{ "numMessagesInTopic": 11, "nextInTime": 483, "senderId": "SSEmJ_bS0OAdpW1-esxr4lGBsV1ZfEznrnLFoFkSRID5v0tDBgUcmPYB8y54TjieqTiAgiDkYsq_3WTJEwInOaKF06hDUw", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: Anybody tried Matrox HR256 with T221 DG3 ?", "from": ""p_duanra" <p_duanra@...>", "authorName": "p_duanra", "msgSnippet": "Thanks for the reply. ... I am not a gamer, not at all :-) so the 3D performance is not a real issue here. And alas, I have not been able to find any provider", "msgId": 482, "profile": "p_duanra", "topicId": 478, "spamInfo": { "reason": "0", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 204380680, "messageBody": "
--- In IBM_T2X_LCD@yahoogroups.com, "fluppeteer" <yahoo@f...> wrote:
\n>
\n> --- In IBM_T2X_LCD@yahoogroups.com, "p_duanra" <p_duanra@y...>
\nwrote:
\n> >
\n> > I consider buying a T221 DG3 for Christmas and would like to know
\n> > if anybody has tried it with a 4 x DVI graphics card.
\n> >
\n> > I read on Matrox site that the HR256 should be able to drive the
\n> > DG3 at full resolution and full refresh rate. Can anybody confirm
\n> > this by his/her own experience ?
\n>
\n> I believe it's designed to work, but it's very expensive and
\n> (I believe) a PCI card - meaning that any data which needs
\n> transferring from the computer will get there very slowly. If
\n> you're expecting to shuffle around 9 megapixel images, this
\n> may be a concern (or it may not be, because otherwise many people
\n> wouldn't be perfectly happy with their PCI T221 solutions...)
\n>
\n> The HR256 is also not particularly fast, as 3D graphics cards
\n> go. If you can find one, you might find a DG5 plus some form
\n> of dual link card (Quadro FX2000 or newer depending on how
\n> rich you feel and how fast you want it to be, a Realizm 200,
\n> or some FireGL cards, depending on the feature set you want)
\n> would come to a lower total. Even a Quadro FX4000 is only
\n> about the same price as the HR256, whilst massively faster,
\n> and my T221-DG5 (refurb) was $3300 - which isn't far off
\n> the prices I've seen for DG3s. If you're sticking to a DG3,
\n> though, the Matrox card is probably the best single card
\n> solution you can get. If you're expecting fancy 3D graphics,
\n> you might do better settling for 21Hz refresh and getting a
\n> faster graphics card...
\n
\nI am not a gamer, not at all :-) so the 3D performance is not
\na real issue here. And alas, I have not been able to find any
\nprovider for the DG5. There are a few DG3 vendors in Switzerland,
\nbut none for DG5. I could also consider getting the IIyama
\nequivalent, but this is DG3 if I got it right.
\n
\nI want the display to work with Developer Studio. I looked at
\nseveral current 1920x1200 LCDs and was disappointed with the
\nsize of the pixels. 100 dpi is definitely not enough; the fact
\nthat I see the LCD grid strains my eyes which have difficulty
\nto focus when I watch a white surface. I never liked the Trinitron
\nCRTs either. On my DELL laptop (14" 1600x1200) the pixels are about
\nsmall enough that I don't have this focusing problem. So 200 dpi
\nwould be a dream !
\n
\nMy current setup is a good old EIZO 6600-M (monochrome display
\nat 1920 x 1440, very sharp, no flickering, nice gray shades) and
\na 21" EIZO color CRT. But both have about 10 years now and I
\nfear they could fail anytime soon.
\n
\n> If you want cheaper, I'm not sure whether you can get a quad-head
\n> G450 series card to cope with a DG3 (anyone?) or you might find
\n> a couple of dual-head PCI cards which you could genlock together
\n> (probably a job for eBay).
\n
\nMaybe the G450 could do the trick, yes. But if you guys say that
\nyou can work with 21fps refresh rate without losing the mouse
\ncursor or the text cursor, then I'll settle to a simple bi-DVI
\nboard.
\n
\n> I'm not an expert, though, so research what you get (some BIOSes
\n> don't like big resolutions, some drivers won't cope, and some
\n> DVI transmitters are dodgy).
\n>
\n> > Or what other graphics card do you suggest using with the DG3 in
\n> > order to get the most out of it ? I have only AGP and PCI in my
\n> > system, and if I could still have a second display attached to
\n> > my system, it would be nice (e.g. on an old PCI graphics card).
\n>
\n> Depending on what you'd want to do, I'd be inclined to use the
\n> AGP for the T221 and the PCI for a CRT - but if you do a lot of
\n> gaming the reverse may be true of you. PCI graphics cards are
\n> cheap enough these days, although you won't get anything amazing;
\n> I got a 256Mb FX5200 card and the nVidia Dawn demo crawls (I think
\n> a Quadro FX600 is about the fastest you can get, but that's not
\n> saying much). They might disappear off the market as PCI-e becomes
\n> popular, though.
\n
\nI've still an old pre-AGP era MATROX card which worked quite well
\nfor simple 2D display with 1600x1200.
\n
\n> The mix works fine in my setup (AGP VP990Pro driving the T221 from
\n> both heads, not at full refresh, PCI FX5200 driving a CRT). I'm
\n> waiting for a 6800Ultra with dual link connectors, though.
\n
\nSo you can mix card models without problems. That's nice to know.
\nI feared I'd have to stick to the same card family in order to
\nget my desktop spread across several graphics cards.
\n
\n> That's my tuppence worth, but please don't presume I know what I'm
\n> talking about. :-)
\n>
\n> --
\n> Fluppeteer
\n
\nIt was nice to take the time to reply so exhaustively. Thanks again.
\n
\nPierre