What two head video card can play High Definition video on a secondary monitor in the extended desktop mode?

Hello All!
What two head video card can play High Definition video on a secondary
monitor in the extended desktop mode? I saw in MS Knowledge Base and
on the Internet that most of two head video cards reduce speed on the
extended desktop.
Does Windows Vista Media Center run slower on the secondary monitor in
the extended mode?
Is there any video player which runs on the secondary monitor in the
extended mode as fast as on the primary monitor? Can anyone run two
monitors in the mirror mode in their two different native resolutions?
How to make Windows Vista Media Center component run on the second
monitor in the extended mode always?
I want to buy a video card with outputs for two monitors and connect
its d-sub output to my HDTV Samsung 32R71B and use it as a secondary
monitor in the Extended mode in its native resolution 1366x768 or
1360x768. The primary monitor should remain in its native resolution
1280x1024. I want to watch video files on the 32R71B and control the
playback from a remote control. Which remote control should I buy?
Best regards,
Dima
+79035093892

Dima <tarb@bk.ru> wrote:

> What two head video card can play High Definition video on a secondary
> monitor in the extended desktop mode?

Playing high definition video is easy on modern hardware.

> I saw in MS Knowledge Base and on the Internet that most of two head
> video cards reduce speed on the extended desktop.

I've noticed a small reduction in frame rates when using the second
monitor.

> Does Windows Vista Media Center run slower on the secondary monitor in
> the extended mode?

As opposed to a single monitor? Likely a little. As opposed to Windows
XP? Likely significantly slower.

I'm guessing about that stuff.

If you're wondering whether two monitors are better than one, they
definitely are. If you have lots to do on your computer, a second
monitor can be very useful. And you can always just turn it off when you
don't need it. I usually turn off my primary monitor when I'm not
actively using the computer for hours, since it's the better monitor.













> Best regards,
> Dima
> +79035093892
>
>

On Jun 28, 2:03 am, John Doe <j...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
> Dima <t...@bk.ru> wrote:
> > What two head video card can play High Definition video on a secondary
> > monitor in the extended desktop mode?
>
> Playing high definition video is easy on modern hardware.
>
> > I saw in MS Knowledge Base and on the Internet that most of two head
> > video cards reduce speed on the extended desktop.
>
> I've noticed a small reduction in frame rates when using the second
> monitor.
>
> > Does Windows Vista Media Center run slower on the secondary monitor in
> > the extended mode?
>
> As opposed to a single monitor? Likely a little. As opposed to Windows
> XP? Likely significantly slower.
>
> I'm guessing about that stuff.
>
> If you're wondering whether two monitors are better than one, they
> definitely are. If you have lots to do on your computer, a second
> monitor can be very useful. And you can always just turn it off when you
> don't need it. I usually turn off my primary monitor when I'm not
> actively using the computer for hours, since it's the better monitor.
>
>
>
> > Best regards,
> > Dima
> > +79035093892- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks John Doe for your answers!
Why does Windows Vista Media Center run likely significantly slower on
the secondary monitor in the extended mode as opposed to Windows XP?
How to make Windows Vista Media Center playback video on the secondary
monitor (HDTV) without the stuttering, or what hardware to buy?
Best regards,
Dima

Dima <tarb@bk.ru> wrote:

....

> Why does Windows Vista Media Center run likely significantly slower
> on the secondary monitor in the extended mode as opposed to Windows
> XP?

A new Microsoft operating system runs slower than the recent prior
Microsoft operating system. Eventually Vista should run better.
Personally, I think Windows XP was partly a product of the big
Microsoft antitrust trial, Microsoft was very motivated at that time.
Who knows what Vista will turn out to be.

A user shouldn't upgrade until his (or her) hardware and/or programs
require it. I would even avoid upgrading until then.

> How to make Windows Vista Media Center playback video on the
> secondary monitor (HDTV) without the stuttering, or what hardware to
> buy?

Stuttering? Depends on what causes the stuttering.













> Best regards,
> Dima
>
>

On Jun 29, 3:16 am, John Doe <j...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
> Dima <t...@bk.ru> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Why does Windows Vista Media Center run likely significantly slower
> > on the secondary monitor in the extended mode as opposed to Windows
> > XP?
>
> A new Microsoft operating system runs slower than the recent prior
> Microsoft operating system. Eventually Vista should run better.
> Personally, I think Windows XP was partly a product of the big
> Microsoft antitrust trial, Microsoft was very motivated at that time.
> Who knows what Vista will turn out to be.
>
> A user shouldn't upgrade until his (or her) hardware and/or programs
> require it. I would even avoid upgrading until then.
>
> > How to make Windows Vista Media Center playback video on the
> > secondary monitor (HDTV) without the stuttering, or what hardware to
> > buy?
>
> Stuttering? Depends on what causes the stuttering.
>
>
>
> > Best regards,
> > Dima- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks John Doe for your opinion!
Video playbacks with stuttering when the system does not have enough
power to playback, as in the http://support.microsoft.com/kb/830851/en-us
"Media Center must be run on the primary monitor for optimal video
performance".
Why do hardware manufactures suggest Windows Vista often, if
"eventually Vista should run better"?
Best regards,
Dima

Dima <tarb@bk.ru> wrote:

....
> Video playbacks with stuttering when the system does not have enough
> power to playback,

Of course that's true, but "enough power" is a very vague term.

