Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

P on HardwareZone

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • P on HardwareZone

    Don't know if this has been posted already but ...

    HardwareZone is the leading online technology portal in Asia Pacific gives you latest tech Updates, technology news, products & gadgets reviews and more.
    According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless...

  • #2
    I'm reading it right now.

    Comment


    • #3
      Of course, while the TripleHead feature does seem to be heaven sent, there are some issues to consider about it. For one, TripleHead requires a minimum resolution of 2400x600 in order to stretch your desktop to three monitors. At that resolution, most monitors will not even be able to refresh beyond 60Hz (75Hz is the minimum recommendation when using CRTs).
      Is that true?

      anything under 85hz is unacceptable to me.
      I thought that each monitor could, for example, run in 1280*1024@85hz, does triplehead limits the refreshrates?
      This sig is a shameless atempt to make my post look bigger.

      Comment


      • #4
        It sounds like he made a mistake somewhere setting up his tripple head. The 2400x600 is no where near the resolution each monitor is running. If my monitor couldn't display 800x600 in higher than 60Hz, I'd toss it in the garbage bin in a matter of seconds.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by TDB


          Is that true?
          I think he's thinking that the triplehead res of 2400x600 is beyond the spec of one of his monitors thus he mistakes what the max refresh is he can apply......
          "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts

          µße®LørÐ - A legend in his underwear
          Member of For F*ck Sake UT clan
          DriverHeaven administrator
          PowerVR Network administrator

          Comment


          • #6
            Talking about refresh rates with Surround gaming...my Optiquest Q95 19 In monitor acts strangely. I can run it in singlehead mode at 85hz @ 1200x1024 with my Radeon 8500DV in my Shuttle box and 1024x768@85hz with a Matrox G450 when I had it at work, but when its at home on my Parhelia as part of triple head at 3072x768, I can't go over 81hz in the Powerdesk-HF options without getting an OSD display saying that its over its refresh limits, yet my Older Optiquest V95 has no problems what so ever.
            Why is it called tourist season, if we can't shoot at them?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TDB


              Is that true?

              anything under 85hz is unacceptable to me.
              I thought that each monitor could, for example, run in 1280*1024@85hz, does triplehead limits the refreshrates?
              nope ...

              he just did not understand what TripleHead is about ...
              2400x600 is three monitors, each running 800x600 (3 x 800 = 2400) and hence his comment is complete BS.

              Despite my nickname causing confusion, I am not female ...

              ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
              Intel Core i7-3930K@4.3GHz
              be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 2
              4x 8GB G.Skill TridentX PC3-19200U@CR1
              2x MSI N670GTX PE OC (SLI)
              OCZ Vertex 4 256GB
              4x2TB Seagate Barracuda Green 5900.3 (2x4TB RAID0)
              Super Flower Golden Green Modular 800W
              Nanoxia Deep Silence 1
              LG BH10LS38
              LG DM2752D 27" 3D

              Comment


              • #8


                why is 1600*1200@4fsaa faster than 1280*1024@4fsaa?

                does it fallback to 2fsaa in high-resolutions?

                what is the bottleneck? it doesn´t seem to be fillrate or bandwidth.



                shouldn´t the 1600*1200@no fsaa be about equal to 800*600@4fsaa speedwise?
                Last edited by TdB; 13 September 2002, 04:55.
                This sig is a shameless atempt to make my post look bigger.

                Comment


                • #9
                  And I think he got it completely messed up since he was running his triplehead rig with a Philips 22'' and 2 LCD together. The problem with that kind of rig is that the LCD's are limited to 60Hz and thus bringing down his 22'' CRT to 60hz which is a problem for the the CRT but not any LCD's. The third head got a 300Mhz ramdac if I remember correctly so that should mean the limit at 1280x1024 is somewhere around 95Hz I beleive....

                  Cobos
                  My Specs
                  AMD XP 1800+, MSI KT3 Ultra1, Matrox G400 32MB DH, IBM 9ES UW SCSI, Plextor 32X SCSI, Plextor 8x/2x CDRW SCSI, Toshiba 4.8X DVD ROM IDE, IBM 30GB 75GXP, IBM 60GB 60GXP, 120GB Maxtor 540X, Tekram DC390F UW, Santa Cruz Soundcard, Eizo 17'' F56 and Eizo 21'' T965' Selfmodded case with 2 PSU's.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TDB


                    why is 1600*1200@4fsaa faster than 1280*1024@4fsaa?

                    does it fallback to 2fsaa in high-resolutions?

                    what is the bottleneck? it doesn´t seem to be fillrate or bandwidth.
                    I don't know, but probably the resolution of 1600x1200 was just better optimized than 1280x1024 in that driver release ?
                    Despite my nickname causing confusion, I am not female ...

