Widescreen Gaming Forum

When it finally released it seems that it was a little more(than a little) hype/sizzle.

That should have been readily apparent, because there were no mention of the capability being a pre-existing enthusiast market. Where were their acknowledgment and comparisons to TH2G or SoftTH? It's as though ATI invented surround-screen gaming and just now released it upon the world. I was having a deja vu moment much like Al Gore "inventing" the internet. :lol: Kudos to them for putting it into the public eye, but it's less than genuine to gloss over the specifics that we're all painfully aware of. Both good and bad came out of this but overall we have more options now...which is a good thing.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com

er, I did do research, I read every single post in this forum before I sold my stuff.

They never mentioned that you can't have dvi+dvi+hdmi to dvi connector?

If they did mention anything about an extra adapter I'm 100% sure they didn't say how much it was going to bloody cost.

It's like selling a car and telling me I need a small part to make it work and not telling me that part was 10 grand.

er, I did do research, I read every single post in this forum before I sold my stuff.

They never mentioned that you can't have dvi+dvi+hdmi to dvi connector?

If they did mention anything about an extra adapter I'm 100% sure they didn't say how much it was going to bloody cost.

It's like selling a car and telling me I need a small part to make it work and not telling me that part was 10 grand.

Welcome to early adopter's remorse. It's the reason why many warned to hold off till a few brave souls figured out all the hidden issues for us all.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com

er, I did do research, I read every single post in this forum before I sold my stuff.

They never mentioned that you can't have dvi+dvi+hdmi to dvi connector?

If they did mention anything about an extra adapter I'm 100% sure they didn't say how much it was going to bloody cost.

It's like selling a car and telling me I need a small part to make it work and not telling me that part was 10 grand.

Problem was, no one knew. It wasn't until people had them 'in hand' that we found out that cheaper adaptors weren't going to be the answer. :(

I see a lot of complaints about dp to dvi. Has anyone considered dp to hdmi? My monitors will accept hdmi input as well as dvi. I don't know much about these things but maybe dp to hdmi would be better than dp to dvi.

I see a lot of complaints about dp to dvi. Has anyone considered dp to hdmi? My monitors will accept hdmi input as well as dvi. I don't know much about these things but maybe dp to hdmi would be better than dp to dvi.

You can not substitute the HDMI port for the 3rd port on the standard card as the HDMI port and the 2 DVI ports share the same 2 internal clocks. Only 2 of those ports can function at a time. The 3rd port has to be the DP port with how it's engineered. The issue has to do with the internal clocks allocated to ports.

DVI/HDMI on the standard card:
1 DVI port, 1 HDMI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter...or...
2 DVI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter.

DVI/HDMI on the 6-port card:
6 Mini-DP ports with 2 DVI/HDMI passive adapter, 4 DVI/HDMI active adapter.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com

[quote]When it finally released it seems that it was a little more(than a little) hype/sizzle.

It's as though ATI invented surround-screen gaming and just now released it upon the world. I was having a deja vu moment much like Al Gore "inventing" the internet. :lol:
Yea, it seemed like that to me as well, like they were the first ones to come up with the multi display stuff. The Matrox Parhelia came out like how long ago, 2002, 2003?

[quote]I see a lot of complaints about dp to dvi. Has anyone considered dp to hdmi? My monitors will accept hdmi input as well as dvi. I don't know much about these things but maybe dp to hdmi would be better than dp to dvi.

You can not substitute the HDMI port for the 3rd port on the standard card as the HDMI port and the 2 DVI ports share the same 2 internal clocks. Only 2 of those ports can function at a time. The 3rd port has to be the DP port with how it's engineered. The issue has to do with the internal clocks allocated to ports.

DVI/HDMI on the standard card:
1 DVI port, 1 HDMI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter...or...
2 DVI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter.

DVI/HDMI on the 6-port card:
6 Mini-DP ports with 2 DVI/HDMI passive adapter, 4 DVI/HDMI active adapter.

you have missed my point. I am not talking about the hdmi port that is shared. I am talking about converting the DP to HDMI which is a different thing altogether. Some monitors have an HDMI port input, so my question is, can we convert the DP to HDMI and avoid the DP to DVI (active) conversion? A DP to HDMI only costs $13.95 so I am wondering if it can be done.

wait, now you lost me, most posts talk about active dp to avi and now you are talking dp to active hdmi? I don't get all this active stuff. as far as I've read, you need to go DP to active DVI, I have not seen anything about DP to HDMI mentioned.

No matter how many ports there are on the card only 2 will have the clock that is needed for 'legacy' passive adaptors to work. So whether you are going to HDMI or DVI; for more than 2 monitors you need either:
a) a DP monitor or
b) an active adaptor
...for each monitor beyond 2.

EDIT: and an active adaptor is one with an independent USB connection (to provide power and, I guess, the clock timing).

Does that make sense?

_________________
Dipping bags at Mach1.9

[quote][quote]I see a lot of complaints about dp to dvi. Has anyone considered dp to hdmi? My monitors will accept hdmi input as well as dvi. I don't know much about these things but maybe dp to hdmi would be better than dp to dvi.

You can not substitute the HDMI port for the 3rd port on the standard card as the HDMI port and the 2 DVI ports share the same 2 internal clocks. Only 2 of those ports can function at a time. The 3rd port has to be the DP port with how it's engineered. The issue has to do with the internal clocks allocated to ports.

DVI/HDMI on the standard card:
1 DVI port, 1 HDMI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter...or...
2 DVI port, DP port with 1 DP to DVI/HDMI active adapter.

DVI/HDMI on the 6-port card:
6 Mini-DP ports with 2 DVI/HDMI passive adapter, 4 DVI/HDMI active adapter.

you have missed my point. I am not talking about the hdmi port that is shared. I am talking about converting the DP to HDMI which is a different thing altogether. Some monitors have an HDMI port input, so my question is, can we convert the DP to HDMI and avoid the DP to DVI (active) conversion? A DP to HDMI only costs $13.95 so I am wondering if it can be done.

wait, now you lost me, most posts talk about active dp to avi and now you are talking dp to active hdmi? I don't get all this active stuff. as far as I've read, you need to go DP to active DVI, I have not seen anything about DP to HDMI mentioned.

No, I did not miss your point. Specifically, they use the Dell/BizLink active adapter and then a passive DVI to HDMI adapter to do it. AMD specifically called both DVI and HDMI "legacy" ports and have stated they share the same 2 clocks. This was specifically done and shown in pictures from the launch event.

In any 58X0-series card it only has a clock setup to handle 2 passive "legacy" adapters. I still find it laughable that dvi/hdmi is called a "legacy" port, considering the market dominance. IMHO, that's pure marketing spin. DVI/HDMI is legacy only in the sense that it has bandwidth issues that most of us surround-screen gamers are painfully aware of. Then again DP also has an upper bandwidth limit too.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com