M329+FX4000 quadro problem

Hello Richard, I need help with cat m329, I'm using 2 machines 12-core MacPro 2.66 ghz, 12 gb memory ,video card quadro 4000 for 6 out DVI at 1280x1024, one triple head DisplayPort, one triple head dvi classic., phoenix sdi, 2 disc OCZ for raid content Snow leopard 10.6.6.Whit catalyst open the triple head DP releases the video signal(black screen whit no video input ), the triple head dvi it's ok, with catalyst closed ,stable and ok, which may be the problem .triple head DP are not integrated in m329 ?? Operating system at 32 bit, capture video ok, sorry for my english:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

Hello Richard, I need help with cat m329, I'm using 2 machines 12-core MacPro 2.66 ghz, 12 gb memory ,video card quadro 4000 for 6 out DVI at 1280x1024, one triple head DisplayPort, one triple head dvi classic., phoenix sdi, 2 disc OCZ for raid content Snow leopard 10.6.6.Whit catalyst open the triple head DP releases the video signal(black screen whit no video input ), the triple head dvi it's ok, with catalyst closed ,stable and ok, which may be the problem .triple head DP are not integrated in m329 ?? Operating system at 32 bit, capture video ok, sorry for my english:

---

its not catalyst -

its telling you - you are doing something the graphics card does not allow you to do

screens on triple head whit display port lost signal video only when catalyst go in full screen mode (out 1 triple head DP ,out 2 triple head dvi )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

screens on triple head whit display port lost signal video only when catalyst go in full screen mode (out 1 triple head DP ,out 2 triple head dvi )

---

that means video card cant do this many outputs at this size-

you need to reduce outputs-

its not related to catalyst - its what the video card can do-

tomorrow i try whit only one out on triple head whit displayport, if signal is good means that video card can't make 6 screen at 1280x1024 ,i can make 6 screens whit ge force 8800 and gtx 285 card ,maybe use two different tipe of triple head is not good idea .
thanks good night

I have done plenty (too many) shows with dual TH2G. They have all been on 2008 machines with 8800s. Just because I have done this does not mean I suggest this. In fact, I won't do it anymore.

In the 2009 or 2010 machines, I have not been successful in using 2 TH2G boxes, especially mixing 2 different types.

The best recommended configuration for a TH2G is to place it on the second Output and have a monitor or 4th out on the First Output.

I will also note that 1280x1024 is 5:4 ratio not 4:3. If your output devices are 5:4 then using the 1280x1024 is reasonable. Otherwise, stick with 1024x768 unless you absolutely need the resolution. Then only use a 5:4 if your projectors are 5:4 otherwise, you'll need to use the Matrox Desktop to enable 1280x960 which is 4:3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

tomorrow i try whit only one out on triple head whit displayport, if signal is good means that video card can't make 6 screen at 1280x1024 ,i can make 6 screens whit ge force 8800 and gtx 285 card ,maybe use two different tipe of triple head is not good idea .
thanks good night

---

what works and doesnt is a thing between matrox and graphics cards

and apple and graphics card -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SourceChild

I have done plenty (too many) shows with dual TH2G. They have all been on 2008 machines with 8800s. Just because I have done this does not mean I suggest this. In fact, I won't do it anymore.

In the 2009 or 2010 machines, I have not been successful in using 2 TH2G boxes, especially mixing 2 different types.

The best recommended configuration for a TH2G is to place it on the second Output and have a monitor or 4th out on the First Output.

I will also note that 1280x1024 is 5:4 ratio not 4:3. If your output devices are 5:4 then using the 1280x1024 is reasonable. Otherwise, stick with 1024x768 unless you absolutely need the resolution. Then only use a 5:4 if your projectors are 5:4 otherwise, you'll need to use the Matrox Desktop to enable 1280x960 which is 4:3.

---

i think there is a maximum limit which the graphics card will do
and
i think there are some things with display port bandwidth and how this works - how many output lanes are in use

there has possibly been some architecture change to recent graphics cards which puts a lower limit on output sizes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_DisplayPort

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB571Z/A

Quote:

