I'll have been research this dual monitor for a year now. I was leaning towards Matrox G400max but opted to go the Nvidia way. From my research the G400max has better drivers for the dual display than the TwinView. As for 2D quality, I've read that the two were pretty close. So G2MX Twin view offered 2D quality close to Matrox, better 3D, less cost, and also offered dual monitor display. Nvidia's twin view can do separate resolution and refresh rates. However, Win2K doesn't support that function. Maybe it will come up with patches for it in the future. Win98SE seems to be more reliable and compatible w/most hardware and can utilize the separate resolution and refresh.
Powergene (Don't know what the model is)
Asus (has released a twin version yet)
Hercules Geforce 2MX Dual $150 (VGA + TV out)
Leadtek WInfast Geforce 2MX Dual for $134 (2 VGA)
Matrox G400 Max DH for ~$200 (2 VGA)
Matrox G400 DH for ~$150 (2 VGA)
Matrox G450 DH ~$150 (2 VGA)
Matrox G450 is about the same as the G400 except for the micron processing and various small things. Otherwise it just going to offer you the same performance as the G400 at a lower manufacturing cost.
It just appear that Matrox is in the game. G800 would be killer but by then other manufacturers are going to come out with something else. Just like how 3DFX screwed themselves by releasing the Voodoo 5500 too late and is being murdered on the market.
OR just make another computer and control them both through 1 keyboard and 1 mouse. There is a product for Net Admin like that. (~$100)
I just hopped on the RCA Multimedia monitor 36" SVGA 800x600 w/ 2 15 pin vga ports (through 800.com and MSN). I plan to hook it up to Leadtek Winfast Geforce2 MX Dual Pro (20%off MSN from EBworld).
Hope this helps.
Powergene (Don't know what the model is)
Asus (has released a twin version yet)
Hercules Geforce 2MX Dual $150 (VGA + TV out)
Leadtek WInfast Geforce 2MX Dual for $134 (2 VGA)
Matrox G400 Max DH for ~$200 (2 VGA)
Matrox G400 DH for ~$150 (2 VGA)
Matrox G450 DH ~$150 (2 VGA)
Matrox G450 is about the same as the G400 except for the micron processing and various small things. Otherwise it just going to offer you the same performance as the G400 at a lower manufacturing cost.
It just appear that Matrox is in the game. G800 would be killer but by then other manufacturers are going to come out with something else. Just like how 3DFX screwed themselves by releasing the Voodoo 5500 too late and is being murdered on the market.
OR just make another computer and control them both through 1 keyboard and 1 mouse. There is a product for Net Admin like that. (~$100)
I just hopped on the RCA Multimedia monitor 36" SVGA 800x600 w/ 2 15 pin vga ports (through 800.com and MSN). I plan to hook it up to Leadtek Winfast Geforce2 MX Dual Pro (20%off MSN from EBworld).
Hope this helps.
Correction, There are more Geforce 2 MX Dual. Such as the Cardexpert and ASUS. You can check out the reviews from this link.
http://www.nvidia.com/Products/geforce2MX.nsf/reviews.html
To do dual display using your tv isn't all that great. Unless of course it is progressive scan. If you want to play DVD, you are better off buying a standalone DVD player for your TV instead. Less trouble and less cost. Two monitors is a better option for dual computing. For games, it look horrible on the TV because of the resolution and scanning limitations.
There is a 20-30% in productivity when using a 19" instead of 15" monitor. Image your productivity with two 19" monitors. Forgot where I got this from. But I know I read it somewhere because financial analysis use two monitors.
http://www.nvidia.com/Products/geforce2MX.nsf/reviews.html
To do dual display using your tv isn't all that great. Unless of course it is progressive scan. If you want to play DVD, you are better off buying a standalone DVD player for your TV instead. Less trouble and less cost. Two monitors is a better option for dual computing. For games, it look horrible on the TV because of the resolution and scanning limitations.
There is a 20-30% in productivity when using a 19" instead of 15" monitor. Image your productivity with two 19" monitors. Forgot where I got this from. But I know I read it somewhere because financial analysis use two monitors.
THANX for all the help, it is really more than just opinions and word..THANK YOU ALL and just a few more questions.
First BEZELLso you are saying dual monitor setup is better for 19" rather than 15" correct? I have one 19" planning on getting my 2nd 19" and that's why I am deciding on the video card/cards. I do mostly 2d designs..at times 3d but not as much, but mostly 2d and lots of memories needed of course because I open multiple programs and that's why dual monitor...if possilbe TRIPLE monitor would definately help since I can just place the tool boxs anwhere and look at my designs and also will different programs I can see the outcome of them. Please feel free to answer or give your best guess.
