Widescreen Gaming Forum

The new Matrox 8-display card supports XP, the price may be an issue though:

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/graphics_cards/m_series/m9188pciex16/

BTW which are those games that work with TH2Go but don't work on Windows 7?

A few games I love just won't start/run on Windows 7 (yes I know about running in XP mode and "as administarator" )

in XP all my games run under the Th2go.

would be great for Eyefinity to run under XP.

I would suggest we/you make a list of such games. Maybe somebody has gotten them to work with a method that you haven't tried. This list may be better off in a different thread though.

_________________
EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 3.5GB | 3 X LG Flatron 24EA53VQ in Nvidia Surround | Optoma HD20

The new Matrox 8-display card supports XP, the price may be an issue though:

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/graphics_cards/m_series/m9188pciex16/

BTW which are those games that work with TH2Go but don't work on Windows 7?

I don't think it's really a gaming card, methinks day traders would kill for it though.

The new Matrox 8-display card supports XP, the price may be an issue though:

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/graphics_cards/m_series/m9188pciex16/

BTW which are those games that work with TH2Go but don't work on Windows 7?

Simply put, the horsepower of Matrox GPUs are crap.

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

That, and there are probably limitations in DX9 that won't allow eyefinity to work like it should. "Eyefinity" is just what ATi calls their solution.

I'm sure every company that (eventually) makes a DX11 card for Win7 will have a similar (if not the same) solution that does exactly the same. AFAIK it's an inherent feature in DX11.

ATi being the first to the market was just able to call it whatever they wanted.

Critical parts of Eyefinity are unique and not part of DX10, DX11, or the OS. Those other guys may duplicate what we have done, but regardless of what they may call it, I assure you AMD invented what it takes to make this capability work.

Although knowing the history of their press releases and claims, they will no doubt claim it is unique and a totally new invention, way better than EF. lolz

Although knowing the history of their press releases and claims, they will no doubt claim it is unique and a totally new invention, way better than EF. lolz

hem hem

You know guys I respect you all, but even though you are right with that statement, I wouldn't go too much in that direction if I were you. Press releases are a sloppy rope to say the least. ATI got its share of "weirdness" in press releases too.
Commercials are what they are, with the goals they have... there's nothing more to say although I wish we lived in a more "honest" world (globally)

have a nice day. :)

IMHO "Eyefinity" is just a way to span a display across multiple monitor

pretty much presenting to the OS a "virtual ultra high resolution" that is made of multiple lower resolution display.

It's been done before, matrox, nvidia (they had spanning in their workstation cars) and even as far back as 1986 with a few arcade games.


I don't think that "spanning" is a feature that is unique to DX11.

anyway to me the only advantage of the Eyefinity is the cost/speed/resolution. and I do admit that ATI did it well but when I think of triplehead gaming I still look back to Matrox as the grand daddy that brought it to the masses.

(similiar to what 3DFx did for 3D gaming )

Critical parts of Eyefinity are unique and not part of DX10, DX11, or the OS. Those other guys may duplicate what we have done, but regardless of what they may call it, I assure you AMD invented what it takes to make this capability work.

Although knowing the history of their press releases and claims, they will no doubt claim it is unique and a totally new invention, way better than EF. lolz

My PR BS meter just went off. :roll: Most of what you said could be interchangeable by swapping the words "AMD" with "nVidia" and "EyeFinity" with "XP span modes". Going down that road is indeed a slippery slope... Revisionist history only works for those left standing to write the history books. Both nVidia and AMD are still standing so revisionist history is a bad move. :wink:

nVidia had SLI Matrox Mode and XP span modes way before EyeFinity was a glimmer in the eye of AMD. What AMD has done is made something simular and gone mainstream with it. The distinction to be made, if any, is that AMD has made a decision to standardize all thier current generation with such capability while nVidia has either removed the capability or made it non-consumer related.

While AMD and nVidia have both arrived at simular feature capabilities for multi-display hardware full-screen accelerated 3D, the driver level implementations are the only real difference. Given SLi Matrix Mode and XP span modes, I think your last statement is hypocritical. :wink:

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

While AMD and nVidia have both arrived at simular feature capabilities for multi-display hardware full-screen accelerated 3D, the driver level implementations are the only real difference. Given SLi Matrix Mode and XP span modes, I think your last statement is hypocritical. :wink:

for AMD's defence, I think it's not only software but also hardware implementation with maybe some hardware "tricks" that allows SLS to not crumble in performance when the resolution raises or things like that.
And as you said they are the first really serious about bringing it to the masses ...

[quote]While AMD and nVidia have both arrived at simular feature capabilities for multi-display hardware full-screen accelerated 3D, the driver level implementations are the only real difference. Given SLi Matrix Mode and XP span modes, I think your last statement is hypocritical. :wink:

for AMD's defence, I think it's not only software but also hardware implementation with maybe some hardware "tricks" that allows SLS to not crumble in performance when the resolution raises or things like that.
And as you said they are the first really serious about bringing it to the masses ...

The only hardware trick is the 2 legacy clocks and the 3rd for DP allowing for 3 or more ports out. XP span mode has the exact same single GPU, single card out limitations that EyeFinity had at launch. While we could split hairs over the finer points of what is alike and different in all of these things, the overall statement I gave is a valid one.

What did AMD really invent? Multiple ports out of a single card in a single 3D full screen area? No... First to market with this tech? No... Available to all consumers built in as value addded? No... All these distinctions were already made with XP span mode.

The big difference is what DP is doing to allow for ports out on the card. The only thing AMD is really doing is giving us a new variation of this capability. It's not an invention, it's more of a recycling if a term is to be used. All marketing spin aside, I think EyeFinity is a great idea. It's a heck of a lot better than what nVidia pulled off and abandoned, but a reality check is in order when it comes to just what was invented.

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