[reignofchaos]

6. Can I use the CrossFire platform to drive multiple displays?
A. Yes, the CrossFire platform will work with ATI SurroundView™ multi-monitor technology to enable up to 5 separate displays when not running in CrossFire mode.

CrossFire™ - FAQ

No 3D with multiple displays with CF enabled. As simple as that.

[ImmortalZ]

That page hasn't been updated for ages.

Here's a quote from HardOCP

CrossFireX allows Multiple Displays

One advantage to people that like to play games as well as get some work done (i.e. me!) is that it supports multiple displays with CrossFire enabled, whereas SLI does not although it has been promised (so has being able to scale GeForce SP clocks, but we have never seen that either.)

We tested this by having two displays hooked up in a dual-display fashion with two Radeon HD 3870 X2s in CrossFireX installed with CrossFire enabled. We can report complete success with this setup, we were able to play our 3D game fully accelerated on one display while there was 2D still being displayed on the second display. Once we exited the game we could easily go about our work. We are ecstatic to see this support, and thank AMD so very much for providing multi-display support now with CrossFireX.

As someone who reads driver release notes religiously, I knew this without looking at any website. You are welcome to Google and find evidence for yourself.

[reignofchaos]

^^Again.... even that doesn't say that you can span the 3D content across multiple displays. The second display was only showing the desktop. You can't have 3D content on two displays. As simple as that. You can have multiple displays but only one can show 3D content.

[ImmortalZ]

Ah.

I thought you were referring to how you can't use multiple monitors with Crossfire. Well, it is a step ahead of nV's case where you can't have more than one monitor active at all with SLI enabled.

[ImmortalZ]

Apologies for the double post, but there is one way to do multiple displays and multiple monitors in 3D - a Matrox TripleHead2Go.

[reignofchaos]

A single video card will accelerate two displays on two monitors. The trouble is when there are multiple video cards.

[JRD]

check out the new AMD Phenom X4 quad processor.

but yea the Q6600 or Q6700 processor will be more then enough..
in regards to the graphics card.. 8800GTS or GTX (320mb/512mb) will kill anything in its path.. for great prices check out tigerdirect.com
i dunno about the 9800 series yet. but the 8800 GTS is the most powerful gpu till now..

Also try avoiding sli. It some how just doesnt multiply the power like its suppose to..

Originally Posted by flipsyde

here is somthing to ponder about. i am planning to get a new system primarily for my work (which involves CAD and 3Ds max) and for occasional gaming. earlier i had plans of getting a dedicated system for my work and a PS3 for my gaming needs. but i have come to understand that games for the PS3 are not affordable right now and besides its 25k just on the console. so i decided to get a computer which can do both.

confusion started right from step one. processor. i have been a hard core AMD fan all this while. but lately AMD hasn't lived upto my expectations. the AMD 64 X2 processor was a bit disappointing. so when i jumped to the intel line i had quite a few options. i have shortlisted E8400 and the Q6600 both based on many user reviews and overclocking potential.

E8400 is a part of intel latest line 45nm core 2 duo processor line. runs @ 3.00ghz stock. Q6600 is a part of the older gen 65nm core 2 quad processor line. runs @ 2.4ghz stock.

both are pretty much on par when it comes to perfomance. while the e8400 runs games better the q6600 is better when it comes to video encoding and other multi tasking.

so which should i go in for??? 4 cored q6600 (old war horse and overclockers favorite) or the 2 cored e8400 (new kid on the block). the q6600 is currently the best cores for money proposition but its future is a question mark. e8400 is pretty rock solid for the near future with the latest architecture. i plan to keep this computer without upgrading for 3 years.

confusion again in the video card department. 8800GT has served well in many applications all these years. its a gr8 performer in SLI mode too. the new entrant in the market is the 9800GTX which costs USD $30 more than the 8800GT ($199 aganist $169). difference not being much which card should i go for?? time tested 8800GT or the 9800GTX. i hear the 9800GTX is 10-15% faster than the 8800GT.

and finally the motherboard. 780i offers gr8 value for a DDR2 mobo with 3 way SLI support and PCI-e 2.0 while 790i is currently top of the line mobo with DDR3 support. so which one??

please pour in your opinions. keep in mind that i am not looking to upgrade much for the next 3 years.

