Problem with New Wide Modes on ATI Cards - Official Thread

xetura · Post by **xetura** » 28 Aug 2008, 19:11

This still doesn't work for me.

CY:G · Post by **CY:G** » 08 Sep 2008, 15:59

Ok, THIS seriously sucks.

I was about to buy my TripleHead2Go until i came across this thread.

I have a 4870x2.

3* 1680x1050 is imperative for me, can someone please tell me if they can get it to work at that resolution.

Im gonna hold on buying it until i get more info, Thanks.

p2987 · Post by **p2987** » 08 Sep 2008, 17:03

In Matrox website, their GXM System Compatibility Test for Radeon 4800 Series, max supported resolution is 3 x 1440 x 900 (with the latest firmware). And, footnote 2 says this resolution is not supported in Crossfire configuration.

So, if 4870x2 is part of the 4800 Series, then it wont get 3 x 1680 x 1050. If it is considered as a Crossfire config, it might not even get 3 x 1440 x 900. Actually, the best is to contact Matrox and confirm this with them.

Gordo972 · Post by **Gordo972** » 14 Oct 2008, 12:17

I need to renew my video card as mine is down (9800GX2). I was interested by 4870X2 but as I have read, there is a really problem with 3x1650*1080. It is a shame on 3 22' do not be able to run the native resolution of this screen.

Can anybody have a solution?

CY:G · Post by **CY:G** » 14 Oct 2008, 17:33

I need to renew my video card as mine is down (9800GX2). I was interested by 4870X2 but as I have read, there is a really problem with 3x1650*1080. It is a shame on 3 22' do not be able to run the native resolution of this screen.

Can anybody have a solution?

I havent found anything, im holding off buying a TripleHead To Go until i need to change my current Video Card (and x2) to a nVidia.

Post by **Downtown1** » 08 Nov 2008, 22:00

So have we heard anything new about ATI cards supporting 3x1650x1050? I am planning to upgrade to WS in the near future and don't want to go back to inferior Nvidia cards (unless of course Nvidia releases something better again)?

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 12 Nov 2008, 10:03

Depends what you play, but on both Fallout3 and Farcry2, both new games, the GTX2xx are faster than not only the 4870, but the X2 as well. Pricing for the GTX260 and HD4870 1GB are the same too..

And no (less) stupid software issues..

Post by **Downtown1** » 13 Nov 2008, 09:24

Depends what you play, but on both Fallout3 and Farcry2, both new games, the GTX2xx are faster than not only the 4870, but the X2 as well. Pricing for the GTX260 and HD4870 1GB are the same too..

And no (less) stupid software issues..

What a myth, they are not faster.. a GTX 260 SLI is roughly equivalent in power to HD 4870 X2, it depends on the games. Just look at something like this. Obviously when buying a new card you should only be looking at 2560x1600 benchmarks (almost as many pixels as 3840x1024), 1920x1200 or lower is pointless to those of us using Th2go.

Just so its clear that I'm not an ATI fanboy, I had an SLI 8800GTS 640MB up till a few months ago for 2 years (before that a GeForce 6800 GTX). When I upgrade every few years recently I've tended to do it soon after the new generation of video cards comes out (so that I can maximize my gaming experience for as long as possible).

Here's the deal.. the GTX 260 cost $400, the GTX 280 cost $650 at release date. You must admit these prices are ridiculous compared to the $550 the HD 4870 X2 debuted at.

Furthermore the HD 4850 and HD 4870 (for those folks not yet hooked on TH2Go) cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $200-$300 (don't remember exact details since I don't care, HD 4870 CF wasn't ever on my list since it only had 2x512MB=1GB total).

ATI came back with a vengeance, they had the best bang for the buck.. even the HD 4870 X2 was much cheaper than the GTX 280 which could barely keep up without being in SLI.

It is only after ATI gave Nvidia's asses a kicking that Nvidia prices took a deep dive, the GTX 260 is now $200 on newegg and the GTX 280 is a mere $380. That's almost 50% price cuts for both video cards.

So of course with that many price cuts it can now be competitive (just 4 months later) with the HD 4870 X2 which has only gone down to $490 after debuting at $550.