First BEZELLso you are saying dual monitor setup is better for 19" rather than 15" correct? I have one 19" planning on getting my 2nd 19" and that's why I am deciding on the video card/cards. I do mostly 2d designs..at times 3d but not as much, but mostly 2d and lots of memories needed of course because I open multiple programs and that's why dual monitor...if possilbe TRIPLE monitor would definately help since I can just place the tool boxs anwhere and look at my designs and also will different programs I can see the outcome of them. Please feel free to answer or give your best guess.
SUOrangeman,
Thanks for the Matrox corrections
No prob
Besides, I really haven't followed Matrox's latest offerings
That's understandable, since there really haven't been any late offerings other than the G450. And if you were, you'd join a lot of people highly disappointed by the delay of the G800.
Looks like there are no direct TV-out options, if an adapter is required (VGA-to-TV)
Not quite - the adapter is only a pin-out adapter, nothing else. The TV-out functionality is on the Matrox TVO chip which is now integrated onto the G450 chip. Instead of putting a separate TV-out connector on the PCB, they use an adapter that fits one of the VGA connectors. Makes sense if you think about it - why put three connectors on the board when you can only use two outputs max. In fact, the cable only costs $10 or something if you don't get it with the G4xx.
Thanks for the Matrox corrections
No prob
Besides, I really haven't followed Matrox's latest offerings
That's understandable, since there really haven't been any late offerings other than the G450
. And if you were, you'd join a lot of people highly disappointed by the delay of the G800.Looks like there are no direct TV-out options, if an adapter is required (VGA-to-TV)
Not quite - the adapter is only a pin-out adapter, nothing else. The TV-out functionality is on the Matrox TVO chip which is now integrated onto the G450 chip. Instead of putting a separate TV-out connector on the PCB, they use an adapter that fits one of the VGA connectors. Makes sense if you think about it - why put three connectors on the board when you can only use two outputs max. In fact, the cable only costs $10 or something if you don't get it with the G4xx.
Bezell,
From my research the G400max has better drivers for the dual display than the TwinView
True
As for 2D quality, I've read that the two were pretty close. So G2MX Twin view offered 2D quality close to Matrox
Nope - well, depends on the resolution you use. At higher resolutions, definitely not. From Anand's review of the G450:
<< Matrox has always been the king of 2D image quality, and the G450 does nothing to change that title other than reinforce it. The sharp 360MHz RAMDAC the G450 borrowed from the G400MAX provides for a very sharp display at 1600 x 1200 and even at higher resolutions provided that you have a high end monitor capable of displaying such resolutions.
On our Sony FD Trinitron GDM-F500 display the G450 provided a sharper picture than any competing card we tried, but that is to be expected from Matrox. What was even more impressive was that the image quality of the secondary display at 1600 x 1200 was definitely acceptable. >>
There was another review I can't find at the moment that found that 640x480 wasn't bad but by the time you reached 1024x768 you could definitely distinguish between the Matrox and the MX. If you've used and gotten accustomed to Matrox's 2D, you get VERY sensitive to poor quality 2D. I've had friends with nVidia cards say "Hey my card's got excellent 2D" and when I see it myself, I find it so poor I couldn't put up with it.
There's also TV-out quality. Matrox and ATI are usually better than nVidia on this. Both Matrox and ATI use their own proprietary stuff for TV-out. nVidia boards generally use the Brooktree/Conexant BT8xx or Chrontel 7000 chips, which rather consistently in the few TV-out reviews I've seen don't compare to Matrox or ATI. FYI, Tom's Hardware did a MX comparison, and the Leadtek had the worst TV-out. Check here.
better 3D
Depends on how you define "better." Speed, yes the MX wins out. Quality, the Matrox wins out. Plus remember at this point in time there aren't any overclock utilities for the G450 that can get it to the same clock speed as the G400Max.
less cost
Not really. The G450 DualHead with 32MB DDR RAM costs $145-150; TwinView cards with TV-out aren't much cheaper than that.
G800 would be killer but by then other manufacturers are going to come out with something else. Just like how 3DFX screwed themselves by releasing the Voodoo 5500 too late and is being murdered on the market
True. Except you can now get a V5500 for a low as $138 with some careful shopping. At that price, I'd recommend it over a non-TwinView MX even though it doesn't have hardware T&L. And 3dfx is waiting in the wings with their Hidden Surface Removal drivers which are showing a lot of potential.