---

DisplayPort is capable of directly emitting single-link HDMI and DVI signals using Dual-mode DisplayPort. VESA has issued interoperability guidelines for supporting single-link DVI and HDMI through a DisplayPort connection using a relatively simple passive adapter that adjusts for the lower voltages required by DisplayPort.[15][16] Dual-mode DisplayPort chipset detects the DVI or HDMI passive adapter and switches to DVI/HDMI mode which uses the 4-lane main DisplayPort link and AUX channel link to transmit 3 TMDS signals plus a Clock signal and Display Data Channel data/clock from the chipset. Dual-mode compatible ports are marked with the DP++ logo; most current DisplayPort graphics cards and monitors support this mode.[4]
A notable limitation is that dual-mode can only transmit single-link DVI/HDMI, as the number of pins in the DisplayPort connector is insufficient for dual-link connections and an active converter is needed for Dual-Link DVI (and analog component video such as VGA); however, VESA foresees that all HDMI conversion will eventually be handled by active adapters which act as DisplayPort Sink devices, in order to facilitate easier updates to latest HDMI specs and support multiple streams, dual-link HDMI,[4] or DisplayPort connection with fewer than 4 lanes, as in PDMI. DVI 1.0 spec was finalized in 1999 and the DVI industry consortium has since disbanded, which means future updates to DVI specification are unlikely; also, although dual-link HDMI Type B is defined in the HDMI specification, it has not seen any practical use so far

---

Also with only one triple head Displayport same defect, When catalyst go in full screen mode black screen (no video input) I need 6 out at 1280x1024 to drive a 6 mm pitch LED screen measuring 3360x1360 total resolution size mix 1120x680 x 6
some ideas for fix this ?thanks to all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

Also with only one triple head Displayport same defect, When catalyst go in full screen mode black screen (no video input) I need 6 out at 1280x1024 to drive a 6 mm pitch LED screen measuring 3360x1360 total resolution size mix 1120x680 x 6
some ideas for fix this ?thanks to all

---

is this for the display port model or the other one?
this means you are doing something the triple head and graphics card dont want to do

-

what refresh rate are you set to?

refresh rate is 60 hz resolution is 3840x1024,3072x768, same defect, triple head display port on out one of quadro 4000 (display port )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

refresh rate is 60 hz resolution is 3840x1024,3072x768, same defect, triple head display port on out one of quadro 4000 (display port )

---

and the other output? the dvi output?
does that work at this resolution?

--

start at the lowest possible output size and work up
dont start at highest size and work down

second out connected to triple head DVI at 3840 x1024 is ok ,primary out connected to triple head Dysplay port at 3840 x 1024 is ok but only when catalyst not is in full sceen mode, also whit resolution more little i have same issue,the triple head display port do not work stable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

second out connected to triple head DVI at 3840 x1024 is ok ,primary out connected to triple head Dysplay port at 3840 x 1024 is ok but only when catalyst not is in full sceen mode, also whit resolution more little i have same issue,the triple head display port do not work stable

---

what low resolutions you try? -with only DP connected

i have tray whit 2400x 600,3072x768,3840x1024. Display port whitout triple head work ,i have try also triple head dvi whit adapter active displayport to dvi dual link , but resolution max for primary out is 2400x 600 second machine have 1 monitor for preview and 1 triple head DVI AT 3840X1024 for 3 screen and work well.I dont wont cut the big screen led 3660x1360 on two machine .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

i have tray whit 2400x 600,3072x768,3840x1024. Display port whitout triple head work ,i have try also triple head dvi whit adapter active displayport to dvi dual link , but resolution max for primary out is 2400x 600 second machine have 1 monitor for preview and 1 triple head DVI AT 3840X1024 for 3 screen and work well.I dont wont cut the big screen led 3660x1360 on two machine .

---

have you been able to get the display port triple head to work at any resolution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samsc

have you been able to get the display port triple head to work at any resolution?

---

what settings are you using in the matrox powerdesk GXM control panel?

Have you checked matrox technical support about using 2 different types of triple head at the same time?

--

you need 4.5M pixels - there are other configurations that might work?
3 * 1920 * 1080 from a single triple head ( if this is possible ) ?

You will probably need more than one Catalyst machine to accomplish this.
I would recommend (x2) servers, each with a single TH2G and local monitor.

The spec NVIDIA lists for this card very clearly shows the maximum resolution to be: 2560x1600 @ 60Hz
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...00-mac-us.html

Todd is correct in stating that the general rule is to not use more than one TH2G per machine or two DH2G.
Unless you are running at vey low resolution (x2) TH2G will most likely give you problems.

Hope this helps. :)

hi Richard, the technical guide says you can not use two different types of triple head under windows, but no restriction for mac user. yesterday i have update triple head DP whit software matrox but nothing change.in matrox power desk i have standard setting. I will try to use old catalyst quad core 3 ghz whit ge force 8800 for six out if possibile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

hi Richard, the technical guide says you can not use two different types of triple head under windows, but no restriction for mac user. yesterday i have update triple head DP whit software matrox but nothing change.in matrox power desk i have standard setting. I will try to use old catalyst quad core 3 ghz whit ge force 8800 for six out if possibile

---

Can you get anything at all out from display port? With triple head

Start with a only single screen
Then add another

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marty Postma

You will probably need more than one Catalyst machine to accomplish this.
I would recommend (x2) servers, each with a single TH2G and local monitor.