Finally, I don't have a clue as to what software issues you're talking about.. but after I switched to ATI I was finally able to use multiple monitors at the same time without having to turn off SLI first (a feature Nvidia has been promising for what feels like years now).

If Nvidia comes out with something competitive again in the next year, then great, I'll buy it.. but these things tend to go in cycles. Usually it takes 2-3 generations for the other company to produce the superior and cheaper cards, and right now ATI has just regained its mojo.

I extend my sincerest regrets to those who heavily overpaid by buying GTX 2xx near their original releases.

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 13 Nov 2008, 11:36

Your meandering tangent of a history lesson should be in another thread. No one is discussing or even interested in the launch prices of the GTX range. TODAY a GTX260 C216 and a HD4870 are similar price and performance, depending on the game. However on the ATI you get no WS Surround Gaming, Crossfire constraints with TH2G and no Stereo3D support.

Most reviews only test to 1920x1200, thats just reality.
Fallout 3, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/article/125-fallout3-performance/page4.html

Farcry 2, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/review/123-farcry2-performance/page4.html

I have 2 HD4800 range cards here that are sitting around thanks to ATIs resolution issues. They were my preference but nV make a fine alternative.

Its misleading and irresponsible to potiential new TH2G users to slate nVidia cards when TODAY, pricing and performance is very similar to ATI but support is not. In any rational mind, "competitive" is price and performance, the GTX2x0 are competing just fine in those regards.

You may have no incentive (other than TH2G) to go from HD4800 to nV, but that doesnt make them uncompetive. Dont you ask yourself what good all that high res performance is on the 4870x2 when you cant use it where you want? Its like driving a Mustang GT on slicks in the rain. Sure its fast on paper, but its not going where you want it.

Post by **Downtown1** » 15 Nov 2008, 06:13

Your meandering tangent of a history lesson should be in another thread. No one is discussing or even interested in the launch prices of the GTX range. TODAY a GTX260 C216 and a HD4870 are similar price and performance, depending on the game. However on the ATI you get no WS Surround Gaming, Crossfire constraints with TH2G and no Stereo3D support.

What the heck is Stereo3D and why would anyone care? I have an Audigy 2 and I get my 5.1 dolby digital sound just fine.

Secondly, my "history lesson" was rationale for why I bought an HD 4870 X2 and why it was far superior around launch day. Obviously for someone buying a card today the story would be different, but it does serve to demonstrate Nvidia's foolhardy beliefs they would never lose the high-end market even for a second.

Most reviews only test to 1920x1200, thats just reality.
Fallout 3, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/article/125-fallout3-performance/page4.html

Farcry 2, GTX260 = HD4870, GTX280 > HD4870x2
http://www.techspot.com/review/123-farcry2-performance/page4.html

CF and SLI doesn't scale very well at lower resolutions, so if you are looking at 1920x1200 benchmarks it's going to be a completely different story at 5040x1050. I recommend to all readers to only look at 2560x1600 or higher resolutions, doing anything else would be misinformed. When I was deciding if the HD 4870 X2 was worth the upgrade, I found at least 5 different benchmarks (on 5 different sites that is) that had a 2560x1600 resolution.

I have 2 HD4800 range cards here that are sitting around thanks to ATIs resolution issues. They were my preference but nV make a fine alternative.

What can I say, my condolences to you? If you bought an HD 48xx in July when it was released, then you really wouldn't have known that they were about to release a widescreen update. If you bought an HD 48xx after August 5th, then you didn't do your homework and check that ATI cards supported the higher resolution.

Its misleading and irresponsible to potiential new TH2G users to slate nVidia cards when TODAY, pricing and performance is very similar to ATI but support is not. In any rational mind, "competitive" is price and performance, the GTX2x0 are competing just fine in those regards.

It supports 3840x1024 pretty damn good, in fact, since I don't need to disable SLI before switching to my triple monitor alternate configuration (so applications are actually aware of my multi-monitor), which is more than I can say for Nvidia.

