyefinity. When he did a single monitor he only used crossfire.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 26, 2013)

And they are probably playing at 5 FPS.....


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

I know some people are fine with 60Hz, but kind of like the transition from TN to IPS or IGZO panels and their fantastic color rendition, trying 120Hz and experiencing the smoothness it brings makes it somewhat annoying to play games at 30-60 FPS, especially if you have a slower LCD panel e.g. 5+ ms. 60Hz on my laptop almost looks closer to 30 in reality, and my work monitor (Acer G215HV) overclocked to 70Hz looks much better. I guess it depends on the game as well, as "slower FPS games" play well even with lower FPS, but faster moving games e.g. multiplayer FPS tend to prefer high refresh rates to smooth things out.

I just can't imagine taking the games I consider "borderline" and making them run 4x worse with a 4x resolution increase. 15-25 FPS FTW?


----------



## Nordic (Jul 26, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> And they are probably playing at 5 FPS.....



If you read it, it was 8fps. Then amd made special drivers. If you watched the video he was getting 30fps with all three, and 130fps with a single monitor.


I wonder what amd did to the drivers. What did they cut out to get extra fps?


----------



## Over_Lord (Jul 26, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> And they are probably playing at 5 FPS.....



60 actually, with AMD's custom drivers


----------



## suraswami (Jul 26, 2013)

lyndonguitar said:


> Pretty bad investment for a $17,000,
> I could have bought a monster 1080p rig, pre-ordered an Xbox One and PS4 + 1080p HDTVs, have a Steam Store shopping spree, a gaming laptop, Hell, I still could even buy a cheap car with the remaining $$$ and buy myself a few boxes of pizza and cases of beer.
> 
> Besides, I don't think my eyes can benefit that much anymore from have a 4k resolution instead of the normal 1080p, unless I'm far way in a couch, plus I like having more FPS more than a better resolution quality. I prefer seeing things move smoothly rather than seeing them more clearly.
> ...



LOL.

thats my one year mortgage!


----------



## Kaynar (Jul 26, 2013)

$17,000 for a stock cooler, crap case with no airflow, crap PSU, 3x 7970 (in one pic there are only 2 of them) instead of having 4x Titans or gtx780, oh and wait, thats not even a X79 platform there. How the F*** did this cost $17,000? I guess the screens cost $16,000

And all that to play Dirt 3 that can be played even by intel integrated HD4600 but this time they use 3 GPUs to get playable fps on a very light game...

Call me again when Battlefield 4 can be played at 12k res.


----------



## AsRock (Jul 26, 2013)

suraswami said:


> LOL.
> 
> thats my one year mortgage!



Think ya self lucky as that's more than a lot earn over a year.


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Jul 26, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Get your eyes cheked bro there are 3 gfx the top ones all black , , you cant see the cpu cooler at all and for that setup an ax1200 would be on its kneees flat out.
> I also look upon this with envious eyes though I too would bin that case



Funny though... in the video @ 1:50 it says 2x 7970... but I am with you I see 3 cards... did from the beginning and then the comments started coming about only seeing 2.... lol


Want a setup like that. but want x79build and 4 Titans


----------



## erocker (Jul 26, 2013)

So, who do I have to contact to get myself some "custom drivers"?


----------



## SIGSEGV (Jul 26, 2013)

i don't really care with $17k, the main reason i do comment to this thread that there was a 'custom driver for 2/3 xfire eyefinity setup' from amd. is that the next whql driver from amd ? *drooolll*


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 26, 2013)

Kaynar said:


> $17,000 for a stock cooler, crap case with no airflow, crap PSU, 3x 7970 (in one pic there are only 2 of them) instead of having 4x Titans or gtx780, oh and wait, thats not even a X79 platform there. How the F*** did this cost $17,000? I guess the screens cost $16,000
> 
> And all that to play Dirt 3 that can be played even by intel integrated HD4600 but this time they use 3 GPUs to get playable fps on a very light game...
> 
> Call me again when Battlefield 4 can be played at 12k res.



The monitors due. 4k 32" Sharp monitors. those could be at least $5,000 each.


----------



## Over_Lord (Jul 26, 2013)

The bulk of the system cost is due to those 3 x 4K monitors.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 26, 2013)

james888 said:


> What did they cut out to get extra fps?


