Why does six monitors have to be so hard?

The Stuff I've Tried

nVidia nvs 400 - This only works in digital mode.
Matrox G450/G550 Combinations - With the G550 in the AGP slot, the computer would not boot at all.
Multiple ATI Radeon 7500 - More than one card in the same computer is not supported.
Multiple ATI Radeon 7000 - Same story as the 7500.

So, here's where I am - I've got a combination of one G450, one nVidia GeForce2 in the AGP slot, one ATI 7500 and one ATI 7000 cards. This works but barely - if I ever have reason to remove one of the cards, I'll have to start all over since it only works because of the order in which I installed the cards and the drivers.

This combination gives me 5 screens with 1600x1200 resolution and one screen with 800x600 (the digital output of the G450). The output from the ATI 7500 digital port is awesome - I wish there was some way I could get that quality on all the screens.

If anyone knows of a better way to get six digital 1600x1200 screens working (from one computer), please let me know.

Thanks. -eLindy

-----------------------------------------

Why just one computer? I don't know that the 1600 x 1200 output over six is feasible/possible. I take it you don't have a hearty tech there so I'll try to argue the (default) tech position. I'd tell you to split the output over two computers. In that instance, you can achieve your desires.

In splitting the load over two computers you will also not have overtaxed the setup. I can easily see your heat output and power loads being rather hefty. In any event, fans are going to definitely be important in your setup(s). Beware the brownouts! :)
 
Hi folks - I just wanted to respond to some of the issues raised in the last three posts:

re: eyestrain etc at higher resolutions - the screens are a decent size @ 20.1 inches. With that size and 1600x1200 *digital* resolution, I don't have any issues. The digital output makes things so much easier to read because of the enhanced clarity. For now though, since I don't have all digital output, I do find myself getting closer to the analog screens in order to decipher smaller font sizes. It's amazing the difference between the digital and the analog outputs.

re: 850e chipset - that's the chipset on my motherboard. I wonder if that's not part of the issue I'm running into. I had to turn off my serial and parallel ports in the bios in order to free up IRQs to run the cards I'm runnning now.

re: why a single computer? Well, I'm actually running three other computers whose images are being funneled through this main computer. i.e.: I'm using the the Windows XP built-in "remote desktop" funtionality to harness the power of 3 more machines but I only have to deal with one machine on a day to day basis. With this set-up I have no need for a KVM which just gets in the way - no need to flip a switch everytime I want to work on a different computer etc. Everything appears as and works as a single computer - even copy and paste.

re: heat issues - I haven't run into that yet. In the current stop-gap configuration, I've got all the PCI slots filled with video cards and the machine has been running 24x7 for the last three weeks or so (except for ocasional reboots and my recent attempt at using the nvs 400 cards). Keeping my fingers crossed though...


-eLindy
 
Quote from elindydotcom:

Hi folks - I just wanted to respond to some of the issues raised in the last three posts:

re: eyestrain etc at higher resolutions - the screens are a decent size @ 20.1 inches. With that size and 1600x1200 *digital* resolution, I don't have any issues. The digital output makes things so much easier to read because of the enhanced clarity. For now though, since I don't have all digital output, I do find myself getting closer to the analog screens in order to decipher smaller font sizes. It's amazing the difference between the digital and the analog outputs.

re: 850e chipset - that's the chipset on my motherboard. I wonder if that's not part of the issue I'm running into. I had to turn off my serial and parallel ports in the bios in order to free up IRQs to run the cards I'm runnning now.

re: why a single computer? Well, I'm actually running three other computers whose images are being funneled through this main computer. i.e.: I'm using the the Windows XP built-in "remote desktop" funtionality to harness the power of 3 more machines but I only have to deal with one machine on a day to day basis. With this set-up I have no need for a KVM which just gets in the way - no need to flip a switch everytime I want to work on a different computer etc. Everything appears as and works as a single computer - even copy and paste.

re: heat issues - I haven't run into that yet. In the current stop-gap configuration, I've got all the PCI slots filled with video cards and the machine has been running 24x7 for the last three weeks or so (except for ocasional reboots and my recent attempt at using the nvs 400 cards). Keeping my fingers crossed though...
-eLindy

Ahh, just as I thought. More clues to this setting. Multiple computers have me breathing a lot easier now. I'll stop thinking about the expensive single machine setup that I had started lite research for.

I also figured that if you were doing this you'd have to give up some other computer functions, like ports. The motherboard/chipset is very important in this setup also. But that's another story. The heat issue should not be an problem until about six or seven months after setup. Maybe sooner if you don't keep those fans clean and operating ok.

KVM switches can be operated from a single keyboard and with keystrokes. Maybe you should look into that. :)
More...
 
Quote from elindydotcom:

Ok - so I had this image in my head of using six 1600x1200 digital monitors for my trading setup. I figured that it wouldn't be so hard to put a few video cards into a computer to power the six screens. Boy, was I wrong...

If anyone knows of a better way to get six digital 1600x1200 screens working (from one computer), please let me know.

Thanks.

-eLindy
More...

I have a friend that has a 6 digital 1600x1200 monitor setup.

However, he spent about $100.00 and let a local computer shop set it up for him.

The $100.00 was easily afordable since he was able to afford 6 monitors :cool:

I think he got his computer back in 2-3 days and it came with a warranty.

He had one problem...defective video card...took his computer back and it was fixed and returned to him in 3 days...no cost because of the warranty.

Simply...if you continue having troubles...call some of your local computer shops to see if they can do what your trying hard to do.

A lot less stress in my opinion.

NihabaAshi
 
Well, I've got the NVidia 400 & 200 AGP.

I'm running (6) Samsung 191T-19" monitors in Digital mode at 1280 x 1024 :eek: I don't think my eyes could adjust to a Higher resolution.

My NVidia works in either Analog or Digital with no problems :)

I do have a great motherboard :D see sig (I'll bet that is your problem)

Very happy with my system, just got it 3 weeks ago. :cool:

Good Luck.

BTW, all computers SUCK. :mad:
 
elindy -

Re: clarity of analog vs. digital monitors - the probable reason your analog monitors don't seem as clear (or vice versa, the digital monitors seem to have enhanced clarity) is that your analogs are supporting 1600x1200 resolution but don't actually have the full complement of scan lines.

There are a lot of analog monitors out there that show 1600x1200 res in their specs but have less physical scan lines - they're fine below the max res and while they are able to accept the high res video feed, they internally drop some of the scan lines - thus making the displays less clear (especially noticable with small fonts).

Example - one of my computers had Hitachi monitors running at 1600x1200 and I can clearly read even small fonts from three feet away.
 
Quote from Swish:

Elindy,

What op system are you attempting to run the 6 monitors on?
More...

Chipset might be important. F-trader said he's running 6 monitors on Win2000 + Intel 845 chipset. I'm also running Win2000, 4 monitors, Intel 845 chipset (don't know what MB).

I'm getting the idea that "Intel 845 chipset" might be one of the ones that handle multiple monitors best??? Just a thought.:D
 
Sorry for the late replies - I was out of town for most of the weekend and I made it a point not to turn on my laptop. Anyway, to answer the questions, I'm running Windows XP Professional.


The chipset I'm using is the Intel 850e.

I'll check out the suggestion about the scan lines (or lack thereof) being an issue in anolog mode - thanks for the idea.


-eLindy.
 
Quote from elindydotcom:

Sorry for the late replies - I was out of town for most of the weekend and I made it a point not to turn on my laptop. Anyway, to answer the questions, I'm running Windows XP Professional.


The chipset I'm using is the Intel 850e.

I'll check out the suggestion about the scan lines (or lack thereof) being an issue in anolog mode - thanks for the idea.


-eLindy.
More...

My computer vendor told me not to go with the 850 board.

They stated that there were too many problems, that they had NO problems with the 845.

Good Luck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top