After Windows 95 came out, I used to enjoy the Rob Roy movie trailer.
It stuttered on my hardware (maybe a 486). Within a few years or so, I
could play at least nine instances of that video tiled on the monitor
(with audio, the echo effect was cool) at the same time with no
stuttering.

I've never had a problem with video stuttering on my computer since
about Windows 98. I'm a gamer so my video cards have been fast.

> "Media Center must be run on the primary monitor for optimal video
> performance".

I dunno. Maybe something to do with DirectX, but I think DirectX can
be applied to the secondary monitor nowadays.

> Why do hardware manufactures suggest Windows Vista often,

Maybe because they are getting paid to sell Windows Vista?

> if "eventually Vista should run better"?

As I said, Microsoft's most recent operating system always runs slower
on the same hardware, because it uses more system resources. That is
true until probably when hardware catches up to the basic requirements
(real requirements, not stated Minimum Requirements) of the new
operating system.

How about a GeForce 7 or GeForce 8 series NVIDIA video card. If you
want DirectX 10 compatibility, maybe the 8xxx series is required.

You should have a mainboard with an open PCI Express x16 slot.

Choose a card that you can afford, then post here to see if it is a
good price (if USA, otherwise I cannot help with that).

Good luck and have fun.










> Best regards,
> Dima
>
>

On Jun 29, 11:27 am, John Doe <j...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
> Dima <t...@bk.ru> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Video playbacks with stuttering when the system does not have enough
> > power to playback,
>
> Of course that's true, but "enough power" is a very vague term.
>
> After Windows 95 came out, I used to enjoy the Rob Roy movie trailer.
> It stuttered on my hardware (maybe a 486). Within a few years or so, I
> could play at least nine instances of that video tiled on the monitor
> (with audio, the echo effect was cool) at the same time with no
> stuttering.
>
> I've never had a problem with video stuttering on my computer since
> about Windows 98. I'm a gamer so my video cards have been fast.
>
> > "Media Center must be run on the primary monitor for optimal video
> > performance".
>
> I dunno. Maybe something to do with DirectX, but I think DirectX can
> be applied to the secondary monitor nowadays.
>
> > Why do hardware manufactures suggest Windows Vista often,
>
> Maybe because they are getting paid to sell Windows Vista?
>
> > if "eventually Vista should run better"?
>
> As I said, Microsoft's most recent operating system always runs slower
> on the same hardware, because it uses more system resources. That is
> true until probably when hardware catches up to the basic requirements
> (real requirements, not stated Minimum Requirements) of the new
> operating system.
>
> How about a GeForce 7 or GeForce 8 series NVIDIA video card. If you
> want DirectX 10 compatibility, maybe the 8xxx series is required.
>
> You should have a mainboard with an open PCI Express x16 slot.
>
> Choose a card that you can afford, then post here to see if it is a
> good price (if USA, otherwise I cannot help with that).
>
> Good luck and have fun.
>
>
>
> > Best regards,
> > Dima- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks John Doe for your opinions and suggestions!
What do you mean by an "open" PCI Express x16 slot? It looks that all
PCI Express x16 slots are open on new mainboards.
Why could I need the DirectX 10 compatibility? I play race games with
Logitech MOMO wheel rarely.
Best regards,
Dima

> Thanks John Doe for your opinions and suggestions!
> What do you mean by an "open" PCI Express x16 slot? It looks that all
> PCI Express x16 slots are open on new mainboards.
> Why could I need the DirectX 10 compatibility? I play race games with
> Logitech MOMO wheel rarely.
> Best regards,
> Dima
>
Some DirectX 10 components are already embedded into Vista and the entire
DX10 suite will come along in a few months. The same was said about the
change from DX8 to DX9. I think about all recent games are DX9 compatible
and the SDK for DX10 has been out quite a while now, so it will not be long
before they begin selling DX10 compliant software. If you use racing
simulations rather than arcade style games like NFS and such you will see
that more and more of the physics will be split between the CPU and GPU.
Right now, I wouldn't worry too much about DX10 video cards. The Nvidia 8x
series is still fairly expensive but is coming down slowly. ATI has not
released their DX10 cards yet as far as I know.... PCI E is really the only
way to go now if you build or buy a new system. I wouldn't pay much for AGP
right now if I had a choice. As far as Vista is concerned, I had it on my
new system and just had too many little problems so I went back to XP Pro. I
have Vista Ultimate 32 sitting on the shelf collecting dust until they
finally come out with a service pack to fix all the little problems. My
system was built from the ground up to more than handle Vista, but the OS is
just not ready for me IMO.


