{ "numMessagesInTopic": 19, "nextInTime": 1069, "senderId": "1QKQ6QZbEPf4dDdtoFU7PxVn_OCB6yvuhZsuWO8C2QCOyP_8nilpdBBBKMg7TuXJsDd0S7lWaocBkte5q9R6BTnbgMTwdjgrxspVMg", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: [IBM_T2X_LCD] Re: Quad SLI announced in a DELL box at CES", "from": "David Evans <key-yahoo@...>", "authorName": "David Evans", "msgSnippet": "If you are just wanting the maximum number of heads, just go for a PCI-E expansion box. For instance, this one gives you 19 PCI-E x4 slots (x8 connectors): ", "msgId": 1068, "profile": "makyen1", "topicId": 1052, "spamInfo": { "reason": "12", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 159820010, "messageBody": "
\n\n--- In IBM_T2X_LCD@yahoogroups.com, "coolwhs" <jjsmithdds@s...>\nwrote:\n \n
\n>
\n> FX3400's seem to be pretty cheap with SLI, while not perfect,\nthey
\n> are a heck of a lot less than the HR256.
\n
\n(Equally the consumer dual link cards, now 7800s can do it.)
\n
\n> Besides, the reaction time
\n> of the monitor is so great, that the refresh rate shouldn't really\n
\n> come into play when using it for games (why anyway?????)
\n
\nMany pixels for strategy games - not that I have the time.
\n3DMark05 is very pretty at full resolution, albeit around
\n1fps on my 6800GTo. Guess I'll have to try 3DMark06, now.
\nIt's never going to be the ideal monitor for an FPS, though,
\neven if cards with enough memory bandwidth appear.
\n
\n> Just
\n> imagine the new maximum amound of monitors though... 8... all\ngoing
\n> at 12.5Hz. A 73.6 MP desktop size, 30720 x 19200 Drool.....
\n
\nDon't forget to add some Quadro FX600s (two T221s off each)
\nin the PCI slots. Something would eventually break, I'm sure.
\nIf some of them are DG5s, you can do 25Hz with eight dual link
\nconnections, if you like expensive graphics cards (or four
\nDG5s and four DG3s at a slightly more reasonable price). I
\nwonder if nVidia are ever going to produce a new PCI card?
\n
\n> LMAO @ T220, wasn't its refresh 4Hz or something rediculously slow\n
\n> like that, not to mention being $15,000+?
\n
\nThe one I saw (at SIGGRAPH01), which I *think* equated to a T220
\n(wasn't called anything that catchy at the time), I believe was
\nthe same 41-ish Hz of the DG3. The thing is, it didn't have an
\ninternal frame buffer, so it had to be driven from the modded
\nG200. I suspect the problem was with the G200 not having any
\nbandwidth left over to do anything, and with trying to transfer
\n36MB of desktop redraw information down a 32-bit PCI bus, rather
\nthan with the monitor itself. I'm guessing, though, and any of
\nthat information could be nonsense.
\n
\nAnd yes, I'm glad the prices (at least refurbished) dropped
\na bit.
\n
\n--
\nFluppeteer
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n \n