1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Investigating 3D Screens

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Baz, 27 May 2011.

  1. Baz

    Baz I work for Corsair

    Joined:
    13 Jan 2005
    Posts:
    1,810
    Likes Received:
    92
    Fizzban likes this.
  2. mi1ez

    mi1ez Active Member

    Joined:
    11 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    17
    Could we not strike a balance with IPS and a refresh rate of 80/90/100Hz?
     
  3. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    Shutter glasses alternate frames, effectively halving the visible refresh rate. Try dropping the refresh rate of your current screen down to 40/45/50Hz and you'll see why anything less than 120Hz is going to be a problem.
     
  4. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,248
    Likes Received:
    88
    Ehmmm, no.
    This part implies that TV screens, using fast IPS or VA panels (they're 3D capable) are superior to monitors, and tests just don't show this.
    A 24" TV is cheaper than a 24" IPS monitor, and they've got the same digital input and resolution now. We'd all have one, right?
     
  5. leveller

    leveller Yeti Sports 2 - 2011 Champion!

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    24
    If what Acer say is true about their 27" 3D then I might be convinced to ditch my current monitor later this year ...
     
  6. Glix

    Glix Left Thumb Stick in the mud.

    Joined:
    11 May 2010
    Posts:
    318
    Likes Received:
    1
    Isn't there a difference in dot pitch though?
     
  7. HandMadeAndroid

    HandMadeAndroid That's handy.

    Joined:
    18 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    740
    Likes Received:
    8
    If a movie needs all these bells and whistles then it's probably not worth watching.I know I get engrossed in a film if I'm enjoying it.
     
  8. SMIFFYDUDE

    SMIFFYDUDE Supermodders on my D

    Joined:
    22 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    2,897
    Likes Received:
    103
    I'd rather they all went back to making 1920x1200 resolution screens.
     
  9. tigertop1

    tigertop1 New Member

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    One point in favour of these 3D screens is that they run at 120Hz. 2D viewing improves a lot when you use it versus a 60Hz monitor. I have had two 3D screens now, A Samsung which was OK but would not run Blu-Ray unless one reset it to 60Hz. The Acer GD245HQ is simply the best screen I have ever had and it is pretty well pefect for gaming and watching 3D DVDs
     
  10. OCJunkie

    OCJunkie OC your Dremel too

    Joined:
    19 Apr 2011
    Posts:
    619
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ok, I'm officially getting tired of this 3D week thing... what's next, shark week?
     
  11. tad2008

    tad2008 New Member

    Joined:
    6 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    332
    Likes Received:
    3
    As far as 3D goes for monitors it is well behind the Real 3D TV technology that companies like LG, Samsung and Philips (to name a few) are already producing. Since I can plug a PC in via a VGA or ideally HDMI port and have happily done so on a 42" screen with good results, then I would have to say monitor manufacturers have some serious catching up to do.
     
  12. DbD

    DbD Member

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    474
    Likes Received:
    10
    Personally I don't agree that colour is a major problem with these 3D TN panels - the LG W2363D is fine colour wise, deviation is low enough and colour gamut is high enough. Viewing angles mean you might loose a bit if it wasn't your primary screen but it is my primary screen so not a problem. Sure we always want better but the colours aren't bad, particularly if you use it for games which aren't true to life - it's not like you are trying to photo edit with the monitor.
     
  13. Grape Flavor

    Grape Flavor New Member

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    81
    Likes Received:
    3
    Excellent article. People can blast 3D all they want but the problem in the end is the displays - you have to wear shutter glasses and the screen itself is poor quality. These are not inherently unfixable concerns.

    Wait a few years until we have auto-stereoscopic displays with excellent color and all this "3D is a worthless gimmick" stuff is going to be looked back on as stuck-in-the-past nonsense. Only those with 3D-blindness will continue to defend such a position.
     
  14. Kris

    Kris Lord Lolwut

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    553
    Likes Received:
    11
    and who cares about 3d anyway? it's just a gimmick :p
     
  15. FelixTech

    FelixTech Robot

    Joined:
    12 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    357
    Likes Received:
    8
    Isn't the saying 'making the whole greater than the sum of its parts'? I hope Viewsonic aren't publicly stating that their products provide less performance than you'd expect from their parts >_<
     
  16. AstralWanderer

    AstralWanderer New Member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    749
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ah yes - here's a true 3D killer application for the gamer demographic - viewing mammograms.
     
  17. lp rob1

    lp rob1 New Member

    Joined:
    14 Jun 2010
    Posts:
    1,530
    Likes Received:
    140
    I thought that the frame rate at which a game is considered 'playable' is 25 fps, and that most movies run at 30fps? So 60Hz refresh rate is pretty useless? As the image is actually changed every 2 refreshes / the screen has to wait for the image to change. I never really understood that.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page