|
Post Reply
alan martin 2002-04-21 20:21
Hello all
Appologies for asking yet another "which card" question. I've tried researching all the usual reviews and forums and got confused by so many possibilities.
Summary:
I'm an old graphic designer on a low budget.
Which works best... one dual-head card or two cards (one AGP and one PCI)?
Used only for 2D graphic design, using 2 CRT monitors (both 1024x768 32bit color)
If the answer is one card with dual outlets, then which one?
---------------------------------------
Details:
I work on 2D graphic design for printed output.
Mostly use Photoshop, CorelDraw, Illustrator, Quark.
I never play games. No html/web design, just print.
I bought a new 17inch CRT because the old MAG 17inch CRT has varying colour and some distortions. It is still good for non graphic work though, with crisp text.
I want to run both monitors always at 1024x768 in 32bit color, same refresh rates.
Sometimes I'd like to maximise one app on monitor A and another app on monitor B.
Othertimes I'd like to run one app on both monitors (the image on the new monitor
and the tool palettes on the old one).
Most important: Good 2D image quality; also convenient software for using the two screens efficiently in various ways. If the card maker's software is not good enough, I would use UltraMon, but the card's Win2K drivers would still have to be good.
I use Windows 2000 Pro; reluctant to move to XP unless it becomes necessary for good practical reasons.
Pentium II 300Mz with 384Mb of RAM
Gigabyte motherboard, Intel LX440 chipset
Matrox Millenium II PCI, one spare AGPx2 slot
So, should I retire the Matrox PCI card and get a dual head
or should I get a single-head AGP card and run two cards?
---------------------------------------
If I go for just one card with two VGA outlets:
Tom's Hardware site advises that the Radeon 7000/VE has better window
management software for my purpose and can run 2 CRT monitors.
But it seems it only has one analog VGA and one DVI outlet.
The ATI site says you can get a "dongle" to run a second CRT off the
DVI outlet but nobody seems to stock the dongle (I live in Australia).
Is there a more suitable but still inexpensive Radeon 2xCRT model?
Should I get a Matrox or GeForce card instead?
If Matrox, which would best suit my needs: G400, G400X, G450, LE, G550 ?
A dual head Matrox would be the most expensive option but I would get
one if it is significantly better for my needs.
I would be very grateful for advice from someone who has checked out
all the 2D 2monitor options.
When I try to research this myself, my head spins from info overload!
Alan
|
Nite 2002-04-22 02:31
My opinion only, but if I were you, I'd got myself a new AGP Matrox DualHead. If no games are played, there is none that can stand up to Matrox. They are the King of the Hill in 2D production.
If you're, you might get a Matrox G4xx DualHead for a very low price. G450 MAX DualHead with 16MB memory is only about 150€ in stores. Try shopmatrox.com.
\Nite - "can't rain all the time"
Multi-Monitor Gaming Web
|
Lanlan 2002-04-22 08:16
When you mentioned the ATI VE DUAL DISPLAY card, I was surprised to hear it did not include the dvi-vga adapter...is this oem? I know retail of ATI usually do include the dvi-vga adapter.
If you are going with budget, I would go with either the ATI Radeon VE (as you mentioned), ATI Radeon 7500, Asus 2v1d Geforce 2 MX or Matrox G series. All good choices and pretty much below $125 US.
Good luck!
|
alan martin 2002-04-22 15:42
Thank you both for your prompt replies.
Here the Matrox G450 costs AUS$100 (about US$50) more than the other options. From past experience I know you can regret getting something that doesn't quite make the grade. So I'm going to enjoy the best recommendation and treat myself to the Matrox. :)
Strange thing about the Radeon 7000/VE. It seems the batch they sent to Australia all lack the DVI to analog dongle. Retailers here all claim there's no such thing.
There are cheap non-ATI boards with the same chip but it is hard to work out which have good drivers, whether it would be better to use ATI's reference drivers or the board maker's, and whether they can run ATI's HydraVision. I'd rather be designing than messing around with all that.
So it seems spending the extra for the G450 is well worth it, if only to avoid uncertainties about driver problems - especially for Win2000.
I'm really looking forward to spreading out over the two screens. The screen always seemed like the worst bottleneck between the user and the computer.
Alan
|
Scott Stafford 2002-04-23 15:17
From my experience, two cards are better.
I went from a Matrox Millenium 1 PCI and a Matrox G200 AGP to a Matrox G450. I recently went back to the Matrox Millenium 1 PCI and Matrox G200 AGP. The 2D on the G450 was a little blury compared to the MM1 G200 combination.
The monitors also had problems with the refresh rates on the G450. With the 2 card solution, both monitors could run at their max refresh rate.
You can pick up Millenium 1 or 2 PCI cards for $20 or less on Ebay. The G200 AGP also sells for about $20 there.
Scott
|
Post Reply
|