Good luck with your setup. Like I said above, I'd double check on that Leadtek.
From my research the G400max has better drivers for the dual display than the TwinView
True
As for 2D quality, I've read that the two were pretty close. So G2MX Twin view offered 2D quality close to Matrox
Nope - well, depends on the resolution you use. At higher resolutions, definitely not. From Anand's review of the G450:
<< Matrox has always been the king of 2D image quality, and the G450 does nothing to change that title other than reinforce it. The sharp 360MHz RAMDAC the G450 borrowed from the G400MAX provides for a very sharp display at 1600 x 1200 and even at higher resolutions provided that you have a high end monitor capable of displaying such resolutions.
On our Sony FD Trinitron GDM-F500 display the G450 provided a sharper picture than any competing card we tried, but that is to be expected from Matrox. What was even more impressive was that the image quality of the secondary display at 1600 x 1200 was definitely acceptable. >>
There was another review I can't find at the moment that found that 640x480 wasn't bad but by the time you reached 1024x768 you could definitely distinguish between the Matrox and the MX. If you've used and gotten accustomed to Matrox's 2D, you get VERY sensitive to poor quality 2D. I've had friends with nVidia cards say "Hey my card's got excellent 2D" and when I see it myself, I find it so poor I couldn't put up with it.
There's also TV-out quality. Matrox and ATI are usually better than nVidia on this. Both Matrox and ATI use their own proprietary stuff for TV-out. nVidia boards generally use the Brooktree/Conexant BT8xx or Chrontel 7000 chips, which rather consistently in the few TV-out reviews I've seen don't compare to Matrox or ATI. FYI, Tom's Hardware did a MX comparison, and the Leadtek had the worst TV-out. Check here.
better 3D
Depends on how you define "better." Speed, yes the MX wins out. Quality, the Matrox wins out. Plus remember at this point in time there aren't any overclock utilities for the G450 that can get it to the same clock speed as the G400Max.
less cost
Not really. The G450 DualHead with 32MB DDR RAM costs $145-150; TwinView cards with TV-out aren't much cheaper than that.
G800 would be killer but by then other manufacturers are going to come out with something else. Just like how 3DFX screwed themselves by releasing the Voodoo 5500 too late and is being murdered on the market
True. Except you can now get a V5500 for a low as $138 with some careful shopping. At that price, I'd recommend it over a non-TwinView MX even though it doesn't have hardware T&L. And 3dfx is waiting in the wings with their Hidden Surface Removal drivers which are showing a lot of potential.
Good luck with your setup. Like I said above, I'd double check on that Leadtek.
After some cost analysis and comparison. I cancelled my leadtek geforce2 mx dual. I don't see the real purpose for to use the dual monitor for my application. So i opted rather to make another computer at a later time. Right now I just get a ATI AIW Radeon and just plug it into the DTV instead. Save the monitor for another computer in the future. Too many cables and too much addition cost to implement a DTV + Monitor function in a living room. Thanks for all the corrections and comments. Sharing is important.
- Oct 12, 1999
- 8,361
- 0
- 0
WW-
One quick jab in regards to multiple connections on the PCB. The Gainward card has 2 VGA + 1 TV-out. That doesn't require an adapter and you can leave things connected and not have to fiddle with the connections should the need arise (using TV instead of second monitor), etc. True, you can only use two at a time. From what I have seen thus far, this is the only card with three outputs, even if only two can be active simultaneously.
DH is certainly to more established and experienced technology. Hopefully, nVidia will take TwinView to that level.
... and I have to stop usin abbreviation like TV when I could be talking about TV-out.
-SUO
One quick jab in regards to multiple connections on the PCB. The Gainward card has 2 VGA + 1 TV-out. That doesn't require an adapter and you can leave things connected and not have to fiddle with the connections should the need arise (using TV instead of second monitor), etc. True, you can only use two at a time. From what I have seen thus far, this is the only card with three outputs, even if only two can be active simultaneously.
DH is certainly to more established and experienced technology. Hopefully, nVidia will take TwinView to that level.
... and I have to stop usin abbreviation like TV when I could be talking about TV-out.
