is this a good monitor 4 triplehead2go digital

[JKeefe]

We are not talking about the same thing

Can you explain to me what it is you're talking about?

(the question of triple 1680 is irrelevant for matrox because of the DVI limitation).

Then why does Matrox say "the maximum pixel clock supported by the dual-link DVI output could, in theory, enable the triple 1680x1050 resolution"?

But as I said SoftTH is limited by the problem with the hw acceleration that runs on two chips and over the pciex bus.

True, but the PCI-E interface limits framerates in SoftTH in all resolutions. If SoftTH could match the framerates possible with a TripleHead2Go I net a lot more of us would just use SoftTH. After all, it's free and it's a lot more flexible than the Matrox hardware.

[starfighter]

[quote]We are not talking about the same thing

Can you explain to me what it is you're talking about?

That I really do not know anymore because I am a confused because of our communication in two threads. :oops:

(the question of triple 1680 is irrelevant for matrox because of the DVI limitation).

Then why does Matrox say "the maximum pixel clock supported by the dual-link DVI output could, in theory, enable the triple 1680x1050 resolution"?

I do not know but somebody here said the dual dvi is the limitation and I hold this information for true.

So this is again new information for me. :)

But as I said SoftTH is limited by the problem with the hw acceleration that runs on two chips and over the pciex bus.

True, but the PCI-E interface limits framerates in SoftTH in all resolutions. If SoftTH could match the framerates possible with a TripleHead2Go I net a lot more of us would just use SoftTH. After all, it's free and it's a lot more flexible than the Matrox hardware.

Here I have nothing to add. 8)