Widescreen Gaming Forum

... without incuring prohibitive costs ...

What, like an adapter that costs 38% of the 5850 video card? :roll:

Parhelia was terrible, no doubt, but it's been *7_years* for heaven's sake. That's like two lifetimes for AMD, (you know, the time it takes their stock to shoot for the stars, and then plummet back to the ground).

It's fantastic to (hopefully) have some options here, but let's be honest about the "achievement," too. What market exactly are you targeting for a 24 display system?

What, like an adapter that costs 38% of the 5850 video card? :roll:

Or by using an input that comes for free on a number of high quality panels already and will become more prevelent as we go on.

It's fantastic to (hopefully) have some options here, but let's be honest about the "achievement," too. What market exactly are you targeting for a 24 display system?

Professional actually. While that makes an interesting demo, that particular configuration will be aimed in for the professional markets for video walls and the like.

[quote]What, like an adapter that costs 38% of the 5850 video card? :roll:

Or by using an input that comes for free on a number of high quality panels already and will become more prevelent as we go on.

It's fantastic to (hopefully) have some options here, but let's be honest about the "achievement," too. What market exactly are you targeting for a 24 display system?

Professional actually. While that makes an interesting demo, that particular configuration will be aimed in for the professional markets for video walls and the like.

I actually have a question Dave
As I understand it, it seems legacy (VGA,DVI,HDMI) connection requires some additional hardware(clock generators) on the ASIC for getting clock sources, whereas DP can use a shared clock source right ?

Wouldn't this means that in the far far future when no more backward compatibility is needed one could expect removing these clock sources and so save on space & build cost ? (whether for pure savings or reusing them for anything else)

I realize this is a completely theoric scenario which will probably be invalidated by "Display Port Version 4.0" if you see what I mean
but I think you got the idea ... ????

Technically you are completely correct. Realistically, we probably won't go down from the number of display clock generators that we have at the moment due to thefact that some form of legacy display will be required - at the very least, while HDMI is around on CE devices, its probably that will be supported.

Taking away features to shrink the card might be a cost effective strategy, but it's also ignoring the marketplace. Going only DP would not be the best idea right now taking a detatched look at the marketplace. In order for a product to thrive it must accomodate the pre-existing majority in such a manner that it's an upgrade yet function with thier current hardware. This is why I see the DP strategy a bit out of whack. I do understand why they went that route though and it has great implications for the future, but right now it has high early adapter (pun intended) headaches. 5 years down the road most of the stuff sold will probably be HDMI and DP only, but right now it's a bit ahead of it's time. In order for that evolution to occur, there needs to be a push like this from major manufacturers to implement the port. AMD is doing it's part, time will only tell if the display manufacturers will reciprocate. EyeFinity will be much more mature and appealing about 5 years from now. As is, with entheusiasts, it already is appealing on many levels. The trick will be lowering the bar low enough that it appeals to a large cross section than just us.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com

BH, I'm pretty sure that what we've really got going here is a commercial grade product, and the gaming community is more of a sideshow fringe income to simply help mature the technology into something more commercially attractive, a stepping stone if you will. Once you put it into perspective (where real cash comes from) the DP starts to make more sense for sure.

If ATI started development for this any time in the last 12 months, you can bet there were some heated meetings both before and after engineering launch, pressing the bean counters on how they plan to pay for this in the midst of a shaken World economy.

Looks like we'll all eventually be speaking Chinese anyways, and to ATI's benefit, they can't make bootleg copies of video cards (to my knowledge).

Hi Dave and Sunsp*t,

Sorry about all the flak you are taking off some of the yahoos on this forum, going Displayport was a bold move and didn't take away from existing capabilities. If you can afford 3 monitors, you can afford the DPtoDVI adapter. Those kids don't know how the market works.

I went from a GTX295 with a TripleHead2Go digital to a XFX 5870 with a Bizlink adapter and made $150CAD off the deal (that's a lot of lap dances over by the airport). It works FREAKING GREAT with FSX and KA-50 at 5040x1050, something the TH2G could never get right. The GTX295 is great for shooters, but those sims don't use both cores so the 5870 is a lot faster. :twisted:

I am having one problem and I wanted your input. My centre monitor is on the Bizlink adapter, and from time to time it starts blinking on and off, like it's switching modes every few seconds, for about 10 minutes, then goes back to normal for up to an hour. The blinking is interspersed with artifacts, patterns, and a lot of other loss of signal stuff.

My question to you, engineer to engineer, could this be a bad displayport? I realize it could just be a bad adapter, but Dell, where I got the Bizlink adapter, is horrible to deal with. You're "working the ecosystem" for active adapters, do you know anything that could be helpful?

Thanks,
trueman832, Toronto

I'm afraid my posts here are coming off markedly negative, and although I'm reasonably miffed at the decision making procedures and their consideration for backward compatibility in 3+ display environments, a company that's willing to plan that far ahead has some balls. In technology markets these days, it can't be easy to convince folks to think 3 to 5 years down the road.

In addition, Trueman, I don't appreciate being referred to as a child if that's where you're going with that, and please don't assume that there is no principle in the hardware purchasing decisions of rational adults. We have plenty of cash, but we didn't get here (and we didn't bring our corporations with us) by making frivolous decisions.

Technically you are completely correct. Realistically, we probably won't go down from the number of display clock generators that we have at the moment due to thefact that some form of legacy display will be required - at the very least, while HDMI is around on CE devices, its probably that will be supported.

that's exactly what I expected in fact, thanks for answering

don't be mistaken BHawthorne
I was just verifying that I understood all that info correctly, as said by Dave, legacy will sit around for a while longer (hey you still get motherboards equipped with the legacy parallel LPT1 port still nowadays, although on the majority the port is now optional)

on a sidenote I wonder if an ATI partner might do a redesign of the 5870 month later with 3x "working" DVI outputs, depends if they expect a market for it I guess ...

on a sidenote I wonder if an ATI partner might do a redesign of the 5870 month later with 3x "working" DVI outputs, depends if they expect a market for it I guess ...

I don't thnk there is a large enough market for them to do that, or it would have been done in the first place. I think EyeFinity occured because they were looking at new ways to use that third active port DP allowed, not to accomodate people who already had 3 DVI displays. It came about with different reasoning than how most of us arrived at triple-head. This is also why there is a bit of friction here, because both this community and EyeFinity do triple-head, but came about in different ways. For 99% of the population, our concerns are largely irrelevant to the 5000-series line. We do bring some new perspective to the table that AMD is listening though with at least 2 people here. Many things we are seasoned veterans at AMD is only now just having to troubleshoot. That is why I'm glad they are here listening. I would hope our perspective is useful in prioritizing EyeFinity feature implementation.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com