-SUO
SUOrangeman,
One quick jab in regards to multiple connections on the PCB
That's true, but remember the G450 is targeted as a corporate/OEM card (HP, Dell) and Matrox's overriding principles in designing the G450 were cost and integration. The G450 doesn't even have the connectors for the Rainbow Runner G-series. That extra connector is part of nVidia's manufacturing flexibility - OEMs can put S-video and/or composite video or no video on the card. It's also their weakness because there's no significant quality control by nVidia on the TV-out quality or 2D quality for that matter (see Tom's MX review linked above). That's why if you really want DualHead technology and aren't terribly interested in a lot of 3D stuff, you can get Matrox-quality 2D, TV-out and DualHead (16MB SDR) for $79. That's cheaper than any 16MB or 32MB Geforce2 MX I've seen, TwinView or not. If you're not a heavy gamer, that's a no-brainer. If you're not a heavy gamer and you're running a 19" or larger monitor, that's an an absolute no-brainer, even if you never use DualHead. And we still haven't seen what a G450 overclocker can do yet.
From what I have seen thus far, this is the only card with three outputs
Actually most of the two monitor or monitor+flat panel cards have a separate TV-out. Leadtek, Hercules, Suma, and eVGA I know have 2 DB15+TV-out connectors. Asus is the only major MX OEM I know of that doesn't.
One quick jab in regards to multiple connections on the PCB
That's true, but remember the G450 is targeted as a corporate/OEM card (HP, Dell) and Matrox's overriding principles in designing the G450 were cost and integration. The G450 doesn't even have the connectors for the Rainbow Runner G-series. That extra connector is part of nVidia's manufacturing flexibility - OEMs can put S-video and/or composite video or no video on the card. It's also their weakness because there's no significant quality control by nVidia on the TV-out quality or 2D quality for that matter (see Tom's MX review linked above). That's why if you really want DualHead technology and aren't terribly interested in a lot of 3D stuff, you can get Matrox-quality 2D, TV-out and DualHead (16MB SDR) for $79. That's cheaper than any 16MB or 32MB Geforce2 MX I've seen, TwinView or not. If you're not a heavy gamer, that's a no-brainer. If you're not a heavy gamer and you're running a 19" or larger monitor, that's an an absolute no-brainer, even if you never use DualHead. And we still haven't seen what a G450 overclocker can do yet.
From what I have seen thus far, this is the only card with three outputs
Actually most of the two monitor or monitor+flat panel cards have a separate TV-out. Leadtek, Hercules, Suma, and eVGA I know have 2 DB15+TV-out connectors. Asus is the only major MX OEM I know of that doesn't.
Don't know about the others but the Hercules Dual Head MX 2 only has one coaxial video output and one monitor output, does not have 2 monitor outputs. See the site for more info.
I recently bought a Twin View Plus card from eVGA(.com) that had one VGA output, one DVI output, and one S-Video output. The card went for $145. While the quality of 2D display on my primary monitor (a KDS 19" was fine, the output on my secondary monitor (a 17" OptiQuest Q71) simply blew. To run two VGA monitors eVGA provided a DVI-->VGA adapter. I used this to run my OptiQuest and the display was extremely blurry. If I ran the monitor on the primary output it looked fine. As I bought the card so that I could use 2 monitors, I decided that I was not satisfied with the quality and sent back the card today. I think that I will stick with a one monitor setup until a clean, gameable, two-head card becomes available.
Azk
was fine, the output on my secondary monitor (a 17" OptiQuest Q71) simply blew. To run two VGA monitors eVGA provided a DVI-->VGA adapter. I used this to run my OptiQuest and the display was extremely blurry. If I ran the monitor on the primary output it looked fine. As I bought the card so that I could use 2 monitors, I decided that I was not satisfied with the quality and sent back the card today. I think that I will stick with a one monitor setup until a clean, gameable, two-head card becomes available.Azk
IITravel,
Yup, you're right about the Hercules - 1 DB15 & 1 S-video DIN. I thought I'd seen one with 2 VGA's. Moves that card firmly into the overpriced column.
Azk
the output on my secondary monitor (a 17" OptiQuest Q71) simply blew.
See the quote from Anand I posted above about the G450. That also highlights the problems with nVidia boards in general. The second monitor uses an external RAMDAC, and that's not QC'd by nVidia.
I will stick with a one monitor setup until a clean, gameable two-head card become available.
I'd guess that'll be the Matrox G800, and who knows when that will actually be available. Closest thing available now is the G400Max. ATI's got Radeon VE - while the dual monitor functions look closest to Matrox, they crippled the gaming stuff on chip. All of the nVidia stuff, while gameable, has the same general problem with "clean".