Ed

On Jun 29, 4:20 pm, "Ed Medlin" <e...@edmedlin.com> wrote:
> > Thanks John Doe for your opinions and suggestions!
> > What do you mean by an "open" PCI Express x16 slot? It looks that all
> > PCI Express x16 slots are open on new mainboards.
> > Why could I need the DirectX 10 compatibility? I play race games with
> > Logitech MOMO wheel rarely.
> > Best regards,
> > Dima
>
> Some DirectX 10 components are already embedded into Vista and the entire
> DX10 suite will come along in a few months. The same was said about the
> change from DX8 to DX9. I think about all recent games are DX9 compatible
> and the SDK for DX10 has been out quite a while now, so it will not be long
> before they begin selling DX10 compliant software. If you use racing
> simulations rather than arcade style games like NFS and such you will see
> that more and more of the physics will be split between the CPU and GPU.
> Right now, I wouldn't worry too much about DX10 video cards. The Nvidia 8x
> series is still fairly expensive but is coming down slowly. ATI has not
> released their DX10 cards yet as far as I know.... PCI E is really the only
> way to go now if you build or buy a new system. I wouldn't pay much for AGP
> right now if I had a choice. As far as Vista is concerned, I had it on my
> new system and just had too many little problems so I went back to XP Pro. I
> have Vista Ultimate 32 sitting on the shelf collecting dust until they
> finally come out with a service pack to fix all the little problems. My
> system was built from the ground up to more than handle Vista, but the OS is
> just not ready for me IMO.
>
> Ed

Thanks Ed Medlin for your suggestion and opinion!
I use arcade style games like NFS too.
I convert and edit video sometimes. Is nForce mainboard chipset better
that other chipsets for converting and editing video?
Best regards,
Dima

"Dima" <tarb@bk.ru> wrote in message
news:1183120191.914811.40770@c77g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
> On Jun 29, 4:20 pm, "Ed Medlin" <e...@edmedlin.com> wrote:
>> > Thanks John Doe for your opinions and suggestions!
>> > What do you mean by an "open" PCI Express x16 slot? It looks that all
>> > PCI Express x16 slots are open on new mainboards.
>> > Why could I need the DirectX 10 compatibility? I play race games with
>> > Logitech MOMO wheel rarely.
>> > Best regards,
>> > Dima
>>
>> Some DirectX 10 components are already embedded into Vista and the entire
>> DX10 suite will come along in a few months. The same was said about the
>> change from DX8 to DX9. I think about all recent games are DX9 compatible
>> and the SDK for DX10 has been out quite a while now, so it will not be
>> long
>> before they begin selling DX10 compliant software. If you use racing
>> simulations rather than arcade style games like NFS and such you will see
>> that more and more of the physics will be split between the CPU and GPU.
>> Right now, I wouldn't worry too much about DX10 video cards. The Nvidia
>> 8x
>> series is still fairly expensive but is coming down slowly. ATI has not
>> released their DX10 cards yet as far as I know.... PCI E is really the
>> only
>> way to go now if you build or buy a new system. I wouldn't pay much for
>> AGP
>> right now if I had a choice. As far as Vista is concerned, I had it on my
>> new system and just had too many little problems so I went back to XP
>> Pro. I
>> have Vista Ultimate 32 sitting on the shelf collecting dust until they
>> finally come out with a service pack to fix all the little problems. My
>> system was built from the ground up to more than handle Vista, but the OS
>> is
>> just not ready for me IMO.
>>
>> Ed
>
> Thanks Ed Medlin for your suggestion and opinion!
> I use arcade style games like NFS too.
> I convert and edit video sometimes. Is nForce mainboard chipset better
> that other chipsets for converting and editing video?
> Best regards,
> Dima
>
I do racing simulations and flight sims. I also do a lot of A/V work and the
NV 680i chipset does just fine for me. I have a P4/EM64T @ 3.6ghz and my
Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.2ghz on this MB with 2ghz of memory really runs circles
around the P4 for video work. I highly recommend the P5N32-E SLI (680i)
board as I just don't have any issues with it. Intel also has the P35 that
will support faster memory and more processors. I haven't priced them and am
not really sure they are out on the market quite yet.


Ed