Image Quaility is my first guess... 10.4 drivers anyone?


----------



## Ikaruga (Jul 26, 2013)

Over_Lord said:


> Oh, to get the setup working, *AMD put together some custom drivers to make sure that EyeInfinity works well*. Before using the custom drivers, the whole rig was able to pull together a measly 8 frames per second, to be more accurate, a slideshow.


I think this might be "too much" information from AMD's point of view


----------



## Octavean (Jul 26, 2013)

The case looks to be an Antec Nine Hundred.  Perhaps not the latest case design but I wouldn't call it a crappy case personally.   The CPU cooler looks like a Zalman AlCu xxx. Cheap but likely a minor step up from stock and probably fine for  some of the latest Core i5 / Core i7 processors provided your not trying to OC the CPU significantly.

The Sharp PN-K321 4K monitors were  loaners so clearly they just needed to slap something together to test them with. The system they have seems fine for it whether you love or hate the HD 7970 cards / PSU.

I'd love to have a setup like this.  

I don't care if the GPU setup would have difficulty in some or even most games. I'd just drop the settings and resolution to 2560x1440 or possibly even lower.  Some might say that would defeat the purpose but not for the games that would be playable at 4K and one could always get some real work done with a tripe 4K monitor setup as well. 

I mean at ~$17,000 someone better be able to get some real work done with them to pay them off.


----------



## TheDeeGee (Jul 26, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> I only see 2 cards. Am I missing something?



Naah, hes playing DiRT 3 which runs at 150 FPS on a single card.

Games like BF3, Crysis, Far Cry need 4 Titans at that resolution to just reach 60 FPS. Believe a Benchmark was posted here someone on TPU a while back.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 26, 2013)

erocker said:


> So, who do I have to contact to get myself some "custom drivers"?



Big g's only gone and found THE question right there me too


----------



## radrok (Jul 26, 2013)

Why are people too busy raging/hating over the 17K+ of the setup? He clearly stated on the main source :



> In this article I’m going to share with you an amazing set of experiences that I recently had pushing the boundaries of 4K multi-mon gaming with several Sharp PN-K321 4K Ultra HD displays that I had on *loan* for a short period of time.



I'd say we got to praise him (and every single early adopter of new tech) because he's pushing the envelope and got AMD too involved in this.

It's because of people like him we get support for future setups.

Hate doesn't bring anything, stay classy instead


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 26, 2013)

hckngrtfakt said:


> The case sucks



It is an Antec 900, it's older, but it isn't a terrible case.  I seem to remember it getting pretty decent reviews actually.



hckngrtfakt said:


> the PSU overheats because is probably a no-brand POS



It's a Thermaltake PSU, hardly no-brand POS. It was probably working pretty darn hard to drive 3 of those cards, but for just 2 it is more than enough.



hckngrtfakt said:


> and the CPU cooler ? really ,.. might as well use the stock one....



The CNPS7700-alcu is quite a bit better than stock, but on a setup like this he likely isn't overclocking the CPU all that much.



hckngrtfakt said:


> And am i missing something or does the article say "3 gpus" when i only
> see 2



I see three:


----------



## Jorge (Jul 26, 2013)

Perfect example of more money than brains. The fact that he plays games with this hardware kinda tells the whole story.


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Jul 26, 2013)

Jorge said:


> Perfect example of more money than brains. The fact that he plays games with this hardware kinda tells the whole story.



GO AWAY TROLL!!!!!!!

do any of you read before posting????


----------



## radrok (Jul 26, 2013)

nickbaldwin86 said:


> GO AWAY TROLL!!!!!!!
> 
> do any of you read before posting????



QFT


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 26, 2013)

EarthDog said:


> Image Quaility is my first guess... 10.4 drivers anyone?



Those drivers were the only ones that were actually stable for me when I had a 5870 haha.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 26, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Those drivers were the only ones that were actually stable for me when I had a 5870 haha.



Strange ive had mine years no issues still upping every driver release and I must be up 20% or more in performance over day 1 when I had one card after six months of ify the five series rocked now about those amd tweeked drivers???? ,?.


