2405fpw question

[CU]

We have some 2405fpw's on the way. I have read the 5200agp can do 1920x1200 if you reducing the blanking data. Is that correct and what problems does this cause ie. image quality? If all that was correct then that is how it will connect to our Dells. Also does any one know if the first G5's have a similar option? They also 5200agp's in them, but they have two dvi ports as opposed to one like the Dells. Assuming I get both the Mac and the Dell to work with a dvi connection can anyone recommend a kvm that supports 1920x1200 through dvi and works with a mac and a pc. Thanks.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: CU
We have some 2405fpw's on the way. I have read the 5200agp can do 1920x1200 if you reducing the blanking data. Is that correct and what problems does this cause ie. image quality? If all that was correct then that is how it will connect to our Dells. Also does any one know if the first G5's have a similar option? They also 5200agp's in them, but they have two dvi ports as opposed to one like the Dells. Assuming I get both the Mac and the Dell to work with a dvi connection can anyone recommend a kvm that supports 1920x1200 through dvi and works with a mac and a pc. Thanks.

Not sure about the 5200... It would not be pretty, that is for sure, at least in 3D gaming. If it has a DVI port, it should support the resolution. I am not entirely sure on your post though, you have me lost in a lot of places. Can you update us with more clear and concise information?

If you play any games at all, you are going to have to ditch that 5200. I did some research a while back and the 7800 GTX is like 26 times faster than the 5200 series...

No advice on the KVM switch, I never use them.

 

[mezrah]

In other words if the 7800gtx is getting 100 fps (very nice) the 5200 is getting ~4 fps (very bad). A video card upgrade is in order. Send back the 2405, get the 2005, and upgrade your video card.

 

[Peter]

Problem with most NVidia cards is that the main chip's integrated DVI transmitter isn't up to delivering the full 165 MHz pixel frequency as required for 1920x1200. Recent drivers compensate by lowering the frequency (and thus the display refresh rate). Some cards work around the problem by ignoring the integrated transmitter, using a discrete transmitter chip instead. This isn't something you'll find on a low end card though.

The good news is that cards that have two DVI outputs have at least one "good" port.

 

[CU]

I should have said these are office computers. So, there will be no game playing. The 5200's are fine for what they are used for. I found out the G5 support 1920x1200 for sure. I looked on apple's website and found it. I guess I just missed it the first time I looked. Considering the only dvi kvm that I have found that supports 1920x1200 is over $300, I think the Macs will use dvi and the PC will use vga. They will use their current kvm for keyboard and mouse, and switch inputs on the monitor when switching between Mac and PC.

 

[Nda]

my 2405 fpw arrived today, havent try it yet tho (still at school). I have BFG 6800gt OC, will this DVI problem occured to me?

 

[Peter]

As I said, recent drivers work around it by lowering the refresh rate - down from 60 frames per second to about 52 - to keep the signalling frequency within the working limits of the NVidia chip. Depending on card design, there might even be a discrete, properly working DVI transmitter chip.

 

[Nda]

damn, i should have bought ati instead

 

[WobbleWobble]

I know this is an old thread, but do ATIs generally have this limitation? My friend is looking for a faster AGP videocard and it looks like the best fastest/value AGP card available to me is a Sapphire X800 GTO. Sapphire doesn't list the spec for DVI output on their website.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: WobbleWobble
I know this is an old thread, but do ATIs generally have this limitation? My friend is looking for a faster AGP videocard and it looks like the best fastest/value AGP card available to me is a Sapphire X800 GTO. Sapphire doesn't list the spec for DVI output on their website.

ATI's onboard DVI works just fine, and has for years. NVIDIA cut some corners on their DVI implementation, especially on the GF5 series. I think the GF6 and GF7 cards are better in this regard, as I haven't seen any complaints about them not working at 1600x1200 and higher resolutions.

Toms Hardware did a big writeup on it last year, where they looked at the signals with a scope. ATI's DVI signal was flawless, while the GF5's onboard transmitter was just barely scraping by within spec if they were lucky.

 

[Peter]

Originally posted by: WobbleWobble
I know this is an old thread, but do ATIs generally have this limitation? My friend is looking for a faster AGP videocard and it looks like the best fastest/value AGP card available to me is a Sapphire X800 GTO. Sapphire doesn't list the spec for DVI output on their website.

Go back up and read again. It's NVIDIA's chips that suffer a DVI signal integrity problem.

 

[WobbleWobble]

I read that nVidia chips suffer, but I didn't see explicity that ATI chips don't suffer from this problem. I just wanted to clarify before dropping cash on a new card and finding out that it won't do 1920x1200 on DVI.

Thanks guys!

 

[imported_Cript]

Just be careful with ATI's lower end solutions. Some of their cards don't go beyond 1600x1200. Some Matrox cards don't go past 1280x1024 either, again on their lower end.

 

[Peter]

Those that do 1600x1200 are capable of maximum frequency DVI (165 MHz signal clock). 1920x1200 is achieved with reduced blanking interval at the same frequency. So generally, if an (older) chip specification says 1600x1200, then 1920x1200 will work just as well. YMMV. All Radeons, except (maybe, I don't remember) the 7000, can do it.

Those that are specified at 1280x1024 won't manage, however. From current offerings, this includes the Matrox G series chips, as well as the XGI Volari V3.