TH2G DP Edition help

Maddrox · Post by **Maddrox** » 01 Jul 2009, 21:26

This next week I am planning on getting three monitors, and the TH2G DP edition when it's in stock. My goal is 5040x1050.

2.4ghz DualCore AMD cpu
GeForce 9800 GTX+ Somewhat oc'd. Will upgrade if necessary

http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0294222
That is the monitor I will be getting three of... Wasn't on the list but looked like a good one. ^^

The information on the Displayport connects aren't very specific. I want to be able to get this together and not have any surprises. D:

From what my understanding is, please correct me if i'm wrong..
I will need to get a DVI to Displayport connector to connect the TH2G DP to my graphic card, and 3 more Displayport to DVI for the three monitors?

Then I would be able to just hook it all up and from there get it to work right? If I had that wrong then please correct me.

JKeefe · Post by **JKeefe** » 01 Jul 2009, 21:41

Yep, that's wrong. You will not be able to adapt DVI to DisplayPort to drive the TripleHead2Go DP Edition. Only native DisplayPort can be connected to the TripleHead2Go DP Edition. The only adapter that will work is a miniDP-to-DP adapter, for Macs.

If you don't have a laptop with a DP connection, then you are better off getting a TripleHead2Go Digital Edition.

The TripleHead2Go DP outputs can be adapted to DVI, just not the input.

Maddrox · Post by **Maddrox** » 01 Jul 2009, 21:45

Thanks for the quick response, with the Digital edition would I be able to run at 5040x1050 with three monitors? It doesn't look like it.

JKeefe · Post by **JKeefe** » 01 Jul 2009, 21:46

Sure, but at 57 Hz instead of 60 Hz. ATI drivers coming soon are supposed to enable this mode at 59 Hz as well. Here is the full list of currently-supported TripleHead2Go Digital Edition modes.
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/resolution/digital/resolutions.html

Maddrox · Post by **Maddrox** » 01 Jul 2009, 21:50

Sure, but at 57 Hz instead of 60 Hz. ATI drivers coming soon are supposed to enable this mode at 59 Hz as well. Here is the full list of currently-supported TripleHead2Go Digital Edition modes.
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/resolution/digital/resolutions.html

Thanks again, major help ^^

Now i'm seecond guessing the monitor because only 2500:1 contrast ratio, people keep telling me it'll suck >_>

Dem Pyros · Post by **Dem Pyros** » 01 Jul 2009, 22:04

Now i'm seecond guessing the monitor because only 2500:1 contrast ratio, people keep telling me it'll suck >_>

For five years I used an LCD monitor with a 300:1 contrast ratio, and it still looks better than some of my friend's xxxx:1 ratio monitors.

Don't get too caught up in the numbers.

Maddrox · Post by **Maddrox** » 01 Jul 2009, 22:05

[quote]Now i'm seecond guessing the monitor because only 2500:1 contrast ratio, people keep telling me it'll suck >_>

For five years I used an LCD monitor with a 300:1 contrast ratio, and it still looks better than some of my friend's xxxx:1 ratio monitors.

Don't get too caught up in the numbers.

Alright good to hear, I didn't think it'd be that much of a difference, if noticeable so i'll stick with the plans.

Sir Drip · Post by **Sir Drip** » 12 Jul 2009, 00:45

You will not be able to adapt DVI to DisplayPort to drive the TripleHead DP Edition. The only adapter that will work is a miniDP-to-DP adapter, for Macs.

The TripleHead2Go DP outputs can be adapted to DVI, just not the input.

WHAT! Do they not make an adapter for the input side?

Post by **skipclarke** » 12 Jul 2009, 03:04

No. It cannot pass through.

Sir Drip · Post by **Sir Drip** » 12 Jul 2009, 09:30

Yet...They FAIL again!

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 12 Jul 2009, 18:38

Yet...They FAIL again!

How so, pray tell?
Just because your hardware doesn't support it doesn't make it a failure.
Those that do have the hardware for it are probably very appreciative.

Sir Drip · Post by **Sir Drip** » 12 Jul 2009, 19:42

[quote]Yet...They FAIL again!

How so, pray tell?
Just because your hardware doesn't support it doesn't make it a failure.
Those that do have the hardware for it are probably very appreciative.

Ok...Who makes and sells gfx cards with a Display port? Enough said!

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 12 Jul 2009, 19:51

Matrox, for one, but there are others too.
Seek and Ye shall find.

[email protected] · Post by **[email protected]** » 12 Jul 2009, 20:01

Wow your the one who fails, the Display Port edition of the TH2G is for... you guessed it gfx cards with display port!!!

Post by **thales100** » 12 Jul 2009, 20:01

Im playing at 5040x1050 57Hz with my Matrox TripleHead2Go Digital + 3 x 22" monitors, working just fine. You failed Sir Drip, not Matrox.

Sir Drip · Post by **Sir Drip** » 14 Jul 2009, 21:26

Matrox, for one, but there are others too.
Seek and Ye shall find.

