Upgrade for new dual monitor setup

I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension 8400
desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer-- {PCI
express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a little
sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps and
surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video card
that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to waste
hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and whose
capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?

--
"Beware of the man of one book."
- Thomas Aquinas

"Slacker" Slacker@ wrote in message
. ..
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension 8400
desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer-- {PCI
express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a little
sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps and
surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video card
that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to
waste hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and
whose capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?

--
"Beware of the man of one book."
- Thomas Aquinas


Would get a dual DVI Out. You can always use the converter to analog.
How much do you want to spend is the question. The 7 or 8 series is what I
would go with.

Slacker wrote:
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension 8400
desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer-- {PCI
express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a little
sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps and
surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video card
that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to waste
hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and whose
capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?



Good news: Any modern card that fits your undisclosed budget will suit
your minimal display needs.

"Kevin Weaver" wrote in message
t...
"Slacker" Slacker@ wrote in message
. ..
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension
8400 desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer--
{PCI express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a
little sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps
and surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video
card that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to
waste hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and
whose capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?

--
"Beware of the man of one book."
- Thomas Aquinas


Would get a dual DVI Out. You can always use the converter to analog.
How much do you want to spend is the question. The 7 or 8 series is what I
would go with.


I'm willing to spend all I need to for capable performance. If I can get
that for $50-$60, great. If I need to spend $125, that's cool too.

"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. ..
Slacker wrote:
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension
8400 desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer--
{PCI express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a
little sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps
and surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video
card that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to
waste hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and
whose capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?



Good news: Any modern card that fits your undisclosed budget will suit
your minimal display needs.

Well, that's my problem. The card I have isn't strong enough-- I got the
computer about 18 months ago.

I don't have any particular budget because I don't what I need to spend to
get decent performance. That was kind of what I was asking here-- how much
do I need to spend---- $50? $100? $200? more?

I'll pay whatever it takes-- but don't want to over-buy.

"Slacker" Slacker@ wrote in message
I don't have any particular budget because I don't what I need to spend to
get decent performance. That was kind of what I was asking here-- how much
do I need to spend---- $50? $100? $200? more?

I'll pay whatever it takes-- but don't want to over-buy.

Based on your minimal need (you don't play 3D games, do you?), I'd suggest
any new Radeon cards around $100 will work for you (something like X1300
series).

Slacker wrote:
"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. ..
Slacker wrote:
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension
8400 desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the computer--
{PCI express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one monitor but it a
little sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps
and surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express video
card that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to
waste hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and
whose capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?


Good news: Any modern card that fits your undisclosed budget will suit
your minimal display needs.

Well, that's my problem. The card I have isn't strong enough-- I got the
computer about 18 months ago.

I don't have any particular budget because I don't what I need to spend to
get decent performance. That was kind of what I was asking here-- how much
do I need to spend---- $50? $100? $200? more?

I'll pay whatever it takes-- but don't want to over-buy.



This 7900GS is $165, minus $30 rebate. It comes with two DVI-I to VGA adapter
dongles, so you can use two analog or two digital monitors. If you read the
reviews on Newegg, there is a wealth of suggestions for this card. Like, if
the fan noise is too much, you can fit a Zalman VF-900 as an aftermarket cooler.
Or for better case temps, you can fit a slot cooler next to the card (blows
out through a PCI slot hole).

There are 110 reviewer comments here, to help you. There are even people who
have Dell 8400 in the reviews. Power consumption should be about 48W or so,
based on being similar to the 7900GT (Xbitlabs doesn't appear to have measured
the 7900GS).

BFG Tech BFGR79256GSOCE GeForce 7900GS 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814143070

On this page, 7900GS rates 20th in overall capability. The emphasis in this
ranking, is gaming and 3D.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/every...ked-241379.php

Will it help ? I cannot really say, because all I can afford is one monitor :-)

From your description, it sounds like your Windows desktop is not painting
fast enough. There will be a significant CPU component to the desktop, so
you need to do as much as you can, to help out the CPU. For 2D, the video
card probably has accelerated line drawing, bitblt and the like, but at
least some of the screen rendering, is limited by the CPU.

I notice in your system description, you have 1.5GB of memory. That is
a weird amount of memory, and you should do what you can to help your
system. Here is some background reading material for your system. The
first link, is the 925X memory guide from Intel. Page 11 shows the
dual channel symmetric configuration, which is what you want for your
system.

http://download.intel.com/design/chi...s/30234403.pdf

These two links are on the Dell site. One channel consists of
slots 1 and 3. The second channel is slots 2 and 4. The memory
should balance such that: (1)+(3) = (2)+(4)

http://support.dell.com/support/edoc...0/SM/parts.htm
http://support.dell.com/support/edoc...0/SM/specs.htm

If you can, try to use the fastest memory for the machine. The
docs say that is DDR2-533. The Intel document says 3-3-3 memory
would only be supported by 925XE, and the Dell BIOS writers would
probably slow down some 3-3-3 DDR2-533 memory, to run at 4-4-4, to
please the staff at Intel.

You should also find a benchmark, so you can compare your current card,
to the new one, in a meaningful way. We'd certainly like to hear how it
turns out, and benchmarks are always nice. The only thing that comes
to mind for 2D, would be something like Wintune 97 :-)

I found WinTune 98 here. If you load this link, it will prompt to download
the file. The file is wintune_43.exe and is 1729KB.

http://comunitel.tucows.com/win2k/ad...681_30039.html

On my 9800Pro, 1280x1024@32bit, with a 3.2Ghz P4 Northwood, I get

"Video(2D) 305.3937 MPixels/s"

Maybe someone else has suggestions for a benchmark for 2D stuff.

To compare your basic computing performance, try out SuperPI.

http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/super_pi_mod-1.5.zip

Run super_pi_mod.exe (104960 bytes). Select 1 million digits and
run it. It helps if the machine is idle when you run the test.

My 3.2Ghz P4 processor (Hyperthreading enabled), with 1GB DDR460 CAS3
memory, gets 49 seconds. I used to get 44.1 seconds, before my anti-virus
software was installed. Less time is better.

Paul

"Paul" wrote in message ...
Slacker wrote:
"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. ..
Slacker wrote:
I just added a second monitor (a Samsung SM223BW) to my Dell Dimension
8400 desktop with 1.5g RAM. The video card that came with the
computer-- {PCI express ATI Radeom X300 with 128) was fine with one
monitor but it a little sluggish pushing two of them.

I run WIN XP SP2 fully updated and use mainly office productivity apps
and surf. I was thinking about going to at least a 256 PCI express
video card that has 1 VGA and 1 DVI port.

So how far up the video card food chain do I need to go to get improved
performance? I don't want to leave myself short-- but can't afford to
waste hard-earned bucks on a bleeding edge card that I don't need and
whose capabilities I could never take advantage of.

Any recommendations?


Good news: Any modern card that fits your undisclosed budget will suit
your minimal display needs.

Well, that's my problem. The card I have isn't strong enough-- I got the
computer about 18 months ago.

I don't have any particular budget because I don't what I need to spend
to get decent performance. That was kind of what I was asking here-- how
much do I need to spend---- $50? $100? $200? more?

I'll pay whatever it takes-- but don't want to over-buy.

This 7900GS is $165, minus $30 rebate. It comes with two DVI-I to VGA
adapter
dongles, so you can use two analog or two digital monitors. If you read
the
reviews on Newegg, there is a wealth of suggestions for this card. Like,
if
the fan noise is too much, you can fit a Zalman VF-900 as an aftermarket
cooler.
Or for better case temps, you can fit a slot cooler next to the card
(blows
out through a PCI slot hole).

There are 110 reviewer comments here, to help you. There are even people
who
have Dell 8400 in the reviews. Power consumption should be about 48W or
so,
based on being similar to the 7900GT (Xbitlabs doesn't appear to have
measured
the 7900GS).

BFG Tech BFGR79256GSOCE GeForce 7900GS 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16
Video Card - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814143070

On this page, 7900GS rates 20th in overall capability. The emphasis in
this
ranking, is gaming and 3D.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/every...ked-241379.php

Will it help ? I cannot really say, because all I can afford is one
monitor :-)

From your description, it sounds like your Windows desktop is not painting
fast enough. There will be a significant CPU component to the desktop, so
you need to do as much as you can, to help out the CPU. For 2D, the video
card probably has accelerated line drawing, bitblt and the like, but at
least some of the screen rendering, is limited by the CPU.

I notice in your system description, you have 1.5GB of memory. That is
a weird amount of memory, and you should do what you can to help your
system. Here is some background reading material for your system. The
first link, is the 925X memory guide from Intel. Page 11 shows the
dual channel symmetric configuration, which is what you want for your
system.

http://download.intel.com/design/chi...s/30234403.pdf

These two links are on the Dell site. One channel consists of
slots 1 and 3. The second channel is slots 2 and 4. The memory
should balance such that: (1)+(3) = (2)+(4)

http://support.dell.com/support/edoc...0/SM/parts.htm
http://support.dell.com/support/edoc...0/SM/specs.htm

If you can, try to use the fastest memory for the machine. The
docs say that is DDR2-533. The Intel document says 3-3-3 memory
would only be supported by 925XE, and the Dell BIOS writers would
probably slow down some 3-3-3 DDR2-533 memory, to run at 4-4-4, to
please the staff at Intel.

You should also find a benchmark, so you can compare your current card,
to the new one, in a meaningful way. We'd certainly like to hear how it
turns out, and benchmarks are always nice. The only thing that comes
to mind for 2D, would be something like Wintune 97 :-)

I found WinTune 98 here. If you load this link, it will prompt to download
the file. The file is wintune_43.exe and is 1729KB.

http://comunitel.tucows.com/win2k/ad...681_30039.html

On my 9800Pro, 1280x1024@32bit, with a 3.2Ghz P4 Northwood, I get

"Video(2D) 305.3937 MPixels/s"

Maybe someone else has suggestions for a benchmark for 2D stuff.

To compare your basic computing performance, try out SuperPI.

http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/super_pi_mod-1.5.zip

Run super_pi_mod.exe (104960 bytes). Select 1 million digits and
run it. It helps if the machine is idle when you run the test.

My 3.2Ghz P4 processor (Hyperthreading enabled), with 1GB DDR460 CAS3
memory, gets 49 seconds. I used to get 44.1 seconds, before my anti-virus
software was installed. Less time is better.

Paul

Super-- thanks for the very comprehensive answer!!

Oh, and on the 1.5g of memory-- not weird at all. Mobo has 4 slots, it came
with 2x256 and I added 2x512 in the remaining two slots...

"Mandinga" wrote in message
news

"Slacker" Slacker@ wrote in message
I don't have any particular budget because I don't what I need to spend
to get decent performance. That was kind of what I was asking here-- how
much do I need to spend---- $50? $100? $200? more?

I'll pay whatever it takes-- but don't want to over-buy.

Based on your minimal need (you don't play 3D games, do you?), I'd suggest
any new Radeon cards around $100 will work for you (something like X1300
series).


Thanks, that will work...

Slacker wrote:

Super-- thanks for the very comprehensive answer!!

Oh, and on the 1.5g of memory-- not weird at all. Mobo has 4 slots, it came
with 2x256 and I added 2x512 in the remaining two slots...



Just thought I'd check, because occasionally I run into people who do
stuff like use 3x512MB :-)

Just for fun, did you try any benchmarks ? I'm curious how your
system compares to mine.

Paul