Do you have a DisplayPort monitor or one of those active adapters?
If yes, the adapter, the monitor or the GPU is faulty. If no, it isn't supposed to work.
You can only use DP + DVI + HDMI or DP + DVI +DVI. You can't use DVI + DVI + HDMI.
If you have 3 DVI/HDMI monitors you need a active DisplayPort -> DVI/HDMI adapter. The 5000-series cards have only 2 DVI/HDMI clock chips so you can't use more than 2 DVI/HDMI monitors at once without an active adapter.
Hmm. Now I am just confused. Yes, one screen has to be connected to the DisplayPort connector if you are using three monitors and you need an active adapter if it isn't a DisplayPort monitor.
The thing that confuses me what does that have to do with HDMI-DVI adapters or HDMI extenders?
The thing that confuses me what does that have to do with HDMI-DVI adapters or HDMI extenders?
You are not being clear at all what you have and you don't have. Anyway what you should get is 2 more monitors the same size as your hdtv, that is 19" and 1360x768. Then you would have total of three 19" screens with 1360x768 which would work well with triplehead gaming.
Studio 9? Is it Dell or HP or what?
Easiest way to find out what your motherboard is by opening the case and taking a look. It should say the model somewhere on the board. But while you are at it, you might as well look for the actual thing why I would have liked to know you motherboard model, that is what kind of expansion slots you have available.
If you have only one PCI-E 16x slot. PCI-E
(The longest slot in that picture). It will make using SoftTH a bit difficult since you can't plugin a second normal GPU. There are PCI-E 1x GPUs, but they are rare and expensive. You can also plug a PCI-E 16x card to a shorter slot, but it will require a bit of tinkering, which I don't recommend doing unless you know exactly what you are doing.
So in conclusion if your motherboard only has one PCI-E 16x slot, it will make SoftTH solution more difficult.
So they are both 19" and 1360x768? You could use those two in your triplehead setup so you would need to buy only one monitor. You would lose the Outgauge display though, but it is an option if you are short on budget.
Your motherboard, your GPU, your monitors (the model), your OS. And most importantly your budget.
Nope. But I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. The GPU does not know (or care) if there is a HDMI-HDMI or HDMI-DVI cable attached to the HDMI connector. The signal is exactly the same.
Unless you are using the wrong DVI connector with the HDMI connector. The HDMI connector has shared circuits with the one of the DVI connectors, so only one of those works at the time (afaik). Have you tried plugging the DVI cable to the other connector?
Or have you checked if the HDMI connector works at all?
Thanks. I forgot about that one.
DVI and HDMI are signal compatible. Only thing you lose is the sound.
Actually I am using one of those adapters at the moment and can confirm it works.
I don't know what your friend was thinking. Quadro2 is not a gaming GPU and it's old (it's based on GeForce 2).
I am guessing your 19" hdtv is either 1366x768 or 1440x900. In either case you want the other monitors to be the same resolution and size for triple head gaming.
DVI and HDMI are essentially the same. HDMI has sound also, but you don't have to use that feature if you don't want to. It doesn't really matter which of those two you use. The GPU you have/will buy will have max one HDMI so, you might need a get a DVI-HDMI adapter if your monitors of choice don't have DVI connectors.
As for actually using triple head in games you have three choices:
1. Any GPU + Matrox Triplehead2Go (TH2G costs something like 300€, only works if all three monitors have same resolution)
2. Radeon 5000-series GPU (only works if all three monitors have the same resolution)
3. Any two GPUs + SoftTH
Case 3 is the cheapest if you already have powerfull enough GPU (you only need to buy a very cheap 2nd GPU).
Case 2 would be good, except that you need one DisplayPort monitor/adapter (adapter price is about 100€) to make it work. The Radeon 5000-series has cheap options starting from 150€. But for triplehead you probably should look for 5850, which is about 250€. They might be out of stock in most places at the moment.
Keep in mind that the GPU needed for triple head gaming has to be quite powerful.
For the 4th monitor in case 2 you need one additional GPU (a cheap one will do). In case 3 you can use the 4th connector in the 2 GPUs. In case 1 you can use the 2nd connector in the GPU.
PS. I wouldn't ask that friend any PC related advice in the future.
I am guessing your 19" hdtv is either 1366x768 or 1440x900. In either case you want the other monitors to be the same resolution and size for triple head gaming.
DVI and HDMI are essentially the same. HDMI has sound also, but you don't have to use that feature if you don't want to. It doesn't really matter which of those two you use. The GPU you have/will buy will have max one HDMI so, you might need a get a DVI-HDMI adapter if your monitors of choice don't have DVI connectors.
As for actually using triple head in games you have three choices:
1. Any GPU + Matrox Triplehead2Go (TH2G costs something like 300€, only works if all three monitors have same resolution)
2. Radeon 5000-series GPU (only works if all three monitors have the same resolution)
3. Any two GPUs + SoftTH
Case 3 is the cheapest if you already have powerfull enough GPU (you only need to buy a very cheap 2nd GPU).
Case 2 would be good, except that you need one DisplayPort monitor/adapter (adapter price is about 100€) to make it work. The Radeon 5000-series has cheap options starting from 150€. But for triplehead you probably should look for 5850, which is about 250€. They might be out of stock in most places at the moment.
Keep in mind that the GPU needed for triple head gaming has to be quite powerful.
For the 4th monitor in case 2 you need one additional GPU (a cheap one will do). In case 3 you can use the 4th connector in the 2 GPUs. In case 1 you can use the 2nd connector in the GPU.
PS. I wouldn't ask that friend any PC related advice in the future.
Last edited by geeman1, .
