Running two different graphics cards for dual monitor setup

[PanzerKnight]

Hey all,

I'm looking to buy a 24" monitor to go alongside my current 19" and my 7600GT just won't cut the mustard! I was thinking of buying an 8800GTS and using that to run the 24" and let the 19" use the 7600GT.

I was wondering if this will actually work like this? I'm not trying to SLI (i know i wouldn't even be able to if I wanted) so I don't see why this wouldn't work but thought I would double check in case!!My motherboard is a Asus p5w dh


Also, will my 650w PSU be able to take this ?!

Any comments appreciated

thanks!

[SiM]

The 8800GTS (even the 7600GT) has 2 video outputs, so you can drive both monitors with one graphics card. If you still want to use both (not sure why) then it should work afaik...

[Rosaline]

I believe that, as long as they both use the same drivers, then you should be ok.

As for your PSU, the second, older, card will likely only be idling most of the time, and so you will probably be fine.

[PanzerKnight]

Thanks both for the quick reply.

I was thinking for running games etc on the 24" it would benefit from having it's own dedicated gfx card rather than sharing it with another monitor? That way I wouldn't have to buy 1 beeffier and more expensive card to power both

[SiM]

Thanks both for the quick reply.

I was thinking for running games etc on the 24" it would benefit from having it's own dedicated gfx card rather than sharing it with another monitor? That way I wouldn't have to buy 1 beeffier and more expensive card to power both

You can tell it in the settings to prioritise the 24" screen. So it won't make a difference for games... Unless you need to do something graphics intensive on the other screen at the same time... TBH, you are better off using one card, it would be less strain on the psu and motherboard...

[Agent]

I believe that, as long as they both use the same drivers, then you should be ok.

You can use different drivers on each card if you want as they are separate physical devices (its usually when using logical devices issues start to happen ).
I can say this from experience (quadro 3d stuff + normal Nv cards)

It is also easy to do with Nv/ATi cards.

Thanks both for the quick reply.

I was thinking for running games etc on the 24" it would benefit from having it's own dedicated gfx card rather than sharing it with another monitor? That way I wouldn't have to buy 1 beeffier and more expensive card to power both

Sharing makes no difference when it comes to games. You'll only be using one monitor for the game. The desktop sitting in the background takes pretty much 0 power up.

You have more of an issue because you're going from a low end, small memory card to a bigger screen.
There is little point having 2 3d cards to power 2 screens unless you have a specific reason to. Hardly any games support cross card rendering (Supreme Commander does for example).

[pauldarkside]

You can use different drivers on each card if you want as they are separate physical devices (its usually when using logical devices issues start to happen ).
I can say this from experience (quadro 3d stuff + normal Nv cards)

It is also easy to do with Nv/ATi cards.

This is not the case with Vista:

If multiple graphics adapters are present in a system, all of them must use the same WDDM driver. If there are two graphics adapters with WDDM drivers from two different manufacturers, then Windows will disable one of them. The VGA adapter will be enabled, and the second device will be disabled.

[Agent]

This is not the case with Vista:

I am utterly shocked at this. Its bloody retarded!

Do the current drivers from Nv and Ati use WDDM then?

[-iceblade^]

Vista is stupid.

I'm not trying to be irritating, but i know it can be done in certain circumstances. Which circumstances precisely, i don't know...

[pauldarkside]

I am utterly shocked at this. Its bloody retarded!

Do the current drivers from Nv and Ati use WDDM then?

I would imagine they'd have to since it forms part of Vista's requirements. I couldn't believe it either but as it stands, when using Vista, you're locked into using devices from a single manufacturer and a single, shared unified driver. If they (nVidia/AMD/etc) decide to drop support of one of your devices from their unified driver you're looking at a forced upgrade.

[CooperXS]

I never could get Radeon and FireMV working on single system with each own drivers set.

[Agent]

I would imagine they'd have to since it forms part of Vista's . I couldn't believe it either but as it stands, when using Vista, you're locked into using devices from a single manufacturer and a single, shared unified driver. If they (nVidia/AMD/etc) decide to drop support of one of your devices from their unified driver you're looking at a forced upgrade.

Yeah, its bad enough if they drop support, but what about the Quadro cards and other non-mainstream stuff?
They use a separate driver to the normal cards. So by the sounds if this, if you have two Nv cards in the system (one being a professional Qudro for example) its not going to work.

Love the reasoning though:

Background Notes: This restriction only affects a system that has WDDM drivers. WDDM was designed with stability as a key objective. Based on information gathered through Windows Error Reporting and the related Online Crash Analysis for Windows XP display drivers, Microsoft decided to simplify the graphics stack in Windows Vista.

The number of people that used this feature are going to be tiny. I've never had any issues using it either. I just don't see what they can get out of disabling it. Surely its my choice if I want to 'risk' system stability.
Or is it actually something to do with DRM in Vista?

[pauldarkside]

Yeah, its bad enough if they drop support, but what about the Quadro cards and other non-mainstream stuff?
They use a separate driver to the normal cards. So by the sounds if this, if you have two Nv cards in the system (one being a professional Qudro for example) its not going to work.

I remember when I had a Quadro 2 Pro I was able to use the GeForce drivers but looking at the list of supported hardware in ForceWare it's no longer the case with newer Quadro models.

The number of people that used this feature are going to be tiny. I've never had any issues using it either. I just don't see what they can get out of disabling it. Surely its my choice if I want to 'risk' system stability.
Or is it actually something to do with DRM in Vista?

If I remember correctly, Error Reporting was/is enabled by default in XP. Granted it does ask for user consent before submitting the error, but judging by the number of users who blindly accept "additional features" (spyware, etc) and click "yes" to virtually everything I'd be surprised if the number of reports Microsoft received are tiny.

I guess their reasoning is that the number of users wanting that feature (mixing pro and mainstream cards) are in the minority - those using the professional cards (for CAD/etc) aren't likely to have that in their multi-pupose/do-all machine.

As for DRM, it's possible, I really don't know to be honest but I thought that was handled at OS level?