5614 Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 and then sell your other graphics cards on ebay or something and you will easily make up the money you spent on the converter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callipygous Posted September 27, 2004 Author Share Posted September 27, 2004 alrighty then... whats the come to in good old american? why will it work better? what is twinview? will i have to pay for it? also, wont that just put all the load on one card? wont that hurt the performance of my game? sell it... riiiiight. i dont think you quite understand the quality were talking about here. the graphics card im talking about (pci) would probly sell better as a coaster or an antique than a graphics card. european/american translation: maplin = radio shack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossoi Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 Radio Shack will stock it. There is still demand for PCI graphics cards as people want to run secondary graphics who don't have double headed cards so you should get more than what you pay for the DVI adaptor back if you bung it on Ebay. £3 is approx $5. It'll work better 'cos it's a better card designed to run two monitors. Twinview is a free app that should be on the driver disc for the card or can be downloaded from the manufacturers website. Performance may be affected but it's not gonna make it any worse than the current situation of not working at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callipygous Posted September 28, 2004 Author Share Posted September 28, 2004 right now it only doesnt work when i try to do both. im wondering if when im just playing my game with the other screen on desktop, will i have worse performance this way(noticable) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 if you only had one screen, more resources will be dedicated to it, allowing for better quality. having a 2nd monitor will reduce [fractionally] the quality of each other, because resources have to be split between them. you will only really notice this difference when you have two high resolution processes running on each monitor. when you have two very high resolution processes trying to run on both monitors, you will run out of resources... which is why this thread was started. leaving your 2nd monitor on desktop should not reduce the quality of the 2nd monitor noticeably, although there will be a slight difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 I've browsed over this topic, and really, I think YT is on to something. I use an ATI radeon 9800, which has 3 outputs, on standard monitor, one RCA, and one S-Video. I have a 17" kds plugged into the standard port, and I switch between a television or projector for the RCA port. Anyhow, using this setup, I am able to watch movies on the projector, while playing games or really, anything else I want to do. One thought to your problem, is direct X. For one, you do have the most up to date DX, right? If so, trying playing a game which does not use direct x. Perhaps there is an option in warcraft to set it to GL drivers or something? I think the 2 cards might be screwing it up a bit, if I can do it with one. However, I can't say for certain that I have watched movies while playing DX games. But if you've got a graphics card with dual outputs, GOOD GOD MAN, use that one card and save some resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callipygous Posted September 29, 2004 Author Share Posted September 29, 2004 which resources are we thinking are saved by using one card instead of two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 well, a card that could be used in another computer a slot, that could be used by another card and uhh, I dunno man! Should have chosen a different word then resources, seeing as how that is generally a term used to describe some kinda computer power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 i think that his set-up is fine. what YT was talking about is just another more normal and cheaper way of doing it. the amount of directX resources used up will not differ with the amount of graphics cards used. however using seperate graphics cards will allow each monitor more power [as, instead of having 2 monitors from one graphics card, you have 2 monitors, each with their own graphics card] theres not much advantage in having 1 graphics / 2 monitors, other than keeping a free slot and costing less. however it will put more strain on the single graphics card and will not vary the strain on the directX resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callipygous Posted October 2, 2004 Author Share Posted October 2, 2004 well i got the second gfx card for free. so there goes the cost issue : P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now