Seeked and Ye found a "Load of Crap"!
If anyone has purchased a Matrox GFX card for gaming, they need a head exam. With the 2 ATI cards I found on Newegg, both would be lucky to run BF2 @1680x1050, let alone across 3 screens!

Wow your the one who fails, the Display Port edition of the TH2G is for... you guessed it gfx cards with display port!!!

How is it that I fail? Matrox is targeting the 5-10% of the computer population with this product. When in fact.... they needed to build a "REAL" new product for the 90+%. But no...instead of building a unit with 2 duel DVI inputs to power 3 screens, they would rather change the conections on their old product and call it New. You see....between the VGA,DVI(DIGI) and the DP models they all share 95% of the same internal componets produced 8+ years ago. This is how they FAIL!

90%>10%?

Im playing at 5040x1050 57Hz with my Matrox TripleHead2Go Digital + 3 x 22" monitors, working just fine. You failed Sir Drip, not Matrox.

Hey... nice setup you have there. I myself find that the 22" displays looks the best @5040 over the 24"and 26" displays. Im using the ViewSonic 22" displays, However due to my 1 1/2 year old GFX cards, Im having to run the latest and greatest FPS @3840 with good frames at max settings. So I guess I fail in not updating my GFX cards(waiting on the 300 series).

Oh....BTW Why the QX9650 @ $1000 bucks than the Q9650 @$300? They both have the same performance and overclock the same. Now that smells like a $700 dollar "TOTAL FAILURE" to me! But who's pointing fingers!

EDIT: Oh I see... you are harping on me from my info from my sig. I havent updated it, I think ill leave it like it is for people like you to have something to do!

Post by **thales100** » 14 Jul 2009, 21:30

Now that smells like a $700 dollar "TOTAL FAILURE" to me! But who's pointing fingers!

Mmm hehe :lol: im the "playing succesfully at 5040x1050" guy, you arent. :wink:

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 14 Jul 2009, 23:06

Man, I love the internet. You meet such nice, cheerful people on it.

I would guess they made it for people using laptops that have DP. It seems that many actually do have that type of connector. So, Matrox make a unit that will better suit their needs. Gaming isn't the only thing TH2Go is used for. Having a easy and quick way to connect a laptop to multiscreens is probably very useful to some business reps, developers, marketing folks, etc. that find it more useful to be ble to display docs, etc. over multi screens rather than having to minimize windows and such.

It is probably something they have requested often and Matrox delivered.

Sir Drip · Post by **Sir Drip** » 15 Jul 2009, 03:55

It is probably something they have requested often and Matrox delivered.

Butch..after looking at some of your post, you seem to be a nice guy, and I say this with all due respect.

Take a good look at these fourms, and a few others, and tell me what is the most requested and how Matrox has delivered? It's not laptop support with DP outputs!

Just think of how many people that have purchased this product and sent it back because it didn't work for them. Then you have people that are scared to spend $800 and up for the 50/50 chance it's going to work for them. And now we are starting to see displays (in the working list) not working at 57hz and now it has changed to 55hz. Hell I think there is someone here on these fourms that beleave that the 57hz-55hz requirments has killed 2 of his displays (though not confermed).

1 of 2 things has to happen here, but not both, to fix this for all!

1)Matrox needs to get off their ars's and put together a RD team and produce a NEW product for the 90%. Com'on Matrox feed the box with 2 DVI inputs! One as a pass thru to the center display and the other dvi input to drive the side displays! So everyone on the face of the planet can use your product @60Hz! ATI and nVidia both support Multi-display in their control panals? Use it!

2) I like this one....With w7 and the new ATI/nVidia cards around the corner. It would like to see driver support for TRI disply modes! If and when this ever happens, this would fix the (lack of) 60Hz@5040 support and Matrox all together and forever!

Peace.

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 15 Jul 2009, 09:26

I'm just guessing, although probably correctly.
If businesses did approach Matrox for a solution to the DP connection issue, they would have done it directly. It is doubtful they would have posted on a public forum that is mainly frequented by gamers.

I understand your frustrations. I have faced the same thing when ISI made F1 Challenge 99-02. I had requested that support for TrackIR to be in it. By some misunderstandings they put in support for a device that was no longer available once F1C was released. The units had been discontinued. It took a while working with some coders to get TIR working via a couple 3rd party apps, but for for awhile I was scratching my head wondering why Gjon? He explained what had happened and as we all know rFactor (ISI's following project after F1C) has native support for TrackIR.

So things happen. I too want a unit that can do 3x1920x1200@60Hz. And I imagine we will get it, sometime. I'm certain Matrox wants to offer it. They know it would be a very strong sales point. Development takes time, especially when it comes to something that hasn't yet been done. Much testing is required and many changes are made before the final product reaches the market. It is far better for them to take their time to insure that the unit will do what it is suppose to do and be reliable doing it. Nothing worse then releasing a item to the public, only to find problems arise in the field. It not only costs loads of money to correct it, it cost reputations as well.

Widescreen Gaming Forum