Dual head video cards? Which one

[Aurora]

Hi all..

I am currently running an ATI Radeon 7500 on an Athlon XP2000/RAID0/1gig DDRAM system..

Dual monitor support is a must for me, however i do not want to sacrifice on the 3d gaming side of things..

My question is: Is the 7500 the right card for me? I have neen looking at the 8500 and would like to here your views on it or any of it's rivals..

Maybe i am being pinickidy (good old irish saying!) but i am looking for the best card for me. I like a bit of gaming but also use this machine as a music production worskstation with dual monitor support..

your thoughts would be appreciated

[Aurora]

Aren't i popular! sniffle sniffle :confused:

[The Pimp]

Parhelia would be a good choice if you have near on £400 to spend on a video card when it is launched on June 30th :D :D

The Rad 8500 is a cracking card if you need Dual Display & very good 3D performance. Look for the price of the 8500 to drop very shortly ;) ;) ;)

[scottie]

i got an ati 7500 and can overclock it like mad - great value for money and fast enough for anything I run - but I'm saving for one of the new matrox things

[scottie]

oops forgot to mention the new matrox does 3 displays!!! :D - I want one !!!!

[Geekster]

Your missing out THe GeForce range! there are GF4 Ti 4600 cards that will easily do dual displays, haven't seen one with 2 15 pin D-subs, but you can get an digital to analog converter, and you have good guality dual displays, with all the power of the fastest card out there!

GF4 mx 440's have dual head aswell, but they probably represent a small upgrade to a 7500
and that's clearly not what your looking for.

[The Pimp]

Well according to online reviews the Parhelia is performing worse than current offerings from nVidia & ATI! It looks like we will have to wait for the next gen of 3D API's (DX9, etc) before anything can really be judged on.

[The Pimp]

Originally posted by Geekster:
<STRONG>
GF4 mx 440's have dual head aswell, but they probably represent a small upgrade to a 7500
and that's clearly not what your looking for.</STRONG>


The MX440's are slower than the 7500 due to the 7500's support of DX8 technologies properly, where as the GF4 MX series really should have been classed as a GF2.5 . The MX460 is about comparable to the 7500 in performance.

[scottie]

mx460 is just a wee bit slower, but more or less there. The new matrox card is a wee bit dissapointing though, but to b honest i can get 7000 3dmark2k2 out of my 7500 with o/c so i'm quite happy - I'll prolly get an 8500 next 'cos prices r going down