DUAL-Monitor-System with ATI&NVIDIA

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frank Lauter
  • Start date Start date
F

Frank Lauter

Hello!

I have 2 VGA-cards in my PC.

1x ATI RADEON X850 -> 2 Monitore
1x NVIDIA RIVA TNT2 Model 64/Model 64 Pro

With XP there was no problem...

After the Vista installation a new driver vor the NVIDIA-Card was loaded.

But the second VGA Card still did not work!

German Error:
"Dieses Gerät wurde angehalten, weil es Fehler gemeldet hat. (Code 43)"

Any Ideas?

RGDS Frank

Sorry for the CC
 
It's a limitation of Vista that if you use multiple graphics cards then they
must use the same driver, thus they must be from the same chip company (i.e.
both nVidia or both ATI).

Besides, the Riva card won't support Aero so you'd want to upgrade that
anyway.
 
Hi

Slugsie said:
It's a limitation of Vista that if you use multiple graphics cards then
they must use the same driver, thus they must be from the same chip
company (i.e. both nVidia or both ATI).
Click to expand...

I hope this is a bad joke... because I think that 80% of all Multiscreen
user have different VGA-Cards...
Besides, the Riva card won't support Aero so you'd want to upgrade that
anyway.
Click to expand...

No not realy because this second VGA-Card is only for Screen 3 of 3...

Frank
 
Unfortunately, no, this isn't a bad joke. :(

Doesn't matter if its for a secondary monitor or not. Unless all cards
support Aero, you won't get Aero. :(
 
I think your estimate is way off. I'd guess the majority of multi-screen
(vs. multiple display card) users have only one card in their system, since
most current cards have the ability to drive two displays. And if I DID
have a second display card in my system, I would probably buy a card from
the same manufacturer of my original card because of brand loyalty and a
desire to try to minimize driver hassles, like maintaining the current
version of the drivers and conflicts between cards/drivers.

Just my $0.02.

Clint
 
Hi
I think your estimate is way off. I'd guess the majority of multi-screen
(vs. multiple display card) users have only one card in their system, since
most current cards have the ability to drive two displays. And if I DID
have a second display card in my system, I would probably buy a card from
the same manufacturer of my original card because of brand loyalty and a
desire to try to minimize driver hassles, like maintaining the current
version of the drivers and conflicts between cards/drivers.
Click to expand...

For 2 Screens no problem, but for more this is a problem....

You don't find the same (Powerfull) VGA-Card one for AGP one for PCI...

e.G. 2 NVIDIA PCIexpress have problems with the IRQ (and the lanes) and
don't run together (XP)
Just my $0.02.
Click to expand...

Just my 100 bucks... :-)
Clint
Click to expand...

Frank
 
That's quite obviously not the case, otherwise SLi would never work. If you
put two identical PCI Express cards into an SLi motherboard, but disable
SLi, then you get two working independant high powered cards.

Anyway, unfortunately for you running 3 or more more monitors is incredibly
rare, and considered a specialist solution. There are hardware solutions
that do allow you to run more than 2 monitors off one graphics card (highest
I have seen was 8 monitors IIRC)
 
Hi

Slugsie said:
That's quite obviously not the case, otherwise SLi would never work. If
you put two identical PCI Express cards into an SLi motherboard, but
disable SLi, then you get two working independant high powered cards.
Click to expand...

Yes of course but I have "only" AGP & PCI -> New Mainbord 200 Bucks New CPU
900 Bucks New 2 PCIx VGA Cards 700 bucks... So 2100 to get Vista running?!
Anyway, unfortunately for you running 3 or more more monitors is
incredibly rare, and considered a specialist solution. There are hardware
solutions that do allow you to run more than 2 monitors off one graphics
card (highest I have seen was 8 monitors IIRC)
Click to expand...

rare? Yes for the consumer market but for developer I think nearly everybody
has at least 2 Screen... (ok that works with one VGA card...I know..)

Frank
 
Frank Lauter said:
Hi


Yes of course but I have "only" AGP & PCI -> New Mainbord 200 Bucks New
CPU 900 Bucks New 2 PCIx VGA Cards 700 bucks... So 2100 to get Vista
running?!
Click to expand...

I was responding to your statement:

"e.G. 2 NVIDIA PCIexpress have problems with the IRQ (and the lanes) and
don't run together (XP)"

Not suggesting a course of action.

You should be able to quite cheaply purchase a PCI card that matches your
AGP card chip manufacturer and add additional screens that way. Total cost
probably around $100, maybe less if you buy second hand/ebay.

(oh said:
rare? Yes for the consumer market but for developer I think nearly
everybody has at least 2 Screen... (ok that works with one VGA card...I
know..)
Click to expand...

Not true. I am a software developer for one of the largest IT companies in
the world, and no-one where I work uses dual monitors (mostly becuase the
company wouldn't fork out for the cost).

The fact still remains, probably 95%+ of the market only uses a single
screen. Of those that use more than 1 screen, probably 99%+ only use two
screens. So more than that is a vanishingly small market.

(BTW, I've been a dual screen user at home since Windows 98 was in beta)
 
You should be able to quite cheaply purchase a PCI card that matches your
AGP card chip manufacturer and add additional screens that way. Total cost
probably around $100, maybe less if you buy second hand/ebay.

(oh, and 200+900+700 <> 2100 ;) )
Click to expand...

There's also no reason to spend $900 on a CPU, and $700 on 2 PCI-Express
graphics cards. You can get an E6300 processor for <$200, and the graphics
cards for < $150 each (7600GT or equivalent), all prices from NewEgg.
Considering the age of your system (AGP and PCI), it's likely that those
upgrades will blow the doors off your current setup, even with the cheapest
C2D processor and a low/mid-range cards. Of course, you'll likely have to
buy new memory, too.
Not true. I am a software developer for one of the largest IT companies in
the world, and no-one where I work uses dual monitors (mostly becuase the
company wouldn't fork out for the cost).
Click to expand...

Really? That sucks! I couldn't imagine doing development work without dual
screens anymore. And even my last company, who was broke/cheap, scrounged
together the money to get dual screens for the developers (nobody else) when
confronted with a few whitepapers. At my current contract, EVERYONE has
dual LCD panels, either 17" or 19". That surprised me.

Three screens would be nice at times, but I don't have the physical desktop
space for them. And at work, I'm limited to what my laptop can drive, so
dual displays include the display on the laptop.

Clint
 
Clint said:
I think your estimate is way off. I'd guess the majority of multi-screen
(vs. multiple display card) users have only one card in their system, since
most current cards have the ability to drive two displays. And if I DID
have a second display card in my system, I would probably buy a card from
the same manufacturer of my original card because of brand loyalty and a
desire to try to minimize driver hassles, like maintaining the current
version of the drivers and conflicts between cards/drivers.

Just my $0.02.

Clint
Click to expand...

I havent run 2 discrete cards since the old matrox days with dual mystique
cards under NT4.0. Since then ... I have run Matrox G400, G450, and a
GeForce 4 Ti4200.

Current card is a dual dvi GF7900GTX.

All of my dual head systems have been single card, esp the soluitions I have
build for businesses and traders.
 
Back
Top