Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

[OT] Dual DVI Card

 
 
RL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-26-2003, 11:34 PM
I post here because there seems to be a higher quality user. I need advice
or recommendations on a good dual dvi video card. 2d/text quality and
symmetry is most important.

tia


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
daytripper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-27-2003, 01:35 AM
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 23:34:36 GMT, "RL" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I post here because there seems to be a higher quality user. I need advice
>or recommendations on a good dual dvi video card. 2d/text quality and
>symmetry is most important.


http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/parhelia/256mb.cfm

I've been using a Parhelia 256 (AGP) for almost a year. I use it to drive
three RGB 21" monitors, but you can use it to drive a pair of DVI devices, or
a dual-DVI device. Very nice feature set, very *very* good display quality,
works great with XP Pro...

If that's a little rich, Matrox may still have the answer for you:

http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/m...eries/p750.cfm

cheers

/daytripper
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-27-2003, 03:12 AM
The Parhelia (128mb unit $349) is under consideration as is the P750 ($212)
neither supports dx9. I see Nvidia based dual dvi cards for sub $200 that
do support dx9. Asus 5600 is one. I just wonder if the 2d quality of
Matrox product far exceeds the performance/value of the Nvidia product. I
have 2 19" Samsung 191t's running in portrait mode on one system using a
ti4200 by PNY. I have another system with 1 191t using an Ati Radeon 9000.
The Ati using the DVI output seems to look better than the same model
monitor on the DVI port of the Ti4200. The problem is there are visible
difference on all 3 191t monitors. Since I do not play games I tend to lean
toward the p750. It does have symmetrical dual dvi. I can say this for
sure digital beats analog hands down when you get into 19' territory with
LCD's.



"daytripper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 23:34:36 GMT, "RL" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >I post here because there seems to be a higher quality user. I need

advice
> >or recommendations on a good dual dvi video card. 2d/text quality and
> >symmetry is most important.

>
> http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/parhelia/256mb.cfm
>
> I've been using a Parhelia 256 (AGP) for almost a year. I use it to drive
> three RGB 21" monitors, but you can use it to drive a pair of DVI devices,

or
> a dual-DVI device. Very nice feature set, very *very* good display

quality,
> works great with XP Pro...
>
> If that's a little rich, Matrox may still have the answer for you:
>
> http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/m...eries/p750.cfm
>
> cheers
>
> /daytripper
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Carlo Razzeto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-27-2003, 03:36 AM
"RL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gM6Hb.82351$(E-Mail Removed) om...
> The Parhelia (128mb unit $349) is under consideration as is the P750

($212)
> neither supports dx9. I see Nvidia based dual dvi cards for sub $200 that
> do support dx9. Asus 5600 is one. I just wonder if the 2d quality of
> Matrox product far exceeds the performance/value of the Nvidia product. I
> have 2 19" Samsung 191t's running in portrait mode on one system using a
> ti4200 by PNY. I have another system with 1 191t using an Ati Radeon

9000.
> The Ati using the DVI output seems to look better than the same model
> monitor on the DVI port of the Ti4200. The problem is there are visible
> difference on all 3 191t monitors. Since I do not play games I tend to

lean
> toward the p750. It does have symmetrical dual dvi. I can say this for
> sure digital beats analog hands down when you get into 19' territory with
> LCD's.


My 2 cents. If I were you I would go with the P750, for the price you're not
going to find a better value for 2D applications. I very much prefer Matrox
graphics products for systems where 3D gaming is not a priority, the 2D
graphics quality is unbeatable. Kills the ATI Radeon 9000 I have in my
system.

Carlo


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2003, 10:05 PM
RL wrote:

> I post here because there seems to be a higher quality user. I need advice
> or recommendations on a good dual dvi video card. 2d/text quality and
> symmetry is most important.


I would think that, when using the DVI output, all cards look alike, or
so similar that the differences are undetectable. This would not
necessarily be the case with the analog output, though.

--
Mike Smith

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2003, 10:06 PM
Carlo Razzeto wrote:
>
> My 2 cents. If I were you I would go with the P750, for the price you're not
> going to find a better value for 2D applications. I very much prefer Matrox
> graphics products for systems where 3D gaming is not a priority, the 2D
> graphics quality is unbeatable. Kills the ATI Radeon 9000 I have in my
> system.