The spec NVIDIA lists for this card very clearly shows the maximum resolution to be: 2560x1600 @ 60Hz
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...00-mac-us.html

Todd is correct in stating that the general rule is to not use more than one TH2G per machine or two DH2G.
Unless you are running at vey low resolution (x2) TH2G will most likely give you problems.

Hope this helps. :)

---

For single led screen much better to use one computer

He needs 4.5mega pixels which can be done with 3x1920x1080
Doesn't need 6 outputs as such

I don't believe any nvidia output max of 2500x1600 is relevant in these situations
Otherwise no large triple head outputs would ever work and larger resolutions than this do work

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

hi Richard, the technical guide says you can not use two different types of triple head under windows, but no restriction for mac user. yesterday i have update triple head DP whit software matrox but nothing change.in matrox power desk i have standard setting. I will try to use old catalyst quad core 3 ghz whit ge force 8800 for six out if possibile

---

You should also look at the datapath x4

Which does 4 completely configurable outputs unto 4x1080p30 on each dvi port
And doesn't have the same restrictions of triple head

www.datapath.co.uk

this led want all pixel 3360 x 1360 ,no function zoom in the central is different from barco ,problem whit vertical size very high,i have datapath in rome, now i stay in sanremo for festival, also whith datapath the size vertical is problem ,do you have other solution ? 3 image pro hd can make size vertical at 1360 ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

this led want all pixel 3360 x 1360 ,no function zoom in the central is different from barco ,problem whit vertical size very high,i have datapath in rome, now i stay in sanremo for festival, also whith datapath the size vertical is problem ,do you have other solution ? 3 image pro hd can make size vertical at 1360 ??

---

3360x1360 isnt any kindof dvi or vga standard-

so you split video wall between a number of inputs - and it has a mapping function?

presuming that the video wall has multiple inputs -
what resolution can video wall input goto?

units led accepted resolution 1024 x 768-1280x1024 ,or 1600x1200 on DVI, glux is the name of product ,units make mapping but no zoom function

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

...I need 6 out at 1280x1024 to drive a 6 mm pitch LED screen measuring 3360x1360 total resolution size mix 1120x680 x 6...

---

If I understand you correctly, you have 6 processors feeding 6 walls that are configured in a 3x2 arrangement...

I just created a test piece of content 3360x1360. I used my 2010 12-core mac pro running Catalyst with 2 RAID0 SSDs outputing on a quatro 4800.

I was only able to run 1 layer of content without frames dropping.

I did however split the piece into two pieces at half size (3360x680) and was able to run them both in perfect sync on 2 2008 mac pros.

If you do the same thing then you'll be fine.

Oh and please share more about the wall. I am impressed by a wall that is 20x8 meters at that high a that resolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samsc

For single led screen much better to use one computer

He needs 4.5mega pixels which can be done with 3x1920x1080
Doesn't need 6 outputs as such

I don't believe any nvidia output max of 2500x1600 is relevant in these situations
Otherwise no large triple head outputs would ever work and larger resolutions than this do work

---

Agreed one machine is always better if possible.

My understanding of how the TH2G boxes work is that they essesntially tell the video card what the total size of the "canvas" (raster) is, and then the TH2G cuts that "canvas" (raster) up accordingly. Am I correct? Or have I misunderstood the process somewhere?

My point was that anytime you step outside of the spec for any piece of gear you are in uncharted territory and cannot expect everything to go smoothly.....it might work or it might not. Results may vary widely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marty Postma

Agreed one machine is always better if possible.

My understanding of how the TH2G boxes work is that they essesntially tell the video card what the total size of the "canvas" (raster) is, and then the TH2G cuts that "canvas" (raster) up accordingly. Am I correct? Or have I misunderstood the process somewhere?

My point was that anytime you step outside of the spec for any piece of gear you are in uncharted territory and cannot expect everything to go smoothly.....it might work or it might not. Results may vary widely.