Reason : Added note about needing a DisplayPort monitor/adapter with Radeon 5000-series
Depending on how far the other building is you might need a powerfull and/or directional antenna.
I think they will be mainstream in not too distant future. The prices have dropped dramatically this year. Speed has risen and features like TRIM have made drives more usable in the long run. As said, SSDs won't probably beat HDDs in size/price ratio any time soon, but they don't have to.
At this rate maybe year from now and SSD for system drive and HDD for storage will probably be quite mainstream already.
Interesting. Didn't know that.
The point is moot though if it still won't work with XP. The problem isn't that people don't have DX10 GPUs, the problem is that they are still using XP.
The point is moot though if it still won't work with XP. The problem isn't that people don't have DX10 GPUs, the problem is that they are still using XP.
I read that from between the lines.
Seems odd.
Could you post screenshots of the whole LFS window and the settings you have?
Could you post screenshots of the whole LFS window and the settings you have?
I can give you a free server if you give me free money.
Lol wut. :wtf2:
I think it's more grown up to listen to music you like instead of still being worried about what other people think.
It's a bit unfortunate, but in gaming environment you have to make some compromises. Some people play this with cheap speakers and people live in apartments where there are people next door, etc. If the dynamic range between slow road cars and the race cars would be realistic some people wouldn't be able to hear the road cars because they would be so quiet and their speakers wouldnt have enough volume.
And if you would have your volume to XRG levels a BF1 driving nearby would blow your ears out. Or worse yet, some background app might give out a bleep or something and your ears would be blown out again.
Having real dynamic rations would be neat, but quite impractical.
morpha said it pretty much. Games can be made to support all versions of dx, but you need two versions of the engine. One engine that is made with dx7/8/9 and another one that is made with dx10/11. Dx10 and up is not compatible to dx9 and earlier.
There are still many people with older hardware and OSes (mainly people with XP) that are in games target demography which is why almost all games go the extra distance and make the game have both dx9 and dx10 engine. There is currently only one game I know that only has Dx10 engine (Shattered Horizon).
With LFS' in mind having two separate engines would be less than optimal and would increase the already long development times.
Last edited by geeman1, .
The difference is measurable. Boot times is where it is easiest to see the difference because it's long operation in total. SSD will decrease all load times, but with ordinary apps the difference might be small. With games the difference is bigger because there is more to load. The more you do random access, the more SSD will benefit.
There are HDD benchmarks will show you that seek times on SSDs are nearly non-existant. If you really want some measurements to back it up.
Whatever you think SSDs are worth it at the moment is up to every one to decide. The premium is coming down all the time (and drives are getting better). At the moment I think the prices are reasonable if you are looking to build an high performance computer. For simply storing data (images, videos, music, etc) a regular HDD is still the way to go of course.
SSDs are not the end of all computing technology, but they are simply a step forward to making the mass storage device less of a bottleneck.
There are HDD benchmarks will show you that seek times on SSDs are nearly non-existant. If you really want some measurements to back it up.
Whatever you think SSDs are worth it at the moment is up to every one to decide. The premium is coming down all the time (and drives are getting better). At the moment I think the prices are reasonable if you are looking to build an high performance computer. For simply storing data (images, videos, music, etc) a regular HDD is still the way to go of course.
SSDs are not the end of all computing technology, but they are simply a step forward to making the mass storage device less of a bottleneck.
You need two different graphics engines to make game support dx8/9 and dx10/11 cards.
Sentenced - The Cold White Light
Symphony X - V
Dream Theater - Octavarium
Poets of the Fall - Signs of Life
Pendulum - Hold Your Color
Winds - The Imaginary Direction of Time
Sigur Rós - Takk...
Ayreon - The Human Equation
Pain of Salvation - Scarsick
Rise Against - The Sufferer & the Witness
Symphony X - V
Dream Theater - Octavarium
Poets of the Fall - Signs of Life
Pendulum - Hold Your Color
Winds - The Imaginary Direction of Time
Sigur Rós - Takk...
Ayreon - The Human Equation
Pain of Salvation - Scarsick
Rise Against - The Sufferer & the Witness
The 120Hz monitors only come with 1680x1050 at the moment. The are 1080p models coming later at some point, now there are only few prototypes afaik. Those 1680x1050 models are all 22" and they cost about 300$.
Note that TVs which claim 120Hz (or higher) aren't really 120Hz. They are really only 60Hz, the rest of the frames are interpolated inside the TV to make the image smoother. So those won't work for you.
Note that TVs which claim 120Hz (or higher) aren't really 120Hz. They are really only 60Hz, the rest of the frames are interpolated inside the TV to make the image smoother. So those won't work for you.
It says there that even though the benchmarks didn't show a huge difference the overall performance was snappier.
That's what SSDs are out to do. HDDs are currently one of the biggest bottlenecks in computer systems. Even though you have free RAM and your CPU would breeze through processing the data the HDD is still keeping things back because the disk has to spin to the right spot before any data can be read. Altough this takes only few seconds in modern hard drives, it adds up and it becomes significant. On SSDs there virtually no seek times at all, the drive will start reading right as the request comes. The thing why benchmarks and programs don't directly show the advantage is that they were designed with the old HDDs in mind so everything is loaded in to memory while starting the program. That startup is made faster though. Infact starting anything is faster with SSDs, that's where the snappy feeling comes.
Last edited by geeman1, .
That Xbox 360 ready on monitor is a marketing gimmick. Any monitor with a HDMI or DVI is Xbox 360 ready, so that makes almost all monitors Xbox 360 ready (except those really cheap monitors with only VGA).
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG