Widescreen Gaming Forum

[-noun] Web community dedicated to ensuring PC games run properly on your tablet, netbook, personal computer, HDTV and multi-monitor gaming rig.
It is currently 04 Dec 2024, 18:31

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 28 Aug 2008, 19:11 
Offline

Joined: 05 Dec 2007, 08:54
Posts: 78
This still doesn't work for me.


Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 08 Sep 2008, 15:59 
Offline

Joined: 16 Apr 2008, 17:16
Posts: 273
Ok, THIS seriously sucks.

I was about to buy my TripleHead2Go until i came across this thread.

I have a 4870x2.

3* 1680x1050 is imperative for me, can someone please tell me if they can get it to work at that resolution.

Im gonna hold on buying it until i get more info, Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Sep 2008, 17:03 
Offline

Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 09:01
Posts: 96
In Matrox website, their GXM System Compatibility Test for Radeon 4800 Series, max supported resolution is 3 x 1440 x 900 (with the latest firmware). And, footnote 2 says this resolution is not supported in Crossfire configuration.

So, if 4870x2 is part of the 4800 Series, then it wont get 3 x 1680 x 1050. If it is considered as a Crossfire config, it might not even get 3 x 1440 x 900. Actually, the best is to contact Matrox and confirm this with them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2008, 12:17 
Offline

Joined: 01 May 2008, 23:28
Posts: 6
I need to renew my video card as mine is down (9800GX2). I was interested by 4870X2 but as I have read, there is a really problem with 3x1650*1080. It is a shame on 3 22' do not be able to run the native resolution of this screen.

Can anybody have a solution?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2008, 17:33 
Offline

Joined: 16 Apr 2008, 17:16
Posts: 273
I need to renew my video card as mine is down (9800GX2). I was interested by 4870X2 but as I have read, there is a really problem with 3x1650*1080. It is a shame on 3 22' do not be able to run the native resolution of this screen.

Can anybody have a solution?


I havent found anything, im holding off buying a TripleHead To Go until i need to change my current Video Card (and x2) to a nVidia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2008, 22:00 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 19:00
Posts: 647
So have we heard anything new about ATI cards supporting 3x1650x1050? I am planning to upgrade to WS in the near future and don't want to go back to inferior Nvidia cards (unless of course Nvidia releases something better again)?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Nov 2008, 10:03 
Offline

Joined: 19 Mar 2004, 15:19
Posts: 298
Depends what you play, but on both Fallout3 and Farcry2, both new games, the GTX2xx are faster than not only the 4870, but the X2 as well. Pricing for the GTX260 and HD4870 1GB are the same too..

And no (less) stupid software issues..

_________________
[GTX1080 - 4.48GHz 4690k - planning projector mayhem]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Nov 2008, 09:24 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 19:00
Posts: 647
Depends what you play, but on both Fallout3 and Farcry2, both new games, the GTX2xx are faster than not only the 4870, but the X2 as well. Pricing for the GTX260 and HD4870 1GB are the same too..

And no (less) stupid software issues..


What a myth, they are not faster.. a GTX 260 SLI is roughly equivalent in power to HD 4870 X2, it depends on the games. Just look at something like this. Obviously when buying a new card you should only be looking at 2560x1600 benchmarks (almost as many pixels as 3840x1024), 1920x1200 or lower is pointless to those of us using Th2go.

Just so its clear that I'm not an ATI fanboy, I had an SLI 8800GTS 640MB up till a few months ago for 2 years (before that a GeForce 6800 GTX). When I upgrade every few years recently I've tended to do it soon after the new generation of video cards comes out (so that I can maximize my gaming experience for as long as possible).

Here's the deal.. the GTX 260 cost $400, the GTX 280 cost $650 at release date. You must admit these prices are ridiculous compared to the $550 the HD 4870 X2 debuted at.

Furthermore the HD 4850 and HD 4870 (for those folks not yet hooked on TH2Go) cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $200-$300 (don't remember exact details since I don't care, HD 4870 CF wasn't ever on my list since it only had 2x512MB=1GB total).

ATI came back with a vengeance, they had the best bang for the buck.. even the HD 4870 X2 was much cheaper than the GTX 280 which could barely keep up without being in SLI.

It is only after ATI gave Nvidia's asses a kicking that Nvidia prices took a deep dive, the GTX 260 is now $200 on newegg and the GTX 280 is a mere $380. That's almost 50% price cuts for both video cards.

So of course with that many price cuts it can now be competitive (just 4 months later) with the HD 4870 X2 which has only gone down to $490 after debuting at $550.

Finally, I don't have a clue as to what software issues you're talking about.. but after I switched to ATI I was finally able to use multiple monitors at the same time without having to turn off SLI first (a feature Nvidia has been promising for what feels like years now).

If Nvidia comes out with something competitive again in the next year, then great, I'll buy it.. but these things tend to go in cycles. Usually it takes 2-3 generations for the other company to produce the superior and cheaper cards, and right now ATI has just regained its mojo.

I extend my sincerest regrets to those who heavily overpaid by buying GTX 2xx near their original releases.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Nov 2008, 11:36 
Offline

Joined: 19 Mar 2004, 15:19
Posts: 298
Your meandering tangent of a history lesson should be in another thread. No one is discussing or even interested in the launch prices of the GTX range. TODAY a GTX260 C216 and a HD4870 are similar price and performance, depending on the game. However on the ATI you get no WS Surround Gaming, Crossfire constraints with TH2G and no Stereo3D support.

Most reviews only test to 1920x1200, thats just reality.
Fallout 3, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/article/125-fallout3-performance/page4.html

Farcry 2, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/review/123-farcry2-performance/page4.html

I have 2 HD4800 range cards here that are sitting around thanks to ATIs resolution issues. They were my preference but nV make a fine alternative.

Its misleading and irresponsible to potiential new TH2G users to slate nVidia cards when TODAY, pricing and performance is very similar to ATI but support is not. In any rational mind, "competitive" is price and performance, the GTX2x0 are competing just fine in those regards.

You may have no incentive (other than TH2G) to go from HD4800 to nV, but that doesnt make them uncompetive. Dont you ask yourself what good all that high res performance is on the 4870x2 when you cant use it where you want? Its like driving a Mustang GT on slicks in the rain. Sure its fast on paper, but its not going where you want it.

_________________
[GTX1080 - 4.48GHz 4690k - planning projector mayhem]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Nov 2008, 06:13 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 19:00
Posts: 647
Your meandering tangent of a history lesson should be in another thread. No one is discussing or even interested in the launch prices of the GTX range. TODAY a GTX260 C216 and a HD4870 are similar price and performance, depending on the game. However on the ATI you get no WS Surround Gaming, Crossfire constraints with TH2G and no Stereo3D support.

What the heck is Stereo3D and why would anyone care? I have an Audigy 2 and I get my 5.1 dolby digital sound just fine.

Secondly, my "history lesson" was rationale for why I bought an HD 4870 X2 and why it was far superior around launch day. Obviously for someone buying a card today the story would be different, but it does serve to demonstrate Nvidia's foolhardy beliefs they would never lose the high-end market even for a second.


Most reviews only test to 1920x1200, thats just reality.
Fallout 3, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/article/125-fallout3-performance/page4.html

Farcry 2, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/review/123-farcry2-performance/page4.html

CF and SLI doesn't scale very well at lower resolutions, so if you are looking at 1920x1200 benchmarks it's going to be a completely different story at 5040x1050. I recommend to all readers to only look at 2560x1600 or higher resolutions, doing anything else would be misinformed. When I was deciding if the HD 4870 X2 was worth the upgrade, I found at least 5 different benchmarks (on 5 different sites that is) that had a 2560x1600 resolution.


I have 2 HD4800 range cards here that are sitting around thanks to ATIs resolution issues. They were my preference but nV make a fine alternative.

What can I say, my condolences to you? If you bought an HD 48xx in July when it was released, then you really wouldn't have known that they were about to release a widescreen update. If you bought an HD 48xx after August 5th, then you didn't do your homework and check that ATI cards supported the higher resolution.


Its misleading and irresponsible to potiential new TH2G users to slate nVidia cards when TODAY, pricing and performance is very similar to ATI but support is not. In any rational mind, "competitive" is price and performance, the GTX2x0 are competing just fine in those regards.

It supports 3840x1024 pretty damn good, in fact, since I don't need to disable SLI before switching to my triple monitor alternate configuration (so applications are actually aware of my multi-monitor), which is more than I can say for Nvidia.

Granted it doesn't support 5040x1050, but once again I wasn't recommending anyone to buy ATI cards if they want to go the triple widescreen route.


You may have no incentive (other than TH2G) to go from HD4800 to nV, but that doesnt make them uncompetive. Dont you ask yourself what good all that high res performance is on the 4870x2 when you cant use it where you want? Its like driving a Mustang GT on slicks in the rain. Sure its fast on paper, but its not going where you want it.

It doesn't make them uncompetitive today, but I was speculating the long-term trend and nothing else. Maybe the next iteration of Nvidia cards will be better, but that would go against history.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group