Triple-head not support 3 DVI?

[RoundSparrow]

How come I feel like Matrox is always behind the need?

I use Windows 2000 for 2D only, I don't play games. I'm now starting to use Windows XP too.

For 2 years, I was a Matrox G400 + G550 user, both retail DualHeads. I would encounter odd crashes (video corruption) on both cards with an Intel mainboard... but the crashes only happened every 3 or 4 days of 18 hour use, so it wasn't easy to reproduce.

I just didn't have the time to keep working with support to track down the problem. I reformatted Windows and re-installed, new mainboard, would still have it. When time came to decide to give up DualHead or not...

The Last 6 months
==================
Since giving up DualHead was on the table, I was open to other options.

Despite the expensive price, I broke down ($) and purchased a Gainward TI4600 the day the came out, the only TI4600 card that had dual-DVI.

I also got two Planar 17.4" LCD panels, both DVI. 1280x1024 (highest resolution that the Gainward will drive both at DVI).


Comment on the Matrox G550 dual DVI
===============================
Why didn't I go with Matrox then? The crash problems with two different cards, but it wasn't just that. I didn't like the cable setup on the Matrox G550 Dual-DVI model.

When you need cables of 10' for your install, DVI is a must-have, as even the highest-quality VGA cables show interference at 10' (at least I can see it, and I tried several different cables, all high quality).

The Matrox card uses that oddball "spliter thing" that means you can't just use standard replacement DVI cables. At least I didn't want to mess with it.


Today
=========
I'm looking to add a third display, so Matrox new card is an option - right?

No - it won't let you do tripple-DVI!

My Gainward Ti46000 setup has been perfect, the behavior has been identical to what I was used to on my Matrox G550 Dual-Head. I've not had a single crash I could attribute to the video adapter/drivers (again, I use only 2G Windows stuff).

Why would I choose the new Matrox card over just getting a PCI card that supports DVI? Then I could have all 3 at DVI...?

Matrox, why didn you produce a card that doesn't have 3 DVI ports? Just include 3 DVI to VGA converters like Gainward did.

[K6-III]

Probably because that version would be too expensive for me to afford....and they want to start with what is more mainstream...

[rylan]

The matrox card supports higher DVI clock speeds, so adding another 165MHz transmitter chip and the associated routing for it would increase the cost of the board considerably.

[Cobos]

Not to mention that I'm pretty sure the backplane of the card is not high enough itself to support 3 DVI plugs. At least if you don't want to get the plug in the way of some strange case constructions... And then you need a splitter or a extra connector anyway, and of course the price issue. If Matrox would have gone for 3 DVI you can be pretty sure they would all have been good quality output, thus expensive components.

Cobos

[K6-III]

Well....they could have done one of the connectors via the G550 Dual DVI dongle, but that is hardly the point...

[RoundSparrow]

Yha, but triple-head isn't mainstream.... it is high-end.

For me, I can get 3 17.4" or 19" Planar monitors for the same price as one of the Apple Cinema displays... that is high end!

If you just want cheap, you could get 3 PCI Matrox cards and have that...

[WayneHu]

I do not know why Matrox did not do those luxury designs on AGPPro version of Parhelia. Instead, they come out with Non-total solution with the high price tag, which still approaches a professional Graphics adapter.

I do not know why the Matrox marketing guys think that most people will spend $400 to buy a good 2D/3D quality card, so so 3D speed, and a lot of professional features, which most people seldom use? Especially there are still some usage limitations for the multiple display of current Parhelia on the professional use.

For the professional usage, I think few customers would stop choosing a AGPPro MB and paying the additional $200 bucks if the Parhelia can support 3 DVI output, AGPPro slot, and larger heat-sink (since this card will require a AGP + a PCI slot space to put on 3 DVI-connectors...). Hence, higher clock rate with better performance.

Think more about the mid-range product, which is for the mid-range workatation. Matrox does not have any Graphics adapter + the acceptable 3D performance within the $150~250 price range. No one would suggest G550 if the main purpose is on 3D application, not 2D. If the main focus is on 2D application, the price of G550 is a little bit expensive. However, the price of Parhelia has gone beyond the price tag for the mid-range workstation.