Nvidia and triplehead2go

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 23 Nov 2009, 20:15

This is a copy of a driver feedback form I have sent to Nvidia. I have been scouring the forums trying to find a solution to my inability to get support for 5040x1050 under windows 7 x64. Needless to say I am frustrated.

"Well, I had provided you with lots of feedback but I was unable to send it - limit of 2000 characters. Here it is. Please work with matrox to ensure your product works with Matrox's triplehead2go. You will keep more customers that way. With your present drivers it is not supported, but your old drivers do. I would use those, except they do not work. Ie: I can get my desktop resolution at 5040x1050, but not any games will work under 185.20. My understanding is that this is an api issue. I would hate to think that this was intentional in order to push your next product meant to compete with Ati's Eyefinity. That would leave cusomters like me in the dust, and you without a cusomter as I will not support you if this is the case. Thank you for your time. "

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

Thanks!

bsoder · Post by **bsoder** » 24 Nov 2009, 20:31

Might post that on the various manufacturer's forums... EVGA, BFG, etc.

Post by **BHawthorne** » 24 Nov 2009, 22:20

Might post that on the various manufacturer's forums... EVGA, BFG, etc.

nVidia venders do not have direct control over nVidia's driver quality control. As a former EVGA forum moderator I can safely say it would be a waste to go to EVGA about the driver issue. It needs to be addressed with nVidia.

bsoder · Post by **bsoder** » 24 Nov 2009, 22:35

Oh, I'm aware that they have no direct control - probably no control at all, actually. Doesn't mean getting the issue out there in multiple places is a bad thing, and just because they don't have control over the process doesn't mean they don't have any influence.

Post by **BHawthorne** » 24 Nov 2009, 23:25

Oh, I'm aware that they have no direct control - probably no control at all, actually. Doesn't mean getting the issue out there in multiple places is a bad thing, and just because they don't have control over the process doesn't mean they don't have any influence.

They aren't going to find merit in passing along your singular concern is what I'm trying to get across. It's better to work with nVidia directly, because while they might say they'll pass it along to placate you, it isn't going to be remembered 15 minutes after you have a conversation with them. I delt with these people on a daily basis, their email and phone queues make it so your suggestions will get lost in the noise -- at least at EVGA anyways. To give you an example, every once in awhile I'd suggest something to certain EVGA management and it would get instantly forgotten. Now if they didn't consider me important as one of thier longest standing forum mods I could only imagine what they'd think of a random suggestion from just anyone. The signal to noise ratio is just too much for that to be a successful method.

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 25 Nov 2009, 00:53

Hi

I don't know if it would help or not, but maybe post at the NVIDIA forums.
Then post a link to the thread here and those of us using NV/Matrox can post in it. Hopefully we can keep it alive, without the same few people bumping it.
When someone ask about the drivers and such trying to get 5040x1050, we can ask them to please post in the thread at NV as well.

I would also suggest this thread be made for both Vista 64 and Win7, since drivers for both seem to have the same issue. Vista still has a few years of life in it, so it too should be included, imo.

Anyway, if you do happen to do this, I will be sure to post in the thread and also spread the word around at other sites. Most likely there are people that have simply given up on getting the highest res and rarely drop by here. So, I'm all for trying to rock the boat at NV and spreading the word that we need a real solution to this problem.

Oh yeah, I too believe NV will be releasing a card to do multi screen gaming rioght from the card. However, in a way it probably will not hurt if they were to get things straightened out with regards to reaching the max res with TH2Go. Most likely, whatever they come out with will allow much higher res than the limit we have with TH2Go. So, anyone thinking of going to multi screen gaming would probably want to go with it, rather than TH2Go. Who knows though, maybe they do plan a new driver release that will not only support a new line from them, but also work correctly with TH2Go.

whismerhill · Post by **whismerhill** » 25 Nov 2009, 04:17

I don't think the "threats" are really necessary nor really have an impact

after all I wonder how many customers would they lose by not fulfilling such a request ?

but then that's only my opinion.Plus it's possible that there's no other way to get a bit of attention.

