Ed 2003-06-02 17:48
Howdy folks!
I would like to upgrade to a triple-head LCD configuration with 3 Viewsonics VP201mb running at 1600x1200. I already have one of them, and the prices make it now possible to get another two. After all, we have to boost the economy... of course, everything we buy in this country is imported, even the food -- oh well, enough ranting.
So, my concerns are:
- The VP201mb has a DVI-D connector (not DVI-I)
- The VP201mb digital connector will not work with ATI boards, but it is reported to work with the GeForce 4 type boards
Could someone recommend a card configuration for this setup with an ASUS P4C800 (8xAGP, 0.8V, 1.5V only) running WinXP?
I looked at the ASUS cards like the "V9560 VideoSuite", but the connectors look like DVI-I instead of DVI-D -- not sure. I could not find anything on the max resolution on double-head or triple-head configurations. Not sure even if triple-head is supported, but I could get 2 cards, I suppose. It seems to come with some cool stuff like the "Video Security" which would be tremendously useful, at least for the 1st week ;)
I find this nVidia thing so confusing... :( not sure which manufacturers are putting out the good stuff, or even who they are... I would like to stick with ASUS if that is a good brand for this type of thing... sigh... I just want it to work well... I do mostly programming, but some good gaming would be nice too :)
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Ed
|
ecarlson 2003-06-03 10:27
A monitor with a DVI-D connector should have no problem plugging into a video card with a DVI-I connector, since a DVI-I video card connector also supports DVI-D monitor connectors.
The thing that is special about a DVI-I connector is that it also supports analog monitors, in addition to digital monitors.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
Ed 2003-06-03 11:09
Oh, it is all a bit confusing... at least I do not have to worry about the connector ;)
|
Ed 2003-06-03 14:44
I think I figured it out... with ecarlson's info above I went to the card database and did some research... I'm picking the ASUS V9560 VS and a Matrox G450 for the PCI slot. Thanks!
|
ecarlson 2003-06-04 13:10
Please let us know how it works out. Did you confirm that those cards will do digital out at 1600x1200? I think there are some cards that are limited to 1280x1024 in digital mode, and have to use analog mode to go to 1600x1200. Hopefully that's not the case with the cards you picked.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
Ed 2003-06-04 16:19
I'm thinking about selling my VP201mb and get 3 LCD2080UX -- problem is I can not find any reviews on it... (?)
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/nec_index.cfm
scary
|
ecarlson 2003-06-05 09:36
Well, I could replace my entire system twice for just the cost of one of those monitors, so I definately have no experience with either monitor.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
Ed 2003-06-05 11:45
Just have to get a bit older. When I was young I lived on peanut butter sandwiches - still do at times...
ViewSonic is coming up with a new model http://www.viewsonic.com/products/lcd_vp211b.htm
When comparing it with the NEC it has better contrast, wider viewing angle and is an inch larger at 21.3 diagonal or 17x12.8". They are making them with a thin frame now, like they should have done all along. No big logo or speakers, but the specs seem very close to the VP201mb which I like a lot.
ViewSonic also has what look like very nice frames to hold sets of 2,3 or 4 LCDs together.
|
ecarlson 2003-06-05 12:46
It's not a lack of money issue for me, it's just a "how much do I want to spend on computer stuff", and "do I really need it" issue.
I once bought a 17" LCD monitor (at a great price, of course), but returned it for a number of reasons. The main reason was that it only had an anolog input, and I was not satisfied with the analog picture, especially since my video card has a DVI output. It was very nice for an anolog LCD monitor, but it also had a couple other drawbacks, like it had the wide frame, and it had speakers which always hissed, even when you turned the monitor off.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
Ed 2003-06-05 17:21
I can understand that. I'm like that with clothes and sometimes with food. ;)
But I do go overboard with A/V and computer stuff... it's not too bad as far as vice and money wasting activities go, or at least that it how I excuse occasional excesses like this one. And once you pop the cherry, ahhh the possibilities...
Not too rational though, I got my LCD to save space, but it turns out not to make much of a difference. I used to have my desk 6-8 inches from the wall and now it is 3... lol
Oh well, life is too short.
|
ecarlson 2003-06-06 13:27
Another thing I learned from my trial with the 17" LCD monitor is that I really do like the image on my 17" CRT monitor (at 1024x768), so now I'm not so antsy to upgrade.
I also realized that everything is too small using a 17" LCD at 1280x1024, and I'll probably want at least an 18" or 19" LCD at that res.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
Ed 2003-06-07 11:06
That is true, but you could always get a 17" at 1024x768 ;)
That is sort of the problem with the LCDs -- you pick the resolution when you buy them and then you are stuck. The scalling they do is okay for video & games, but can not really be used for working.
With the larger 9.2 megapixel standard at 3840x2400 scalling may work better because you have enough pixels to resolve the scalling a bit more. But at current prices those are for more serious work. Can you imagine? A multimonitor setup with 9.2 megapixel screens and 3x10bit colors... WOW... meanwhile back on Earth...
|
ecarlson 2003-06-07 13:08
All the 17" monitors I've seen were 1280x1024. 1024x768 would be great for people who like easier to read displays.
I would like the higher resolution of 1280x1024, but in a larger size than 17".
And, yes, the displays you mentioned would be nice, but imagine the video processing horspower required to drive them at a reasonable speed.
- Eric www.InvisibleRobot.com
|