----------



## jihadjoe (Jul 26, 2013)

3-monitor 4k gaming is pretty much AMD-only at this point right?
AFAIK since each of those 4k monitors counts as two, this setup is basically Eyefinity 6x.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 26, 2013)

radrok said:


> Why are people too busy raging/hating over the 17K+ of the setup? He clearly stated on the main source :
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Like most things for enthusiasts, they hate on something because they are jelly and can't afford it.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 26, 2013)

jihadjoe said:


> 3-monitor 4k gaming is pretty much AMD-only at this point right?
> AFAIK since each of those 4k monitors counts as two, this setup is basically Eyefinity 6x.



Yep, this is what I was thinking also. The Eyefinity setup is actually a 6 monitors emulated one.
Good catch.



Aybara said:


> lulz...
> 
> why are they using 7970's though... 4x GTX Titan or go home... nubs


Because Mr. Troll, you cannot emulate 6 monitors on your Titan's cards.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

Correct, each monitor is in DisplayPort 1.2 "Multi-stream transport" mode meaning it is actually being used as "two 1920*2160 monitors" in one. I'm impressed that these particular monitors support 60Hz as well. DisplayPort seems to be the way the future is heading for monitors, especially these "4K" models.


----------



## Breit (Jul 26, 2013)

The 12K moniker is somewhat misleading! The 4K resolution comes from a cinema camera / projection format. As such a (real) 4K display has to have a resolution of 4096x2160. So in fact 3840x2160 isn't a true 4K resolution and therefor called '4K-HD' (as it is exactly 4 times, 2-by-2, HD resolution). A 8K resolution display has to have exactly 4 times the pixles of a 4K display (2-by-2 again), which is far more pixels than triple 4K(HD) displays...
Even though a hypothetical 12K display has to have 9 times the pixel count of a 4K display (3-by-3), which is something around 80 megapixels! This again is far more than those 24 megapixels in his triple 4K-HD setup.
Either post the amount of megapixles or just say that he uses a triple 4K-HD setup, please.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 26, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> They aren't emulating 2 monitors with one, I don't know where you get that.  As far as the computer is concerned each monitor is one monitor.  The only think close to emulating two monitors that 4k requires is the fact that it would need a Dual-Link DVI, so it would use two of the available DVI streams.  However, he's using displayport with this setup, so that doesn't matter.



See this video: Gaming on the Sharp PN-K321 (UltraHD resolution 60...

I don't think DL-DVI has enough bandwidth to support 3840*2160 monitors at >30Hz.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 26, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> See this video: Gaming on the Sharp PN-K321 (UltraHD resolution 60...
> 
> I don't think DL-DVI has enough bandwidth to support 3840*2160 monitors at >30Hz.



Yeah, you're right, I forgot that for 60hz you need two connectors, hence the deleted commend.


----------



## radrok (Jul 27, 2013)

Aybara said:


> why are they using 7970's though... 4x GTX Titan or go home... nubs



Because Nvidia surround can't go over 3 monitors, this is a 6 monitors setup.


----------



## JohnnyX_O (Jul 27, 2013)

I want to see Crysis 3 on one of the 4k monitors , that games kills my 7950 on 8x MSAA  on 4x it just fine but 8x is to much  . So my theory that AMD is going for 4K -8k -12k GPU design was right , nice ... and get this the 7970 is 2 years old ( are they using GHz ? that is a bit younger ) and the Titan is 1000$_$  and doesn't do that resolution ... FUNNY .

P.S: Is the 600 series even supporting 4k ? I know the 6000 did with a driver .


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2013)

Is that a 990fx board?


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jul 27, 2013)

cdawall said:


> Is that a 990fx board?



Looks like it, judging from the NB heatsink and the clips on the cooler.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 27, 2013)

He uses two different machines, so there is one with 2 and one with 3 7970's. Thats why some people are only seeing 2 cards.


----------



## JohnnyX_O (Jul 27, 2013)

You can spend 1200$ on 4k monitors but not 3000 on a GPU that is had to be 1500 $ ( All 3 of them )   .


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 27, 2013)

JohnnyX_O said:


> You can spend 1200$ on 4k monitors but not 3000 on a GPU that is had to be 1500 $ ( All 3 of them )   .



He didn't spend anything on the monitors.


----------



## Ikaruga (Jul 27, 2013)

OK,

I had time to watch the video as well. I'm not trolling but I honestly think that this is just a bad joke. It's really nice that AMD was giving a hand, and I also truly appreciate the enthusiasm that he is experimenting with multiply 4K monitor, but the execution looks terrible to me. 


Looks like he is using 30Hz with the 3 monitor setup, so the post is a little misleading perhaps and 30Hz is also more like console gaming territory imo.
Dirt3, really?
I think I see input lag between his thumb movement and the monitor.. I don't know much about the PN-K321 tbh (expect press release stuffs), but perhaps it's not the best choice for gaming if it has a "slow" scaler.
dat build....
_"really smooth, real fluid graphics"_ @ 60Hz .... /trollface


----------



## tastegw (Jul 27, 2013)

3 monitors is pointless for dirt 3 right?


----------



## NC37 (Jul 27, 2013)

If you're dumping 17k on something...why on earth wouldn't you just max out the GPUs also? Money is no object right? Be a man, bankrupt for it!!


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 27, 2013)

erocker said:


> So, who do I have to contact to get myself some "custom drivers"?



either this whole thing is a marketing stunt, or amd driver developers are wasting their time with this stuff instead of fixing issues the other 99.999999% of their customers are having


----------



## Frick (Jul 27, 2013)

http://www.mwelab.com/index.php/en/products/emperor-200

That but more monitors.


----------



## Akrian (Jul 27, 2013)

I just have one question to the owner of that rig: WHY 0_o.

His 3x7970 will crawl in many currently released games on max settings at those rez. + no water ? just air ? poor cards.


Reasoning: I currently have 4x7970 in my rig, with 3x standard 1920x1080 monitors. Metro LL crawls on max settings at 5760x1080 ( when you add max SSAA)
Crysis 3 crawls on max settings - not enough memory
Serious Sam 3 can crawl on max settings when you manually select maximum possible settings
Sniper Elite V2 will crawl on max with SSAA ( when you zoom-in you will see noticeable slow-down in rendering for a second)
And that's at 5760x1080. Now, with his monitors and resolutions his 3 7970s are a waste of money, or rather those 3 monitors are a waste of money, since there's simply isn't a card that can perform well at those rez in latest titles.


And once again : NO WATER 0_o.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 27, 2013)

what a pos system. guy is just a wannabe douche.

how this has even made the news is beyond me. and 17K? spent on what


----------



## remixedcat (Jul 27, 2013)

I would rather spend more on a decent psu, games, actual compute/gpu power, and storage.


----------



## cdawall (Jul 27, 2013)

remixedcat said:


> I would rather spend more on a decent psu, games, actual compute/gpu power, and storage.



That thermaltake he is using isn't exactly low end. It is likely just not sized correctly for the fx series cpu, 3x7970's and whatever else. Its definitely not the 1400-1500w model judging by size...but is either the older tr2 series built by cwt or their top series also built by cwt and neither is a slouch.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 27, 2013)

Ikaruga said:


> Looks like he is using 30Hz with the 3 monitor setup, so the post is a little misleading perhaps and 30Hz is also more like console gaming territory imo.



Unfortunately a single Displayport connector can only drive one of these monitors at 30Hz, but for many, including pretty much everyone that plays on consoles and myself, 30Hz is smooth enough as long as the framerate doesn't jump around.

However, if you read the article they did get the setup working at 60Hz, it just took 3 7970s and a bunch of extra work since is seems no one has tried this and it isn't supported by AMD's drivers.



NC37 said:


> If you're dumping 17k on something...why on earth wouldn't you just max out the GPUs also? Money is no object right? Be a man, bankrupt for it!!



Because he isn't rich and didn't dump $17k perhaps?



de.das.dude said:


> what a pos system. guy is just a wannabe douche.
> 
> how this has even made the news is beyond me. and 17K? spent on what



When did Dual-7970s become a POS system? Someone running a 3 generation old AMD x4 and a 7790 probably shouldn't be going around calling other people's systems a POS.

And you people seem to be missing that he is really the first person to document tri-4k, and you're really missing the fact that this is his blog.  He did it because he *borrowed* the monitors and wanted to mess around with it.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 27, 2013)

I agree newtekie1, if anyone of us had borrowed these screens, we would probs have tried what he did, dunno if we'd have got a custom driver off AMD though.


