{ "numMessagesInTopic": 12, "nextInTime": 2390, "senderId": "dnJw2gzBwJ-XoYbqs0lyRYHTEfrnZW58fAxjkIZKUKz2-DurQSrC-LhELZOdgLM7MN43mb7t4ixuvYzeX83Q_-ORAx1bCPgX_Q", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: T221 + nVidia Quadro FX3500: cables setting", "from": ""surus81" <corradogizzi@...>", "authorName": "surus81", "msgSnippet": "Ok, now the CB issue makes sense to me. I hope next time I read this NG will be at 3840x2400@48 Hz :) Regards, Corrado", "msgId": 2389, "profile": "surus81", "topicId": 2379, "spamInfo": { "reason": "6", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 301658752, "messageBody": "
>
\n> Corrado,
\n>
\n> My guess, and I'm really guessing, is that there isn't such a thing
\n> as a "dual-DVI-to-LFH-60 cable" (assuming you mean "dual-link DVI").
\n> Dual-link DVI is not the same as having two single-links in one head.
\n> So, you couldn't take a dual-link output and split it into two single-
\n> links just by separating pins. The extra set of pins give you
\n> additional bandwidth, but all going to one place.
\n>
\n> The LFH60 carries two sets of outputs that can be split into two
\n> single link cables. The Matrox card used with the DG1 has two LFH60
\n> connectors that are connected directly to the DG1. Those two
\n> connectors were actually carrying four screens. I guess the Matrox
\n> card was just not capable of more than 41Hz.
\n>
\n> Dual-link was designed to allow increased bandwith to handle large
\n> monitors (2048 x 1536 resolution @ 60Hz). That wasn't enough for the
\n> DG5's 3840 x 2400 @ 48Hz, but it could be attained by unsing a single
\n> link in conjunction with the dual link. However, the T221 needs a
\n> LFH60 input, hence the converter box. My guess is that the circuitry
\n> in the converter box is splitting the dual link into two single links.
\n>
\n> I'm sure I'll be rescued from my ignorance -- by others in here who
\n> are much more experienced and knowledgeable than I am -- if my
\n> guesses are way off.
\n>
\n> Carlos