Is that when using the DVI output, or the analog output? I really can't
imagine the output of two different DVI cards being all that different
in quality.

--
Mike Smith

 
Reply With Quote
 
RL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2003, 10:50 PM
There certainly seems to be a wide price range in dual DVI cards. Each
manufacturer seems to have a consumer line and a pro line. Nvida based
cards have Quadro. Ati based cards have FireGL.

It stands to reason that digital to digital should be the same on all cards
but yet.......I wonder. That is why I'm looking for input. The real
players are Nvidia, ATI, 3D Labs and Martox. I do not care about video out
or in. I do not care about ever needing analog. No one that I can find
makes a simple dual DVI. They all have RAMDACS which I understand to be the
difference in quality. I don't need no stinking RAMDAC. Could someone
step-up to the bar and set me straight.

TIA


"Mike Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> RL wrote:
>
> > I post here because there seems to be a higher quality user. I need

advice
> > or recommendations on a good dual dvi video card. 2d/text quality and
> > symmetry is most important.

>
> I would think that, when using the DVI output, all cards look alike, or
> so similar that the differences are undetectable. This would not
> necessarily be the case with the analog output, though.
>
> --
> Mike Smith
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
David Schwartz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-29-2003, 11:24 PM

"Mike Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Carlo Razzeto wrote:



>> My 2 cents. If I were you I would go with the P750, for the price you're
>> not
>> going to find a better value for 2D applications. I very much prefer
>> Matrox
>> graphics products for systems where 3D gaming is not a priority, the 2D
>> graphics quality is unbeatable. Kills the ATI Radeon 9000 I have in my
>> system.


> Is that when using the DVI output, or the analog output? I really can't
> imagine the output of two different DVI cards being all that different in
> quality.



You wouldn't think so, but the truth is (strangely enough) otherwise.
Windows is not a dumb system where the OS tells the graphics card where to
put each pixel and the graphics driver just sets the specified pixel to the
specified color.

DS




 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-31-2003, 12:27 AM
David Schwartz wrote:

> "Mike Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>Carlo Razzeto wrote:

>
>
>
>>>My 2 cents. If I were you I would go with the P750, for the price you're
>>>not
>>>going to find a better value for 2D applications. I very much prefer
>>>Matrox
>>>graphics products for systems where 3D gaming is not a priority, the 2D
>>>graphics quality is unbeatable. Kills the ATI Radeon 9000 I have in my
>>>system.

>
>
>>Is that when using the DVI output, or the analog output? I really can't
>>imagine the output of two different DVI cards being all that different in
>>quality.

>
> You wouldn't think so, but the truth is (strangely enough) otherwise.
> Windows is not a dumb system where the OS tells the graphics card where to
> put each pixel and the graphics driver just sets the specified pixel to the
> specified color.


I assumed that by "graphics quality" he meant display quality; i.e. the
alignment and sharpness of the pixels on the LCD display. With a
digital output, this should vary very little from card to card. Of
course the *rendering* quality can vary, but even there, in a strictly
2D environment, how much difference can there be?

--
Mike Smith

 
Reply With Quote
 
David Schwartz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-31-2003, 01:00 AM

"Mike Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> You wouldn't think so, but the truth is (strangely enough) otherwise.
>> Windows is not a dumb system where the OS tells the graphics card where
>> to put each pixel and the graphics driver just sets the specified pixel
>> to the specified color.


> I assumed that by "graphics quality" he meant display quality; i.e. the
> alignment and sharpness of the pixels on the LCD display.


With a DVI interface, this should be precisely the same for every
graphics card that supports your display's ideal graphics mode.

> With a digital output, this should vary very little from card to card. Of
> course the *rendering* quality can vary, but even there, in a strictly 2D
> environment, how much difference can there be?



If you don't believe me, ask anyone with a Parhelia card to turn off
Matrox Glyph Antialiasing.

DS




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DVI-to-VGA Adaptors: DVI-I, DVI-A, DVI-D, DVI-WTF! Martin Crozier ATI 2 01-13-2004 04:23 AM
DVI, DVI-D, DVI-I Frank ATI 2 11-06-2003 03:27 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:48 AM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment