use 2 dualheads instead of 1 fourhead video card?

[dave4419]

am building a new PC for myself; I'm not experienced in windows platform, but need to drive three monitors now (and possibly a fourth soon).

the 'four head' card from appian/jeronimo is very pricey, so I'm wondering if, perhaps, using -two- dual head matrox g400 cards wouldn't be more 'cost-effective' for me?
other than the fact that doing that I'd 'kill' two PCI slots, are there any -other- disadvantages?

also, seeing as I now have -no- versions of windows, I'm needing to buy a new windows OS CD, which version do you recommend? (98 se? windows 2000? 2000 pro? NT 4.0? are there others as well? where can I read basic descriptions, user opinions, and comparisons of -all- the windows OS'es? my needs are primarily stability/freedom from hangs and crashes (online active stocktrader)

for the price of only =one= four-headed jeronimo card, I could buy more than four dualhead matrox cards...enough to drive -eight- monitors...

thanks very much for clues, opinions, tips, and ideas,

dave

[RobRich]

For an operating system, I recommend Windows 2000. It is built around the WinNT 5.0 kernel, which offers great stablity and performance. For more OS info, check out this link:

http://sysopt.earthweb.com/os.html

How much do you want to spend on a 4-head card? Colorgraphics sells their 4-head Predator LT PCI for around $400 US. It is primarly a 2D only card, but offers excellent quality with for a decent price point.

Read my review of the Predator series of cards here:

http://sysopt.earthweb.com/reviews/colorgraphic/index.html

Good Luck,
Robert Richmond

[This message has been edited by RobRich (edited 09-26-2000).]

[Kruzin]

Matrox G400s do not come in PCI form. They are AGP only.
A possible solution would be a DualHead G400 and 2 PCI cards.
Matrox also makes G200 in a 4head PCI version (mostly 2D, with usable 3D), but those are pretty pricey as well.
Matrox just released G450, which are all DH, and there is rumors of an OEM PCI version, but nothing official or available on those yet.

[BBA]

Use 2 GeForce2 MX dual head cards. They come in PCI and AGP, and are superior to the G400/G450.

[Kruzin]

There is only one way GeForce2MX is "superior" to G400/450, and that is if you like to count fps in (single monitor) games. Since many of us don't give a fig if Q3 is running at 80fps instead of 60fps, and rely on our PCs for much more than just games, this "superiority" BBA claims isn't so superior.

Picture quality, driver stability, functionality (especially when we are talking about DualHead vs Twinview) all go the Matrox. Twinview reviews (what few there are) have so far shown that GeForce2 cannot to half the the stuff Matrox's DualHead does. Have you wondered why there are so few mfgs building twinview nVidia cards? It's cause their implimentation leaves so much to be desired. Heck, they don't even put a second ramdac on the nVidia cards, where G450 has a 360MHz AND a 230MHz ramdac.

Basically, when we are looking at cards to run multi monitor environments (not compairing UT timedemo scores), GeForce2MX is in no way shape or form "superior" to a G400/G450.

[AuraEdge]

The Geforce vs. the G400 in games..is more than just 60 to 80 FPS.

I had the G400Max, and that didnt feel much better than my TNT OC'ed to 110/120 in games.
Also the MX DOES come with 2 RAMDAC's in the twinview that supports 2 CRT monitors or 1 CRT and 1 DVI. The Twinview comes in many forms, the most basic being TV and CRT at the same time..in which only one RAMDAC is used.
Also, a 2 CRT Geforce MX costs about $133, where the cheapest G400 Max is just a little under $200.
In gaming, Nvidia's drivers are MUCH superior to Matrox's. However, in dualhead/twinview support, Matrox's comes up on top, since its been around for quite a while now. The primary RAMDAC on the MX is 350Mhz, which is right up there with the G400...I dont know how fast the secondary RAMDAC is on the MX tho.

Also, as I mentioned before, The certain MX can run a DVI and a CRT, or 2 DVI at the same time, something the G400 cannot claim
There are currently no PCI cards with 2 Monitor hookups, but there are plans being made to make it happen (the MX chip already supports it, it just has to be put on a PCB by some company and produced)
Im not sure what the differences are between the G400 and G450...I just took a quick glance at the matrox site and saw that it uses a .18um process and 32MB DDR. I'm just sittin here wondering why a business card needs DDR, but I guess they have thier reasons. That DDR wont make the card any faster though, because the memory bandwidth is halved from 128bits to 64bits from the G400.
Im still not sure on what your intentions are of using 4 monitors are, and what kind of work youll be doing on your comp. If you dont touch any 3D at all, and dont mind spending extra money for good stuff, then the G400 is highly recommended. The only way I would recommend the MX over the G400 is if it goes twinview on a PCI bus, which isnt happening yet, or if you plan on doing any 3D work whatsover.

[This message has been edited by AuraEdge (edited 09-27-2000).]

[Kruzin]

Here is a comparison of DH vs TV:

http://www.gamepc.com/reviews/hardware_review.asp?review=asusmxtv&page=1

"Nvidia's implementation of multi-monitor requires a secondary RAMDAC (digital-to-analog) converter chip to power two monitors at once, unlike Matrox's G450, which has the secondary RAMDAC actually built into the processor core. This does mean MX cards will cost a few bucks more for TwinView implementation, but that's something we all expected to begin with. "

In other words, if you want to use the TwinView on a TwinView card, you need to purchase additional parts to actually USE the feature....

[This message has been edited by Kruzin (edited 09-27-2000).]

[dave4419]

thanks to all you guys for your help, but, in addition:

robrich: seems the btter sites I read today agree with you/thanks-I should ‘go’ with win2K, it appears :-).

BTW, I read your excellent in-depth review-obvious you’ve forgotten more about video cards than I’ll ever know...what I ‘want’ to spend, really, is ‘the least $ for the most bang for the buck’, is about my sole criteria, other than (my past experiences, consisting of) “on my mac, 4 mb video cards are WAY too slow and 8 mb cards aren’t much dern better”, so I guess I want the capability of having at LEAST 8 mbs video RAM per channel, and hopefully more (or way more, if I get lucky on ebay/find a ‘jeronimo quadhead’ or something...)

kruzin: I’m sorry - you’re right/it was my oversight-the g400 IS a dern AGP card. I’m thinking in order for ME to get ‘the best match with the least conflicts’, I might be better off using two dual monitor PCI cards (but I’m not at ALL sure dualhead video cards of the PCI type are even -available- with any more video RAM per channel than eight mbs... <do they?>

alternately, does anyone know if there’s such a thing as a motherboard with =TWO= AGP slots? or is there any kind of “AGP splitter” or “Y” device that can make me ‘able to’ use -two- AGP cards on a single motherboard? (if that means 'cobbing the case up to make it all fit", that's OK with me).

today I discovered ‘pci expander chassis’ boxes are also very pricey...

bba-I’ll be lookin’ into those, too :-)

honestly, guys, my interests are all ‘two dimensional’ graphics, pretty much, and non-gaming...though I am -not- adverse to getting one or two ‘highly rated game players video cards’, if it appears they’ll best meet my needs (and bids, if on ebay ;-)

thanks again to all/further suggestions and ideas still very much welcomed,

dave

[AuraEdge]

You dont have to buy additional parts to use Twinview on a twinview card....They are built by the manufacture of that card. A non Twinview MX, OEM is about $110. Twinview MX with Monitor and TV OEM is about $135, and Twinview with 2 monitors is about $140. The RAMDAC is installed in only the cards that require it. It would be a waste of money to have 2 RAMDACs in a single monitor card. The G450 has 2 RAMDACs right in the core, so it would be a waste to _not_ have two monitor hookups. Thats why all G450's support dualhead. Catch my drift?

I think they first dual PCI card made for the home market is the Geforce MX, which has 32MB RAM...which will be out soon, probably by mid Oct, roughly guessing.
There are no motherboard chipsets that support more than 1 AGP card as far as I know.

Again, aside from Twinview driver wariness, I would definitly recommend the MX over the G450 simply because of price point for Dave.
However, Driver implimentation can make the extra money well worth it...I honestly dont know how the drivers on the MX do on twinview, but I know that matrox's are very mature.

[amerifax]

Just glanced at the above messages. But the G400 on Win 2000 Pro will ONLY DISPLAY the lowest display setting of the two monitors. In my case I have a 1600 and 800. I'm stuck with 800, thanks billy.