NVIDIA Shows 4K Surround Gaming on Assassin?s Creed IV 24.9 Megapixels

NVIDIA has been talking about 4K gaming monitors quite often these days, but we haven?t heard much about 4K Suround monitor setups until today. NVIDIA has a 4K surround demo up and running that you really need to see in person to believe.

http://abload.de/thumb/4k-settings-645x4726frbl.jpg

NVIDIA?s demo has three ASUS PQ321Q 31.5-inch 4K Ultra HD Monitor setup at 3840 x 2160 in portrait mode. That means you end up with a 6480 x 3840 monitor setup for 24.88 million pixels :eek: of pure goodness. They were then running Assassin?s Creed IV: Black Flag and allowing those here at the event to take the mega-panel setup for a test drive.

http://abload.de/thumb/4k-surround1-645x396wvqi4.jpg



http://abload.de/thumb/4k-triple-sli-645x5637zolc.jpg

Here is a quick look at the available resolutions in the in-game menu! Our current 5760?1080 setup officially feels tiny after looking at this 6480 x 3840 setup! How isNVIDIA powering such a monitor setup?

http://abload.de/thumb/6480x3840-645x4503xp9q.jpg

Very cool demo and this is the first time that we have seen a 4K Surround gaming setup! We just had to share!

http://abload.de/thumb/ac4-4k-surround-645x4kio7u.jpg

http://abload.de/thumb/maingear-sli-645x751h3ojg.jpg

NVIDIA was using a high-end Maingear Shift gaming PC that was running three NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan 6GB video cards! This system has a combined 18GB of GDDR5 memory and starts at $6,613.00 with three of these video cards. Each ASUS PQ321Q 4K Ultra HD display runs $3499.00, so this 4K Surround setup would set you back an additional $10,497! Not everyday you get to see $20,000 PC setup!

http://www.legitreviews.com/nvidia-s...reed-iv_126752

It will be a little of topic but i don't really get why nvidia paniced this much. Yes amd is doing good moves since last year. Amd also got the attention by being late but imo these must not hassle nvidia this much. Nvidia still has the upper hand and i believe if they show all these one month after the release of 290x i think it would be better for them.

Sent from my SM-N9000Q using Tapatalk

How do you mean they have upper hand? You mean they have upper hand for another few weeks? If so then it's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

How do you mean they have upper hand? You mean they have upper hand for another few weeks? If so then it's true.

---

i mean in general they have a huge lead on sales numbers because of nividia's image in people minds and this will take much more effort for amd to break. this is the upper hand i am talking about.

Well AMD is not sitting still ;).

impressive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatRaceTin

impressive

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ntPN3v0dTI

what's with the comments though? eyefinity stretches image, not real 12k? :shakes:

I wish this was true...

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/j...ps5e8c1414.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kromosto

It will be a little of topic but i don't really get why nvidia paniced this much.

---

It must be because they are not supplying any of its chips to next generation video game consoles, mainly, Nintendo, Sony and or Microsoft. As John Carmack already talked about, AMD has the chance to get close to Intel on the CPU and get far ahead from Nvidia on the GPU due to optimizations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Metroid

It must be because they are not supplying any of its chips to next generation video game consoles, mainly, Nintendo, Sony and or Microsoft. As John Carmack already talked about, AMD has the chance to get close to Intel on the CPU and get far ahead from Nvidia on the GPU due to optimizations.

---

yes that is a good reason for panic...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cronicash

I wish this was true...

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/j...ps5e8c1414.png

---

22ms input lag :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

How do you mean they have upper hand? You mean they have upper hand for another few weeks? If so then it's true.

---

upper hand means they sell more even when their products are inferior

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

22ms input lag :D

---

ASUS PB278Q 1440p input lag = 26ms
30" DELL U3011 1600p input lag = 26ms
23" Samsung S23A950D 1080p 120hz input lag = 22ms

Sure your not confusing this with pixel response?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Metroid

It must be because they are not supplying any of its chips to next generation video game consoles, mainly, Nintendo, Sony and or Microsoft. As John Carmack already talked about, AMD has the chance to get close to Intel on the CPU and get far ahead from Nvidia on the GPU due to optimizations.

---

NVidia backed out willingly on the console dealings on their own two feet. Not sure why they would be worried about that.

Remember the HD 2900xt? I know ATi/AMD does, similar shader design to the xbox360 (main difference is that the HD2900xt could do geometry shading as well). It still lost to the 8800GTX in xbox360 ports, even when they were designed around the AMD shader tech.

I wouldn't put too much thought into the console situation. Even if the game was written from top to bottom around what AMD has in the consoles, you have to realize that those gpus are essentially a stripped down 7850. You could optimize for that to perfection, and it'll STILL run like a banshee on a 780 just off the extra horse-power alone.

True story.

nvidia backed at consoles are their choice of course but is it because they wanted to or because of the things than can't match amd like price.

and for the console port games performance i think like you. but if amd supply a good console to pc port tool with it's sdk for xbox this can easily change. back in that times amd didn't interested on software side to much but today they realized importance of it, mantle is a proof of this. well we will see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kromosto

nvidia backed at consoles are their choice of course but is it because they wanted to or because of the things than can't match amd like price.

and for the console port games performance i think like you. but if amd supply a good console to pc port tool with it's sdk for xbox this can easily change. back in that times amd didn't interested on software side to much but today they realized importance of it, mantle is a proof of this. well we will see.

---

It was because the money wasn't right. The amount made off console deals is a drop in the bucket compared to the normal profits, so NVidia walked away.

Also, Xbox One uses DX, not mantle. One of the architects made that statement directly.

Although, in all fairness, I firmly do believe that AMD was the better choice for the new consoles. APU for a game console just makes sense, less power, lower price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

Also, Xbox One uses DX, not mantle. One of the architects made that statement directly.

---

i didn't mean they will use mantle. mantle is the proof they understand the the power of software. amd build a very good software team last years so it will not be a surprise if they provide a good porting utility that will convert xbox games to pc with a considerably less effort for developers and put every possible optimization while porting the game by this software. if they won't do that it will be like last generation as you stated because no developer wants to put effort on implementing hardware specific optimizations while converting the game to pc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cronicash

ASUS PB278Q 1440p input lag = 26ms
30" DELL U3011 1600p input lag = 26ms
23" Samsung S23A950D 1080p 120hz input lag = 22ms

Sure your not confusing this with pixel response?

---

Check the OSD in the pic I quoted ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

Check the OSD in the pic I quoted ;)

---

I know it says 22ms. Whats funny about that? Checked lag input of most 4k screens

http://iforce.co.nz/i/tpwce1n2.lbq.png

Is there a bigger list somewhere that includes 1600p and 1440p monitors?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cronicash

I know it says 22ms. Whats funny about that? Checked lag input of most 4k screens

---

That it sucks, specially for a supposedly gaming focused monitor. It's also known that some monitors suck more than others, nothing new here. 22ms is almost 3 frames at 120Hz. That's the price of post processing, it takes time.

Also that pic comes directly from nvidia, may need a reality check, which usually means even more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

It was because the money wasn't right. The amount made off console deals is a drop in the bucket compared to the normal profits, so NVidia walked away.

Also, Xbox One uses DX, not mantle. One of the architects made that statement directly.

---

Aye, cause arent those deals mostly about who wil supply the most for the least amount of money.

AMD has the advantage that they can do both CPU and GPU and therefor offer an all in 1 solution something Nvidia cant.
So for AMD the profit might be good enough where for Nvidia it might have been to low.

But even without any of the console deals Nvidia wil still do pretty well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

NVidia backed out willingly on the console dealings on their own two feet. Not sure why they would be worried about that.

Remember the HD 2900xt? I know ATi/AMD does, similar shader design to the xbox360 (main difference is that the HD2900xt could do geometry shading as well). It still lost to the 8800GTX in xbox360 ports, even when they were designed around the AMD shader tech.

I wouldn't put too much thought into the console situation. Even if the game was written from top to bottom around what AMD has in the consoles, you have to realize that those gpus are essentially a stripped down 7850. You could optimize for that to perfection, and it'll STILL run like a banshee on a 780 just off the extra horse-power alone.

True story.

---

That, right there, is terribly false. If NVIDIA isn't in any of the next-gen consoles is because it couldn't present a competitive product, not because they didn't want to. Sure they will tell everybody that they didn't want to... but its far from the truth.

Would you not want to be into a product line that will sell into the hundred million units? EVERYBODY would want to... but the fact is that NVIDIA couldn't simply because they lack the x86 license required to qualify. For AMD this is a huge success, a HUGE one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cronicash

I know it says 22ms. Whats funny about that? Checked lag input of most 4k screens

http://iforce.co.nz/i/tpwce1n2.lbq.png

---

That's actually why I'm glad my cheapo Korean PLS monitor only has a DVI input, no switchboard => almost no input lag. So even though the pixel response time isn't as fast as my old 2ms TN panel, it's still much better for just about everything

Cause flash gordon cant handle 30 thousandth's of a second and its hugely noticeable. pfffft...

Does your gpu/ gpus not have an equal amount of input lag depending on post processing, render ahead and sli/ xfire frame sync'ing?

Would be even better if they added an optional interpolation (replacing dropped frames) function into the gpu (possibly separate ic on the pcb) to perfectly sync frames to 60hz without too much input lag. Then there wouldn't be any of this niche crap (having to choose from a limited/overpriced monitor lineup) and nvid would still make a decent buck on tech...

But looks as though they're going to use the gimmicky strobing...

Or even use CEC over hdmi (2.0 preferably) so that the gpu may sync to monitor scans and possibly interpolate dropped/ un sync'd frames.

http://www.blurbusters.com/

Lol, at least they didn't call it N-sync...