----------



## Octavean (Jul 27, 2013)

tigger said:


> I agree newtekie1, if anyone of us had borrowed these screens, we would probs have tried what he did, dunno if we'd have got a custom driver off AMD though.



Indeed,....

I agree as well and I definitely would have tried this.  Anyone trying this and reporting about it would likely have gotten the same hate from people misreading or not bothering to read the posting yet somehow finding the time to rag on it.


----------



## buggalugs (Jul 27, 2013)

4K IS a very noticeable improvement over 1080p. Heck I can tell the difference between 720 and 1080p. If people cant notice it all I can say is you're blind.....

 A 4K TV connected to a HTPC would be awesome, a 4K computer screen would be good too except no graphics card can run it properly yet, well not if you want decent frame rates.


----------



## Nordic (Jul 27, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Unfortunately a single Displayport connector can only drive one of these monitors at 30Hz, but for many, including pretty much everyone that plays on consoles and myself, 30Hz is smooth enough as long as the framerate doesn't jump around.
> 
> However, if you read the article they did get the setup working at 60Hz, it just _took 3 7970s _and a bunch of extra work since is seems no one has tried this and it isn't supported by AMD's drivers.



It was actually crossfire, 2 7970's, that got him 60hz.


----------



## szeus (Jul 27, 2013)

3840x2160=8294400
8294400x3 monitors=24883200
How??
24883200= 1.5 billion????????
....
4k x 4=8k
whay ???
4k x3 = 12k ?????????????


----------



## Mindweaver (Jul 27, 2013)

Kaynar said:


> $17,000 for a stock cooler, crap case with no airflow, crap PSU, 3x 7970 (in one pic there are only 2 of them) instead of having 4x Titans or gtx780, oh and wait, thats not even a X79 platform there. *How the F*** did this cost $17,000?* I guess the screens cost $16,000
> 
> And all that to play Dirt 3 that can be played even by intel integrated HD4600 but this time they use 3 GPUs to get playable fps on a very light game...
> 
> Call me again when Battlefield 4 can be played at 12k res.



Those screens are around $4,800 to $5,000 ea. So, around 2k for the system plus tax. If they used Titans + Intel then it would be closer to $20k+.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Jul 27, 2013)

And people still claim "one GPU is all you need..."  There's NEVER enough performance to wring out of graphics cards for those of us who really need it.


----------



## Octavean (Jul 27, 2013)

Mindweaver said:


> Those screens are around $4,800 to $5,000 ea. So, around 2k for the system plus tax. If they used Titans + Intel then it would be closer to $20k+.



I have heard that the Sharp PN-K321Q is basically the same as the Asus PQ321Q which can be had from Newegg now for $3,499.99:

ASUS PQ321Q Black 31.5" 8ms (GTG) HDMI Widescreen ...

That's about ~$10,500 for three Asus PQ321Q units. MSRP might be more though.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 28, 2013)

JohnnyX_O said:


> I want to see Crysis 3 on one of the 4k monitors , that games kills my 7950 on 8x MSAA  on 4x it just fine but 8x is to much  .



Use SMAA Injector instead of the standard MSAA


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 28, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Use SMAA Injector instead of the standard MSAA



At 4k you don't need AA.


----------



## radrok (Jul 28, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> At 4k you don't need AA.



You mean at that higher PPI, right? 

Resolution doesn't affect aliasing directly, PPI does


----------



## MikeMurphy (Jul 28, 2013)

I count 24.8 million pixels.

Where do you get 1.5 billion from?


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 28, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Unfortunately a single Displayport connector can only drive one of these monitors at 30Hz, but for many, including pretty much everyone that plays on consoles and myself, 30Hz is smooth enough as long as the framerate doesn't jump around.
> 
> However, if you read the article they did get the setup working at 60Hz, it just took 3 7970s and a bunch of extra work since is seems no one has tried this and it isn't supported by AMD's drivers.
> 
> ...




well, its just a few parts are good. i cant buy stuff because i cant afford it. he spent 12K on stuff and didnt find anything left to buy some after market cooling to replace the intel stock cooler or a decent cabinet and power supply.

by POS i meant its POS because its totally unbalanced and meaningless.


if i had 17K i wouldnt spend it on stuff like this. i would rather go for titans. crossfire is too buggy.