Granted it doesn't support 5040x1050, but once again I wasn't recommending anyone to buy ATI cards if they want to go the triple widescreen route.

You may have no incentive (other than TH2G) to go from HD4800 to nV, but that doesnt make them uncompetive. Dont you ask yourself what good all that high res performance is on the 4870x2 when you cant use it where you want? Its like driving a Mustang GT on slicks in the rain. Sure its fast on paper, but its not going where you want it.

It doesn't make them uncompetitive today, but I was speculating the long-term trend and nothing else. Maybe the next iteration of Nvidia cards will be better, but that would go against history.

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 15 Nov 2008, 12:45

This is getting too long winded now.

Stereo3D is a graphics technology, not "sound". :roll: "Who cares?" The same type of people that care about things like TH2G..

My girlfriend and I bought Radeons HD4800s as they were better value for money back at launch. We didnt plan on using TH2G at all. I had to convince her ATI had decent support and less "issues" these days (we both worked in support for a graphics/multimedia manufacturer years ago, so well aware of the history of problems and the background you arent privvy to on both brands). I now have egg on my face as she had to ditch her ATI and get GTX260s in SLI and I got the "I told you so". Then someone on a forum goes on about their awesomness and belittles their working competitor in a thread entirely devoted to them not working correctly!

I spent a good few hours during the week editing the registry and driver files in hex to try get the Radeon drivers to work in 5040x1050. In my research I found people complaining about their lack of real custom res support as far back as the year 2000! Even 3DFX had better res support apparently. Truely sad, nearly a decade of ignoring one of their customers needs.

Despite everything above, the one simple message to others is nVidia cards arent "uncompetitive" now. If you plan TH2G, you should get an nVidia card until ATI get their asses in gear. Unlike downtown I dont have a crystal ball, so can humbly only base this recommendation on "todays" reality. :lol:

PS: The 180 series drivers enables multimonitor support on SLI setups and it works fine.

Post by **Downtown1** » 16 Nov 2008, 02:13

It's really unfortunate that she decided to buy TripleHead2Go after buying the HD 4800s. Maybe I was unfortunate too by buying ATI a few months before the Nvidia prices dropped to be competitive (but then again I don't have 5040x1050 so it's a non-issue for me in the near future). People reading this thread that want to buy a Th2Go would probably know about the worse ATI support, so they'd be going in and buying an ATI card informed.

Not everyone has got 3 widescreen monitors lying around or the cash to buy them. I know I had bought one 19" monitor roughly every year (at first to increase my desktop productivity) and after 3 years I finally had 3x19" monitors, and then I bought a TripleHead2Go around the same time. To people like that it might matter less if they buy ATI or Nvidia since both cards work equally well on 3840x1024.

You pointed out Stereo3D, well I looked it up and it's a 3rd party technology, so why are you even bringing it up on a TripleHead2Go forum I don't understand? People here care about TH2Go support, want to complain about lack of Stereo3D support, go to their forums.

Nevertheless, I don't see why you can't just admit that the historic trends I've pointed out might have some merit. Lastly, I never recommended anyone to buy one card over the other, so I don't see why you keep bringing that up.

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 16 Nov 2008, 13:33

.

You pointed out Stereo3D, well I looked it up and it's a 3rd party technology, so why are you even bringing it up on a TripleHead2Go forum I don't understand? People here care about TH2Go support, want to complain about lack of Stereo3D support, go to their forums.

Nevertheless, I don't see why you can't just admit that the historic trends I've pointed out might have some merit. Lastly, I never recommended anyone to buy one card over the other, so I don't see why you keep bringing that up.

Stereo3D technology is not 3rd party, you didnt look very hard.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d_stereo.html . Supported on various nVidia chipsets, 3d glasses and 3d screens for a number of years now.

I brought it up as you harp on about historical trends and support, yet its a feature, along with several others, that nVidia support that ATI do not. Similar to lack of resolution flexibility.

My one and only issue with your post is that slating the only completely working product solution we have is bad for this community. If people were to believe you and agree nVidia cards became (overnight) uncompetitive, then they wouldnt buy into TH2G either (as WS is the defacto screen format and a requirement), this hurts all of us.

