Geforce MX

[LC1104]

I don't get this. I love my G400MAX and the reason I won't get rid of it for a Geforce is becasue I use Dualhead and I got the rainbow runner g-series. Now I am kind of interested in the Geforce MX cuz it has dualhead and kicks the g400max's ass in opengl and direct3d. I figure I'll get an add-on tv-tuner somewhere. But here's my question, why doesn't nvidia add on dualhead to one of their top end cards? why on their value card. that's stupid if you ask me. If there were a geforce 2 gts with dualhead, i'd buy that.

[Rags]

You would buy it? Have you seen how their "Twin View" (dualhead) funcitions. Read some reviews, then post back.

Rags

[paulcs]

Rags is correct. Even the NVIDIA sites have pointed out that Matrox's dualhead implementation is more sophisticated.

The MX board is designed both for budget gamers and, I assume, the OEM market. Since dual monitor support has a number of work-oriented functions, particularly in the Content Creation field, it was probably a good idea to include the feature. I would expect NVIDIA and Elsa will eventually include it in an upcoming highend work station board once they get the bugs out.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Maggi]

As said above, NVidia's TwinView is nowhere near completion and lacks a lot of Matrox' DH flexibility.

Afaik there will be three flavors of TwinView:
one for TV output
one for 2nd VGA output
one for flatpanels

Matrox unified all of these into their DualHead.

[Dualbuzz]

Guys, you really underestimate Nvidia's Twinview. I think its lack of functionality will be cured with future driver releases (now Nvidia doesn't care much about Twinview, because they will be in mass production a little later).

And whats more, do you know that Twinview ALLOWS different resolutions in Windows 2000? (users say this) Surprise, surprise.

Maggi, all three flavors of Twinview can be found in one card, EVGA Twinview plus, and it costs $139 (and reviewers say its 2D is one of the best). I'm gonna buy it (In case I'll decide to buy a gaming card, but I'll still wait a little for Matrox G450 16Mb PCI, I've heard it will be really cheap, then I'll go for it

[paulcs]

New drivers aren't going to give the second head it's own dedicated DAC, which the G450 has. I've seen NVIDIA do magic with drivers, but that seems a bit much.

I've never tried the Dual Head function on my G400's, so I'm not sure what it's strengths and limitations are.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 15 September 2000).]

[Rags]

Dualbuzz,

And whats more, do you know that Twinview ALLOWS different resolutions in Windows 2000? (users say this) Surprise, surprise.

Show me the link to the win2k drivers that allow twin view on an mx. Please, I would love to see this for myself.

Rags

[Dualbuzz]

I don't know, where to find such drivers, I'm sure they use standard Geforce MX drivers.

Two quotes from Geforce2MX users (btw they are not happy with their boards at all - but I think they have some hardware incompatibilities)

****quote 1***
No. that is not true at all. While I can't get either monitor over 1024x768, I have run one monitor in 1024x768 and one monitor in 800x600 with the e-GeForce2MX TwinView Plus in windows2000. I don't know about Matrox, though, but what you said about the MX is NOT true.
***end of quote 1***

***quote 2***
I got 1024x768 and 800x600 going simultaneously too.

I think the limit now isnt the monitor (because I have that checkbox unchecked), but its the card. When I go to 'list all modes' for the card, 2048x768 is the largest mode listed for the card.

I'm thinking of just returning the twinview (since they're offering to take it back due to the memory mistake) and getting 2 regular cards for my dual-head luvin. Its kind of unfortunate- I was hoping nVidia could learn from matrox and make their dualhead more useful. Even if I got the res I wanted, horizontal span is awkward to use without basic pager functionality. Oh well...

***end of quote2***

This is a link to EVGA's (card maker) community board's thread, where this is discussed.
http://www.evga.com:8080/read?1153,25

[Greebe]

How about a valid link?

[Dualbuzz]

BTW, I told them its not possible, EVGA's tech told them, that its not possible, but they do not agree

*** from another EVGA thread***
Please note: Windows 2000 requires that the resolutions be the same on both monitors. This is an OS limitation - not a card or driver limitation.

eVGATech

---and the user answers

What worries me is that I ran one monitor in 1024x768 and one monitor in 800x600 in
windows 2000 with a twinview plus earlier today, just to see if i could.

why the wrong information?
---

***end of quote***

))))))))))

[Dualbuzz]

Either Nvidia's twinview is that good, or that was a stupid user, who forgot to take out his previous card from the machine.

Greebe, it seems that link used cookie on my machine. To find that thread you need to go

EVGA.com->Community Board->Geforce 2 MX -> Thread "twinview - limited mode choices?"

[Greebe]

OK, got it now (F***ing IE only sites piss me off)

I retried it again in NS and it'll load if one enters the full url to their home page http://www.evga.com/welcome/index.ihtml

Go figure

[This message has been edited by Greebe (edited 16 September 2000).]

[Joel]

"I was hoping nVidia could learn from matrox and make their dualhead more useful."

They would have if they had not gotten caught as soon as they did trying to steal Matrox's dualhead technology.

Not sure about it's (twinview) limitations when using two monitors but the primary monitor is limited to 800x600 when outputting to a TV. Not so with the Matrox card.

Joel

[Rags]

Sorry DuaLBuzz,

Has to be the same resolution, and it's a spanned desktop, just like the G400, but you can't go as high of resolution as the G400, much less the G450.

Rags

[Snake-Eyes]

Rags, go check out that thread. Looks like Dualbuzz was right. Even the person that originally posted the 'can't run different resolutions in Win2K' has rescinded his statement (after apparently seeing differently with his own eyes). As well, there's indications that very high resolutions are possible on both monitors (something like 2048 on the first with 1600 on the second, if I recall properly).

Big M needs to get their drivers fixed soon, because I know there's no way the nVidia hardware is better than the Matrox hardware for this purpose (..so it MUST be the drivers, I hope).

------------------
Ace