So i had an internet cafe more than 10 computers, have since

File: DSCF0163.jpg (944KB, 2304x1728px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 2304x1728px

just stuff more graphics cards in, and use SoftTH
nvidia nvs280s were adequate as secondaries when i had a video wall

>>1074008
Usb to vga adapters?

>>1074100

that right there is fucking stupid. why thew hell use 6 smal monitors when you can buy a like 72" TV or video display and eliminate those fucking bezels that just would annoy the fuck out of me watching video on that

>>1074233
>Paying thousands more for a new tv when you already have 6 monitors

Okay buddy

>>1074241
thousands?

>>1074233
it was a long time ago, and we needed the resolution to work on gigapixel scans.
six 17" panels was a heck of a lot cheaper than an IBM T220.

>>1074245
Uh,yeah. Been to walmart lately? 72 inches is a little over a grand for a good one. This is /diy/ not /buybuybuy/
It's like people don't think before they post .

>>1074273
>$1000 is now plural.
>A single thousand is thousands somehow

A 72" TV also doesn't have 2-inch bezel lines running through the middle. You cannot /diy/ software and computer hardware for specialized applications.

You might be able to get away with buying a video card with AMD's eyefinity gimmick. It works really well, but it'll probably be a $350 card.

>>1074100
My current computer is a uatx board so I only have a spare pcie x1 port, but using one of these
https://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=N82E16814500395
And the program you posted will let me output to 6 monitors I think, everything gets rendered on the one, in my case 960 right?

>>1074273
>This is /diy/ not /buybuybuy/

Yeah, but there's no point in doing something yourself if the result is going to be so fucking awful.

Making a large screen to view media on is not a DIY task.

If you can't afford a giant screen, just watch on a single small screen.

>>1074417
>Yeah, but there's no point in doing something yourself if the result is going to be so fucking awful.

You haven't been here long, have you?

File: kVF2HQd.jpg (929KB, 4000x4000px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 4000x4000px

>>1074100
christ those bezels are disgusting

File: image_18.jpg (15KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x168px

>>1074233
This! Thank you!

>>1074279

eyefinity works with 7700 series cards which can be had for under $100

>>1074445
Yeah... Makes a 1000$ TV look like the cheapest object in the world.

>>1074273
>72 inches is a little over a grand
so not thousands
>for a good one.
a broken piece of shit TV would look better than 6 old monitors taped together

>>1074465
yeah, go find a sub 100 dollar card that can drive 6 monitors in some hacky tile mode

File: serveimage(82).jpg (200KB, 2150x1434px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 2150x1434px

On the same note.
Wouldn't one be able to remove the bezels and make it all borderless?
I know it would depend on the tv but in general?

Are the screen often separated from the innards (with like a ribbon cable? If that is the case couldn't you move the screen a little and make it borderless that way?

>>1074529
>Wouldn't one be able to remove the bezels
yes
>and make it all borderless?
not even close

>>1074531
> Says it doesn't work
>Doesn't care to explain why?
Please do elaborate.

>>1074532
screens have parts that don't show pictures around the edge

File: ThinBezelMonitors_headerv2[1].jpg (59KB, 960x345px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 960x345px

>>1074532
not him, but unscientifically, the way panels are made, you need a bezel, because (technical manufacturing necessity/whatever). You get 'thin bezel' panels made specifically for videowall use - here again, 'thin' does not mean non-existent.

Traditionally, videowalls have either an overscan adjustment, so the frames are slightly bigger and the composite picture 'passes under' the bezel joints, like a windowframe effect (vastly less annoying, otherwise, it 'jumps'), or, they use projectors onto fresnel screens, whereby the seams are near invisible.

>>1074542
So you can't escape the ugly, annoying ass window view?... Well that sucks

>>1074465
Maybe at 640x480. It's going to look like shit unless he spends money on a decent card. Even at 1080p (counting all displays as one), it's going to look like shit spread across 6 shitty monitors with the unavoidable gaps. Also, it takes more processing power to use multiple monitors than it does to drive a single monitor equivalent.