---

thats correct - the pixel canvas is cut up-

the graphics card will only change to the screen resolution if it can- so its not uncharted as such -as it wont do something it cant-


the triple head uses an edid setting to tell the graphics card what size of screen its connected to-


also there is another thing to do with the bandwidth of dvi and display port connectors- and what the maximum pixel clock speed is- this is the main limit-

Richard hello sorry for the delay, I installed a GTX 285 version (windows bios) card instead of 4000 for the big picture with 6 LED outputs to 1280 x 1024, the measure of the total mixes is 6x1120x760 each, the machine is very good, not sin to use the card quadro 4000 with 2 triple head . I added a twin machine with geforce gt 8800per backup. As soon as I send you photos of the large LED. Thanks to all for your support, the other machine with the card quadroon 4000 with a single dvi triple head is very good, the machines are used x the festival of Italian song (San Remo) I forgot ,I have 2 ati 5870 cards on the shelf, nothing new from the ati?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fabiopagano

Richard hello sorry for the delay, I installed a GTX 285 version (windows bios) card instead of 4000 for the big picture with 6 LED outputs to 1280 x 1024, the measure of the total mixes is 6x1120x760 each, the machine is very good, not sin to use the card quadro 4000 with 2 triple head . I added a twin machine with geforce gt 8800per backup. As soon as I send you photos of the large LED. Thanks to all for your support, the other machine with the card quadroon 4000 with a single dvi triple head is very good, the machines are used x the festival of Italian song (San Remo) I forgot ,I have 2 ati 5870 cards on the shelf, nothing new from the ati?

---

gtx 285 with 2xdvi outputs - makes it easier to do 2xth2go

thanks

-

nothing from ati

quadro 4000 make 7 layer hd1 920x1080 at 25 fps ,whit raid 0CZ,one monitor for local and one triple head DVI @ 3840x 1024 ,good card i think, whit only one triple head,bit rate at 80/90 mbit,file size 600 mb about, AIC codec ,what do you think codec pro res codec for trasparency ,instead of animation codec ,i have try whit my book pro and catalyst demo mode, not very good ,some drops ,if you can try codec pro res and tell me . by by

I'm also struggling with a similar problem. I Have a new 8core Macpro with standard ATI HD5770. Using two DHTG digital edition there is no problem. It is limited to 2560pix.That's is why we changed to the dp edition. This where things started to go bad. We are driving three microtile walls and one projection. I'm not able to get an image after start-up. But it is funny that true screensharing I can see the that the MacPro sees the DHTG and expands the desktop. But no image on the microtiles /projection. When I connect a monitor on one of the outputs, the DHTG goes active. Swap the microtile back and things get finaly to work for one the two DHTG. After some trying I get both DHTG to work. But never from the first time. I need to put a monitor first to get this to work. Any Ideas?


Gilles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gillekes

I'm also struggling with a similar problem. I Have a new 8core Macpro with standard ATI HD5770. Using two DHTG digital edition there is no problem. It is limited to 2560pix.That's is why we changed to the dp edition. This where things started to go bad. We are driving three microtile walls and one projection. I'm not able to get an image after start-up. But it is funny that true screensharing I can see the that the MacPro sees the DHTG and expands the desktop. But no image on the microtiles /projection. When I connect a monitor on one of the outputs, the DHTG goes active. Swap the microtile back and things get finaly to work for one the two DHTG. After some trying I get both DHTG to work. But never from the first time. I need to put a monitor first to get this to work. Any Ideas?


Gilles

---

the DHTG might need to see a monitor connected to its output before it turns itself on-
the microtiles might not be providing correct EDID information - to engage DHTG
suggest you use a DVI parrot or similar to spoof the monitor EDID

-

i dont believe DHTG are limited to 2560 - depends on how you connect to it-
this might be a mini display port bandwidth limit - not the DHTG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samsc

the DHTG might need to see a monitor connected to its output before it turns itself on-
the microtiles might not be providing correct EDID information - to engage DHTG
suggest you use a DVI parrot or similar to spoof the monitor EDID

-

i dont believe DHTG are limited to 2560 - depends on how you connect to it-
this might be a mini display port bandwidth limit - not the DHTG

---

The DHTG digital edition gets its signal in VGA. They are connected with minidp to VGA adapter from Apple. I think the ATI does not go beyond 2560 on analog video.
The DHTG digital edition works fine with micro tiles.
I might have to look in the DVI Parrot to see if I get this working with the DP edition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gillekes

The DHTG digital edition gets its signal in VGA. They are connected with minidp to VGA adapter from Apple. I think the ATI does not go beyond 2560 on analog video.
The DHTG digital edition works fine with micro tiles.
I might have to look in the DVI Parrot to see if I get this working with the DP edition.

---

no - true analogue vga video works at higher resolutions than mini dp.
the limit is on minidp - possibly apples version of its convertor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_DisplayPort
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=634592

there are multiple complications with single and dual link dvi as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samsc

no - true analogue vga video works at higher resolutions than mini dp.
the limit is on minidp - possibly apples version of its convertor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_DisplayPort
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=634592

there are multiple complications with single and dual link dvi as well

---

Do you know of any that would permit higher resolution? With the adapter from Apple I can´t go beyond 2560. I connect the DHTG digital Edition to my 2008 Macpro DVI and Resolution goes up to 3840.