You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
nVidia multi-monitor setup vs Matrox
- Thread starter davez
- Start date
Quote from dcraig:
8 Mbyte per monitor is enough for 1280 x 1024 at 16 bit colour depth. If you have higher resolution monitors or want 24 bit colour (true color) you need more memory per monitor.
Card memory requirement is only dependent on the monitor - not the number of charts you have open or windows you have open.
The large amounts of memory on 3D cards is used for all sorts of interesting things by the GPU for 3D rendering. Apparently the flashy new UI in Vista uses 3D rendering - hence the requirements for more meaty graphics cards.
The Nvidia NVS 2** can be used for viewing DVD video. I do so on a Linux box (also digital TV). I find that the AGP variant is a lot better than PCI for this purpose. Similarly PCI-E would be a lot better than PCI.
Yikes, I was at 32 bit color and just now dropped it to 24 bit with no apparent difference. I'll change to 16 bit if all goes well tomorrow.
I've always wondered if the number of windows open affected video memory requirements - but apparently not.
I knew that AGP was better than PCI and that PCIe (normally PCIe x16) is better than AGP. But I don't know why there is PCIe-x1,x4,x8.
All good info, thanks
Dave Z
Quote from davez:
"... I don't know why there is PCIe-x1,x4,x8....
The industry thought they could save a few bucks by having PCIE slots of various sizes. What they SHOULD have done was design the mobos so that ALL the PCIE slots are x16, then make the cards x1, x4, x8 or whatever they want. But then it would probably cost $5 more for the mobo to have 4, x16 slots instead of one of each size.
What we've ended up with the last couple of years are mobo slots which rarely/never get used because the peripheral card makers have not made cards for them.
Thanks for the reply Gnome. Agreed, if nobody makes cards for these slots then the 'savings' isn't very real.
I think AGP slots were for graphics cards only, with PCIe being the improved evolution of AGP. But with 3 PCIe slots in the Dell XPS 410, I guess the PCIe x1, x4 or x8 must be intended for more than just graphics cards? Which implies that eventually PCI will disappear if PCIe slots are faster and multi-purpose?
I think AGP slots were for graphics cards only, with PCIe being the improved evolution of AGP. But with 3 PCIe slots in the Dell XPS 410, I guess the PCIe x1, x4 or x8 must be intended for more than just graphics cards? Which implies that eventually PCI will disappear if PCIe slots are faster and multi-purpose?
Quote from davez:
Thanks for the reply Gnome. Agreed, if nobody makes cards for these slots then the 'savings' isn't very real.
I think AGP slots were for graphics cards only, with PCIe being the improved evolution of AGP. But with 3 PCIe slots in the Dell XPS 410, I guess the PCIe x1, x4 or x8 must be intended for more than just graphics cards? Which implies that eventually PCI will disappear if PCIe slots are faster and multi-purpose?
I've heard of only a few x1 cards... and at least 2 of them are video cards. PCI may eventually disappear, but not for a long time.
Quote from C99:
Do any of you know if the nvidia NVS will support 4 DVI widescreen monitors at 1440 x 900 each? I'm currently running them with a matrox, but to get the right resolution I've had to use something called powerstrip and the whole setup is a little buggy. Thanks.
Don't know off hand, but you've got 2 chances... (1) it's one of the supported resolutions, and (2) you can set the params for a "custom resolution", up to the max the card supports, through the Nvidia driver... don't know if it works properly.
Some NVS cards support up to 1600x1200 in DVI... others support only up to 1280x1024 in DVI. However, the analog display with NVS is excellent... no diff from DVI.