Butch_N · Post by **Butch_N** » 25 Nov 2009, 05:37

Hi again

I didn't mean threats, as that would do nothing.
However, maybe a thread over there with people asking for support might help to get the ball rolling.

I have no idea how many may have contacted NV about this issue. Email may or may not have any effect. But just maybe a thread signed by those of use that want a driver that works might turn the lights on, especially if a large number of us do post in it.

I could be wrong and it may not help one bit. It's just a suggestion. Should this happen, I would hope everyone would be respectful when posting. I think we stand a far better chance by showing we support NV and are asking they support our needs.

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 25 Nov 2009, 16:43

*sigh*

I have become VERY disheartened with Nvidia over the past few months. A little background might help. I have been an Nvidia customer since I swapped out my voodoo3 card for a Geforce. They have made some marvelous strides in performance and helped to set the standard for many years by incorperating competative features into thier drivers, making regular driver releases and pushing the boundaries of price/performance.

However, they have also demonstrated an aggressive business marketing model, where you have to read carefully between the lines. Example? My previous purchase was a 3d vision kit. Now I had been doing 3d gaming since the days of quake 2, and really got into the whole shutterglasses thing. Sometime, nvidia went from supporting these 3rd party endeavors to creating thier own and simply pushing those as the "only" alternative.

So, buying into the hype, and reading up on the information Nvidia had released I bought a setup. Remember, these types of setups are not cheap. Like many of you can understand with th2go setups, the price is prohibitory. Well, I thought if the support is anywhere as good as it previously was I can't go wrong. Well I did. I believed them when they said that they were going to release opengl support, for example, as many of the titles I prefer are opengl and not directx.

So where was the promised support? It arrived late spring in the form of driver support. Exclusively for professional apps and (edit:) Quattro cards. Workstation cards that cost ~ $1000 or more. They had provided this support about ten years before, on mainstream cards, and it had a huge following, but they saw fit to create an artificial cap, in order to, what I interpret as thier desire to promote thier product line. In short, I felt mislead and ripped off for supporting them.

So I'm left paying some $700 for a setup that while kind of cool in some applications (hey, it rocks for left4dead). I provided feedback and generated threads on thier forums before, but noone from Nvidia has ever responded.

So I decided to purchase a triplehead2go setup to go with my sli'd 275's (which were also very expensive). Previously (182.50) people could run full resolution on 1650x1040 displays via that driver version with Matrox's

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 25 Nov 2009, 16:50

Continued...

So I decided to purchase a triplehead2go setup to go with my sli'd 275's (which were also very expensive). Previously (182.50) people could run full resolution on 1650x1040 displays via that driver version with Matrox's software. Now all of a sudden we cannot. Anyone else notice this happens right around the time Nvidia's competition releases a product that does pretty much what triplehead2go does? Raise your hand if you think Nvidia has something up thier sleeve to compete?

Given Nvidia's recent track record, I propose Nvidia will have a (proprietary) solution for running games and apps accross multiple monitors at high resolutions really soon. But only on the latest Nvidia hardware.... because, you know, it can't be done anywhere else.

Sorry if I seem perterbed, but this is my experience lately with Nvidia. I don't think they are prepared to do anything except push thier own agenda. As a company you have to expect them to do this to a degree, but placing (artificial) limits on hardware performance via driver (as this is how I see it) in preparation for your next product launch seems a little unscrupulous to me.

But this is only how I am reading the big picture. I reserve the right to be wrong here.

bsoder · Post by **bsoder** » 25 Nov 2009, 21:46

Continued...

So I decided to purchase a triplehead2go setup to go with my sli'd 275's (which were also very expensive). Previously (182.50) people could run full resolution on 1650x1040 displays via that driver version with Matrox's software. Now all of a sudden we cannot. Anyone else notice this happens right around the time Nvidia's competition releases a product that does pretty much what triplehead2go does? Raise your hand if you think Nvidia has something up thier sleeve to compete?

Given Nvidia's recent track record, I propose Nvidia will have a (proprietary) solution for running games and apps accross multiple monitors at high resolutions really soon. But only on the latest Nvidia hardware.... because, you know, it can't be done anywhere else.

Sorry if I seem perterbed, but this is my experience lately with Nvidia. I don't think they are prepared to do anything except push thier own agenda. As a company you have to expect them to do this to a degree, but placing (artificial) limits on hardware performance via driver (as this is how I see it) in preparation for your next product launch seems a little unscrupulous to me.

But this is only how I am reading the big picture. I reserve the right to be wrong here.

This would be fairly stupid of NVIDIA, in my opinion. People who bought the TH2G are very likely the same people who would be buying NVIDIA's next-gen solution when they upgrade... but if NVIDIA treats them badly, they may look for alternate solutions out of spite.

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 25 Nov 2009, 22:18

I'd love to believe I'm just spouting conspiracy theories and such, but I just can't put it past them. After all, aggressive anti competative moves have been proven to work very well in the field of computers and hardware. I even tried reinstalling xp pro, but ran into so many issues with bluescreens I gave up. I began a complete wipe and reinstall of win7 x64 last night. I'll even try changing the dvi port used on the vid card in addition to all the regular driver stuff and custom resoultion stuff many of you have provided (thank you!).

Nvidia themselves have been very quiet on thier own boards. I never see staff or developers post there about anything.

For furthur circumstantial evidence I point to a recent interview/arguement I was reading on the launch of the 58xx line from ATI where they and Nvidia got to make general comments about the industry. When it came to the subject of physics enabled cards, ATI suggested they work together to develop an industry standard, so that like directx, physics acceleration might be implemented on a more widespread install base.

Guess how Nvidia responded? That's the kind of crap I get tired of. Remember how well 3dfx did with Glide.

whismerhill · Post by **whismerhill** » 26 Nov 2009, 11:35

if you want XP go the XP64 route, it has a win2k3 professional kernel...
however now that seven64 is out, it's probably the best choice if one has to choose between the two

Post by **BHawthorne** » 26 Nov 2009, 12:05

This would be fairly stupid of NVIDIA, in my opinion. People who bought the TH2G are very likely the same people who would be buying NVIDIA's next-gen solution when they upgrade... but if NVIDIA treats them badly, they may look for alternate solutions out of spite.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but nVidia does have a track record of doing stupid things in the past in relation to profit motive and their IP.

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 26 Nov 2009, 15:52

[quote]This would be fairly stupid of NVIDIA, in my opinion. People who bought the TH2G are very likely the same people who would be buying NVIDIA's next-gen solution when they upgrade... but if NVIDIA treats them badly, they may look for alternate solutions out of spite.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but nVidia does have a track record of doing stupid things in the past in relation to profit motive and their IP.

Exactly my point! While competition helps to drive markets and innovation from sheer competition, particularly when the opponents are technology leaders, usually the public wins. However, I find it suspect that what once worked now does not. Funny that.

I was going to try the xp route because it's my understanding that there are no issues with th2go and xp. I just simply have not had any success getting proper native res from my monitors under 7x64 (yet!). After reading in another thread about Matrox stating that one of the issues they have encountered is the Nvidia api, and that they are trying to get cooperation from said company to ensure compatability, all I could think was "#@%!". Here we go again.

So either a) Nvidia can't remember how to implement high resoulution graphics accross muliple devices
b) They have different teams supporting different os's and they don't talk to each other at all OR
c) It's done on purpose.

Post by **BHawthorne** » 26 Nov 2009, 18:38

So either a) Nvidia can't remember how to implement high resoulution graphics accross muliple devices
b) They have different teams supporting different os's and they don't talk to each other at all OR
c) It's done on purpose.

Option D, you're not a quantifiable part of thier market-share, so your needs are secondary. :wink:

Beazil · Post by **Beazil** » 26 Nov 2009, 20:24

Touche! :D

Widescreen Gaming Forum