Ive made a solid case that support for everything but vanilla games playing is better on nV and has been since the "beginning". There is zero merit to looking backwards in the technology industry to predict the future. To illustrate this look no further than the 8800GTX series, its still a competitve and scalable card nearly 3 years after introduction. That has simply never happened before and who knows if it will again. The future is thankfully not predetermined, recurring patterns.

PS: I will however continue trying to get our HD4870s workling, they are terrific cards software problems not withstanding.

Post by **Downtown1** » 16 Nov 2008, 21:36

Stereo3D technology is not 3rd party, you didnt look very hard.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d_stereo.html . Supported on various nVidia chipsets, 3d glasses and 3d screens for a number of years now.

That's 3D Stereo, not Stereo3D.

I brought it up as you harp on about historical trends and support, yet its a feature, along with several others, that nVidia support that ATI do not. Similar to lack of resolution flexibility.

My one and only issue with your post is that slating the only completely working product solution we have is bad for this community. If people were to believe you and agree nVidia cards became (overnight) uncompetitive, then they wouldnt buy into TH2G either (as WS is the defacto screen format and a requirement), this hurts all of us.

Ive made a solid case that support for everything but vanilla games playing is better on nV and has been since the "beginning". There is zero merit to looking backwards in the technology industry to predict the future. To illustrate this look no further than the 8800GTX series, its still a competitve and scalable card nearly 3 years after introduction. That has simply never happened before and who knows if it will again. The future is thankfully not predetermined, recurring patterns.

PS: I will however continue trying to get our HD4870s workling, they are terrific cards software problems not withstanding.

What you seem to be missing is that while Nvidia may provide the only working experience for 5040x1050, in benchmarks for 2560x1600 it is not clearly superior to ATI cards, which is all I've been saying all this time.

Honestly, stop putting words in my mouth, I never suggested anyone buy ATI cards, just look at my other threads, I even suggest people buy Nvidia cards if they were going to use triple WS.

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 16 Nov 2008, 23:35

Ok agreed, we should stop ruining this thread now. :lol:

mattsimis · Post by **mattsimis** » 25 Nov 2008, 01:10

If anyone wants to send feedback to ATI regarding their lack of custom res and specifically 5040x1050 support:
http://support.ati.com/ics/survey/survey.asp?deptID=894&surveyID=486&type=web

GIP · Post by **GIP** » 07 Jun 2009, 19:20

I've made a new topic to describe the problem on ATI Catalyst forum:

http://forums.amd.com/game/messageview.cfm?catid=279&threadid=114396&enterthread=y

Post by **Paradigm Shifter** » 07 Jun 2009, 20:53

"No." seems to be AMD/ATi's stock answer for "Have you got any plans to...?"

fizzer · Post by **fizzer** » 04 Jan 2010, 19:12

Well having the Analogue TH2GO on a 4870x2 I was interested in upgrading to widescreen.....

Reading this I may have to go with Nvidia, we all know that Nvidia was always better supported with TH2GO's..

Still can't run Catalyst driver above v9.8 and get 3840 x 1024...

This kinda sucks as I've always been an ATI fan. If it wasn't for them and competition Nvidia cards would be stupid prices.

Throw the fact that I had an HD4870 512MB that just wouldn't boot see this thread with the Trippy plugged in and yet a different manufacturer of the same card would kinda shows the sometimes flaky support...

Is a shame. So anyone wanna buy a HD4870X2 :)

It's going on eBay soon before the price drops too much....

YiannisD · Post by **YiannisD** » 04 Mar 2010, 11:37

I can confirm 5040 x 1050 with Catalyst 10.2 .

I have a 4870X2. In case it helps..

I did a fresh installation using a 4th monitor. After I installed all necessary drivers, I installed PowerDesk.

Then I connected the USB cable to my TH2GO (DVI Edition) and then the 3 monitors.

After that and following the setup, I did see the 1680x1050 (independent mode).

The pc rebooted and then I had 5040 x 1050 on my 3 x 22'. I am rock steady for the past 3 days now and never had issue. Lets hope it s

Widescreen Gaming Forum