----------



## BigMack70 (Jul 28, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> he spent 12K on stuff and didnt find anything left to buy some after market cooling to replace the intel stock cooler or a decent cabinet and power supply.
> 
> by POS i meant its POS because its totally unbalanced and meaningless.
> 
> ...



*He didn't spend anything... this was equipment he was testing on loan to him. And at the time, Nvidia could not be used to drive 6 displays, meaning he had to use 7970s.*

Half the posts in this thread are critiquing something that didn't happen... get your facts straight, folks.

All of you critiquing the build as if the guy designed it for a trio of 4k screens and/or spent money on those screens get this...


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jul 28, 2013)

MikeMurphy said:


> I count 24.8 million pixels.
> 
> Where do you get 1.5 billion from?



could be 24.8 million times 60fps, which is around 1.5 billion.


----------



## Octavean (Jul 28, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> well, its just a few parts are good. i cant buy stuff because i cant afford it. he spent 12K on stuff and didnt find anything left to buy some after market cooling to replace the intel stock cooler or a decent cabinet and power supply.
> 
> by POS i meant its POS because its totally unbalanced and meaningless.
> 
> ...



I think there are a lot of us here that either cannot afford or are unwilling to spend the money necessary to acquire such 4K hardware and GPU prowess.  This is no excuse for ignorance though. Like has already been said, a lot of people are going off on a rant without even knowing the given situation or limitations that may have forced specific hardware choices.

Anyone truly interested in the tech could have gleaned the info from actually reading the blog source linked or from other sources.

For example, the Newegg link to the Asus PQ321Q 4K monitor I posted on page 3 (which I hear is basically the same as the sharp) has some interesting info in a user review.  It outlines the nVidia 30Hz limitation and the two monitor spanning issue. It was stated that nVidia needed to release a new driver to fix this. It basically was someone with the hardware informing those without the hardware of the current state of things. 

However, there was a manufacturer note to respond to the review stating that nVidia has updated their driver to address this shortcoming and provided a link to updated drivers.

Naturally knowing these things sort of requires wanting to know them rather then wanting to just dump on everything.

***edit***

He didn't buy the 4k monitors

The case is an Antec 900 which is decent albeit not the newest.

The CPU cooler is not a stock Intel cooler and is likely slightly better then stock. Doesn't matter unless he is emphasizing OCing the CPU.

The PSU looks like a ThermalTake 

$17,000 is likely a fudge number having to do with an estimated value.  I think the Asus PQ321Q had a MSRP of ~$3,800 but has a street price of ~$3,500.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 28, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> At 4k you don't need AA.



Only if your monitor is 10" in diagonal size


----------



## D007 (Jul 28, 2013)

17k for 4k? I think not.. The price is beyond stupid..
No TV is worth a car.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 28, 2013)

radrok said:


> You mean at that higher PPI, right?
> 
> Resolution doesn't affect aliasing directly, PPI does



You are correct, but even at 30" a piece for the displays this setup has  one of the highest PPI available, so AA isn't as necessary.



Prima.Vera said:


> Only if your monitor is 10" in diagonal size



No, even at 30".



D007 said:


> 17k for 4k? I think not.. The price is beyond stupid..
> No TV is worth a car.



Actually, 17K for *3* 4k monitors and the parts in the computer. The ASUS clone of the monitor used(uses the same panel) is about $3,500.


----------



## radrok (Jul 28, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> You are correct, but even at 30" a piece for the displays this setup has one of the highest PPI available, so AA isn't as necessary.



I don't need more than 2x AA on 2560x1600 on a 30" which should be 100 PPI.

I imagine that 3840x2160 on a 31.5"/32" wouldn't need it at all, so I agree with you.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 28, 2013)

radrok said:


> I don't need more than 2x AA on 2560x1600 on a 30" which should be 100 PPI.
> 
> I imagine that 3840x2160 on a 31.5"/32" wouldn't need it at all, so I agree with you.



Yeah, these monitors are ~140PPI, so AA wouldn't be as necessary.  I'd probably still use 2x though.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 29, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> No, even at 30".