                    ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
                    Intel Core i7-3930K@4.3GHz
                    be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 2
                    4x 8GB G.Skill TridentX PC3-19200U@CR1
                    2x MSI N670GTX PE OC (SLI)
                    OCZ Vertex 4 256GB
                    4x2TB Seagate Barracuda Green 5900.3 (2x4TB RAID0)
                    Super Flower Golden Green Modular 800W
                    Nanoxia Deep Silence 1
                    LG BH10LS38
                    LG DM2752D 27" 3D

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I am able to run my TH setup at 3840x1024x32 @ 100Hz. So the refresh limitation in TH is somewhere beyond 100Hz.
                      I should have bought an ATI.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Mailed him!
                        According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The answer I got!

                          :
                          Hi Oskar,



                          It does seem that the 2 LCDs on the secondary port limited the resolution to just 60Hz on all 3 monitors, hence the 22” monitor failed to go beyond that resolution. It still looks radical on 1 primary CRT and 2 secondary LCDs. I’ll run a separate update article on different CRT and LCD setups using TripleHead soon, as I had not managed the time to do the Parhelia on different monitor setups due to the short buffer time we got before returning the card.



                          Thanks for the highlight, and do keep me posted on any feedbacks on my article. I will want to make my next TripleHead Update article as accurate as possible, so any feedbacks and highlights from the folks at M.U.R.C will be much appreciated.



                          P/S: Please pass the message down in the thread you showed me below.



                          Cheers,

                          Aaron
                          According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            BTW, did anbody accidently press the "visit our sponsor" link. Guess what company is their sponsor, hm...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              That HWZ moron is quite wrong..

                              HardwareZone wrote:
                              Of course, while the TripleHead feature does seem to be heaven sent, there are some issues to consider about it. For one, TripleHead requires a minimum resolution of 2400x600 in order to stretch your desktop to three monitors. At that resolution, most monitors will not even be able to refresh beyond 60Hz (75Hz is the minimum recommendation when using CRTs).

                              TDB responded:
                              Is that true? anything under 85hz is unacceptable to me. I thought that each monitor could, for example, run in 1280*1024@85hz, does triplehead limits the refreshrates?
                              One possibility that the GENIUS *cough* at Hardwarezone did to screw up his config resulting in what he either interpreted erroneously or described erroneously in his article is replacing the default "Plug And Play" monitor driver with the driver file of his specific monitor. In my own use I noticed that in any 'stretched desktop' mode using 2 or 3 monitors that if I replace "Plug and play" monitor driver with my monitor's driver (inf file), that progs like Reef Demo, etc. error with "Unsupported resolution/refresh rate'.. Setting monitor driver back to plug'n'play fixes it. It's apparent to me why, but I won't get into it here. In any case, this reviewer should've checked with Matrox Tech before doing them the disservice of barfing his article onto his website..

                              The Parhelia has been pissed on by enough of these unobjective so-called 'review' sites. If it wasn't for me giving the P the benefit of the doubt when I decided to go ahead and buy it, despite all the uncomplimentary one-dimensional reviews I had read in weeks prior, the Parhelia would've never had the chance to prove itself to me how it has: the best all-around video card I've ever owned. Given, I've either owned or tested&returned just about every generation hi-end card from 8 years ago to now up to Gainward Dual-DVI Ti4600, Nvidia Quadro4 900XGL ($1300), Radeon 8500AIW, various Appian cards, Matrox G's, etc, which means I'm not blindly just defending my purchase, for I surely wouldn't have gone on to buy FIVE more P-Retail's at work in addition to the one I bought for home.

                              Sorry if its not the case, but I really hate those certain types of self-important yet inept so-called 'reviewers' and 'hardware experts' out there that have jumped on the bandwagon of this nifty little scam involving setting up a 'review' website with a halfway decent visual layout made by a graphically-talented buddy of theirs that gets paid in pirate software CD's rather than money, then soliciting banner advertisers to subsidize bandwidth costs, getting vendors to give or lend them free hardware products to play around with under the guise of 'reviewing', which consists of some variation of getting home at the end of a tough day working in CompUSA's returns department, saying hi to mom and asking if UPS dropped off any boxes with words-in-big on them like "Asus/Nvidia/ATI/WD/Intel/AMD/etc" and if so bringing them down to his bedroom in mom's basement to unwrap the goodies and install in the Supa-Dupa NEON-lit PC rig, proceeding to play around 30 minutes to make his 'assessment' of the product, and then slobbering the 'results' onto his website, all the while popping back twinkies like tic-tacs. Maybe HWZ isn't guilty of this to the extent I describe, but many are.

                              In conclusion, I hope HWZ and any other 'reviewers' check with a vendor's tech supt. in future reviews prior to spouting off on their website to make sure that any DUMB-END-USER issues are eliminated from the review. After that, go nuts: I have no problem with true and actual limitations being bashed once they're double-checked.

                              Joe T.
                              Last edited by testjoe; 14 September 2002, 10:41.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X