[reignofchaos]

Originally Posted by JRD

check out the new AMD Phenom X4 quad processor.

but yea the Q6600 or Q6700 processor will be more then enough..
in regards to the graphics card.. 8800GTS or GTX (320mb/512mb) will kill anything in its path.. for great prices check out tigerdirect.com
i dunno about the 9800 series yet. but the 8800 GTS is the most powerful gpu till now..

Also try avoiding sli. It some how just doesnt multiply the power like its suppose to..

Your knowledge bank needs upgrading. There are many cards faster than an 8800 GTS - 8800GTX, 8800 Ultra, 9800 GTX, 9800 GTX+, ATI 3870 X2, ATI HD4850, ATI HD4870, GTX 280, GTX 260 and 9800 GX2.

Also the top end Phenon 9850 X4 just about matches a Q9300 in performance. Intel Quads are way faster.

[ImmortalZ]

Meh, I need to stop posting at 2AM.

What I meant is that if you have multiple video cards and multiple displays, you can use a Matrox TripleHead2Go to use one DualDVI connector to drive three LCDs.

[flipsyde]

@ROC, Immortalz - guys you lost me. the reason i want to go for multi monitor display is not just for games. i use quite a lot of autocad + 3ds max and more desktop space really makes things comfortable. so that way as far as i can connect two LCD displays on a crossfire setup i;m good to go.

@JRD : buddy, there was a time when AMD was heading the board with their processors but now they are lagging behind quite badly. on the other hand i have now come to understand that their graphic cards are giving everyone else a run for their money.

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by flipsyde

@ROC, Immortalz - guys you lost me. the reason i want to go for multi monitor display is not just for games. i use quite a lot of autocad + 3ds max and more desktop space really makes things comfortable. so that way as far as i can connect two LCD displays on a crossfire setup i;m good to go.

Sorry about that

Yes, you can run multiple displays with Crossfire and they'll work for your workstation apps without a problem.

Originally Posted by flipsyde

@JRD : buddy, there was a time when AMD was heading the board with their processors but now they are lagging behind quite badly. on the other hand i have now come to understand that their graphic cards are giving everyone else a run for their money.

This is correct. Intel Core uArch gave AMD a whipping and their answer, the K10 (AKA Phenom), didn't live up to expectations. A recent spate of leaks about the performance of their 45nm parts give some hope though. At this time, Intel processors are the way to go.

[Blue_V]

"GeForce GTX 260 now sells for $299
GeForce GTX 280 card has dropped by $150 to $499.
$300 GeForce 9800 GTX dropped down to $200"

Nvidia Drops Prices on GeForce GTX 280 and 260 - Lab Notes by ExtremeTech

Glad ATI set a cat among pigeons Nvidia were running away with their prices.
Intel processors are over priced. Time to bring down the prices. Go AMD!

Respect the competition.

[reignofchaos]

Seems the GTX 280 is retailing at 449$ at many places now. Sounds like a decent deal. But seemingly the preliminary benches show the 4870X2 completely crushing that card. Infact in many apps, the X2 is actually faster than the GTX 280 SLI :P.

[ImmortalZ]

Indeed. The card comes with 2GB of GDDR5 - AMD can't be making much money on that considering how expensive GDDR5 is at the moment. But it's a gem of a card. Slap a full coverage waterblock on it and watch the clock speeds climb!

[Blue_V]

Originally Posted by ImmortalZ

Indeed. The card comes with 2GB of GDDR5 - AMD can't be making much money on that considering how expensive GDDR5 is at the moment. But it's a gem of a card. Slap a full coverage waterblock on it and watch the clock speeds climb!

Maybe they want to sell as much units as possible, all they have is max 1 year before nvidia can change the stakes. So do as much damage to them by under pricing. More sales, more people buying = more ATI fanboys?