Bro, my phone has 450PPI at 5" and when I play a 3D game I can still see jaggies. Very very small, but there are. And that's on a 450PPI. Relax.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 29, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Bro, my phone has 450PPI at 5" and when I play a 3D game I can still see jaggies. Very very small, but there are. And that's on a 450PPI. Relax.



3D games on mobile phones with high resolution screens like that are rendered at a much lower resolution and upscaled and they use extremely low polygon counts, which makes for much longer straight lines.  That is why you can still see jaggies.  If a PC was driving that display there would be no way you'd be able to see jaggies.


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 29, 2013)

james888 said:


> I want one of those monitors. My price range is ~$300. Make it happen.


I remember when 27" 1080P was new Tech and the folks still stuck on CRT's used every effigy to denounce their coming... price, response time who wants a stretch resolution, etc! 


lyndonguitar said:


> Pretty bad investment for a $17,000,


So is a Titian but folks buy them… 



radrok said:


> I'd say we got to praise him (and every single early adopter of new tech) because he's pushing the envelope and got AMD too involved in this.  It's because of people like him we get support for future setups.  Hate doesn't bring anything, stay classy instead


Exactly... An average Joe has the opportunity to play and test this stuff and all some jokers will moan is about crappy case...cooler STFU!


W1zzard said:


> either this whole thing is a marketing stunt, or amd driver developers are wasting their time with this stuff instead of fixing issues the other 99.999999% of their customers are having.


You know we don't see *"virtually every AMD customer (aka 99.9999%)"* having issues with AMD drivers, well not any more than Nvidia.  That was un-called-for trollism, especially coming from you W1zzard.  How do you not know this work isn't including the whole C-F issue that AMD is working on, and thought they might learn something from the guy trying these R&D drivers.  AMD is working on current problems, but in your mind there's not a good time to invest in the future?  That was a *crass shot *that truly undermines my option of your integrity. :shadedshu


newtekie1 said:


> Shouldn't be going around calling other people's systems a POS....
> And you people seem to be missing that he is really the first person to document tri-4k, and you're really missing the fact that this is his blog.  He did it because he *borrowed* the monitors and wanted to mess around with it.


Correct Thank You for maintaining prespective, his is how cutting edge Tech starts... The rest need to _stop being a bunch of wanker's_ and cutting down the tech... 
You may now turn off your CRT's.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 29, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Yeah, these monitors are ~140PPI, so AA wouldn't be as necessary.  I'd probably still use 2x though.


Anti-aliasing isn't ever necessary. XD

I almost always disable AA on my setup because frame rates have always bothered me more than jagged edges.  I only notice jagged edges if I look for them.  My monitor (Samsung T240) has a 0.27mm pixel pitch (1920x1200 @ 24").  2560x1600 @ 30" is 0.25mm pixel pitch.  These Sharp PN-K321 monitors (3840×2400 @ 31.5") are 0.182mm pixel pitch.


----------



## Frick (Jul 29, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I almost always disable AA on my setup because frame rates have always bothered me more than jagged edges.  I only notice jagged edges if I look for them.  My monitor (Samsung T240) has a 0.27mm pixel pitch (1920x1200 @ 24").  2560x1600 @ 30" is 0.25mm pixel pitch.  These Sharp PN-K321 monitors (3840×2400 @ 31.5") are 0.182mm pixel pitch.



Same here. Plus I mostly play ancient games that look bad to begin with.


----------



## radrok (Jul 29, 2013)

Casecutter said:


> So is a Titian but folks buy them%u2026



That's uncorrect, Titan is a pretty good bargain, won't add more as I've already been on the subject so many times...


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 29, 2013)

radrok said:


> Titan is a pretty good bargain...


For those early Tech adopters looking to run just 3 displays bridging as one... I suppose!  But $500 in AMD has the ability to do 6 displays. 
(Caveat: AMD can span 6 display with a single 7970; although not with such cutting edge 4K displays, or at any memorable Fps even with 6 1920x monitors on *most* new titles.  Though there are instances it can be attainable, like say this guy does using Dirt 3.)  

That said, compare Titan vs. 7970 Ghz at 5760x1080... other than perhaps Crysis 2 there's not any compelling rationale to ante-up double the funds.

Not arguing the fact that AMD needs to remedy their C-F issues, but _if/when _that could be remedied it would just improve the situation against the cost.  Consider two 7970 Ghz for $1000.


----------