Yup, you're right about the Hercules - 1 DB15 & 1 S-video DIN. I thought I'd seen one with 2 VGA's. Moves that card firmly into the overpriced column.
Azk
the output on my secondary monitor (a 17" OptiQuest Q71) simply blew.
See the quote from Anand I posted above about the G450. That also highlights the problems with nVidia boards in general. The second monitor uses an external RAMDAC, and that's not QC'd by nVidia.
I will stick with a one monitor setup until a clean, gameable two-head card become available.
I'd guess that'll be the Matrox G800, and who knows when that will actually be available. Closest thing available now is the G400Max. ATI's got Radeon VE - while the dual monitor functions look closest to Matrox, they crippled the gaming stuff on chip. All of the nVidia stuff, while gameable, has the same general problem with "clean".
As the unofficial hitter for Matrox here, IITravel's post about the Hercules got me thinking about one complaint I've got to make about TwinView:
Why in the heck do they pass off 1 monitor+TV setups as TwinView, because practically speaking it's close to useless. Why?
1) Running and using the desktop on the TV for any length of time is really kind of questionable on any TV-out;
2) There's no practical functionality to TV-out TwinView. What are you going to do - clone, or worse, span your desktop onto a large blur? Matrox's DVDMax, which lets you display DVD's full screen on the TV-out without any DVD control windows on screen is at least useful. Matrox does it with good quality, too;
3) To top this off, a lot of cards out advertise themselves as TwinView, only to find out after a fair amount of digging that there's no dual monitor support, only monitor+TV.
And another thing, while I'm at it, why in the heck doesn't nVidia REQUIRE its OEMs to use decent filters on the video output on their cards? I haven't used nVidia cards for more than a few days in my personal machines starting with the Riva 128 (which was replaced in short order by a Rendition, then a Matrox card) simply because I couldn't tolerate the 2D. I'll admit I'm sensitive to this, but I'm not overly nitpicky. This problem isn't exclusively nVidia's because it happened to 3dfx back when they only made chips. As a matter of fact, I'd run across a fix for the old Orchid Righteous Voodoo 1 cards that's almost identical to the fix/hack for cleaning up vid quality on reference Geforces.
Rant over
Why in the heck do they pass off 1 monitor+TV setups as TwinView, because practically speaking it's close to useless. Why?
1) Running and using the desktop on the TV for any length of time is really kind of questionable on any TV-out;
2) There's no practical functionality to TV-out TwinView. What are you going to do - clone, or worse, span your desktop onto a large blur? Matrox's DVDMax, which lets you display DVD's full screen on the TV-out without any DVD control windows on screen is at least useful. Matrox does it with good quality, too;
3) To top this off, a lot of cards out advertise themselves as TwinView, only to find out after a fair amount of digging that there's no dual monitor support, only monitor+TV.
And another thing, while I'm at it
, why in the heck doesn't nVidia REQUIRE its OEMs to use decent filters on the video output on their cards? I haven't used nVidia cards for more than a few days in my personal machines starting with the Riva 128 (which was replaced in short order by a Rendition, then a Matrox card) simply because I couldn't tolerate the 2D. I'll admit I'm sensitive to this, but I'm not overly nitpicky. This problem isn't exclusively nVidia's because it happened to 3dfx back when they only made chips. As a matter of fact, I'd run across a fix for the old Orchid Righteous Voodoo 1 cards that's almost identical to the fix/hack for cleaning up vid quality on reference Geforces.Rant over
Nope, literally nowhere to mount it. There's also a big question as to whether it'll work on the G800 either. And they've dropped the price on the Rainbow Runner G-series down to $119, too. What would have been the Marvel G450 (G450 + integraded RR) became a separate product - the G450eTV. I also believe (but don't quote me) that Matrox moved away from MJPEG on the Marvel/RR to MPEG2 on the eTV. Of course, it's pretty much impossible to find the eTV.
- Oct 12, 1999
- 8,361
- 0
- 0
One thing to consider with the GF2 MX is that a module connector is a Good Thing(TM). Some of the cards like Gainward's seem good if you want dual monitors and others like a basic eVGA or Guillemot seem good just to get a 5.5ns gaming card but if you want to use the Philips VIVO or any other such add-ons that are purportedly superior, then you must get one with the module connector. The only 5.5ns card with decent quality that I think might work with the Philips module is the Guillemot retail TwinView, but I'm not certain. A lot of cards are cut down versions with no connector. Plus, the reference drivers may not have that functionality yet.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter