NVIDIA graphics cards for multiple monitor (2560 x 1600 resolution)

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Tresor, Feb 2, 2009.

  1. Neither of those options have high enough resolution.

    You could get an NVS 450 - which can drive 4 30" monitors.

    Although it seems to come with displayport connections rather than DVI - maybe it depends on the particular model.
    #11     Feb 2, 2009
  2. Tresor


    Thanks BigFunky,

    I have one more off-topic question I would like to ask. It is going to be about processors. I can get either 1 or 2 processors. Options are, as follows:

    Dual-Core Xeon E5205 1.86GHz 6MB 1066
    Dual-Core Xeon X5260 3.33GHz 6MB 1333
    Dual-Core Xeon X5270 3.5GHz 6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon E5410 2.33GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon L5420 2.5GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon E5420 2.5GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon E5430 2.66GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon E5440 2.83GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon X5450 3.00GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon X5460 3.16GHz 2x6MB 1333
    Quad-Core Xeon X5470 3.33GHz 2x6MB 1333

    I will run only MultiCharts and an excecution platform on this computer. My data feed will have ca. 120 symbols.

    I may do some heavy optimizing / backtesting from time to time.

    Should I go for 2 processors or just for one? I want the computer to be as silent as possible.


    P.S. This is the machine (R650) I can get almost for free: http://fujitsu-siemens.com/products/deskbound/workstations/celsius_r.html
    #12     Feb 2, 2009
  3. I would usually say more power the better... but if you aren't sure that you'll be doing back-testing with multicharts, there's not a lot of applications that will use 8 cores.

    That's a lot of extra power usage, heat and noise if you're not going to use it.

    Maybe just get one fast quad core, then you can add another CPU later if you need it - assuming you get a dual socket motherboard no matter which config you choose.
    #13     Feb 3, 2009
  4. Tresor


    Guys, thank you very much for all your input, which saved me a lot of money.

    I will go for:
    (i) 2 x ATI FireGL V 5600, or
    (ii) 2 x NIVIDIA Quadro 1700

    NVIDIA is 12% more expensive Which of the two is better? Which would you recommed?

    Thank you

    P.S. I would like to get 2 x ATI FireGL V 3600 or NVIDIA Quadro 570, but FSC computer configurator prevents from selecting two such cards, so I must decide on more expensive items :(
    #14     Feb 4, 2009
  5. Check with your friend... that's ridiculous. The 570 and 1700 use the same driver. Any mobo which will run 2x, 1700s will also run 2x, 570s.

    You're planning to run FOUR, 30" monitors? Where would you put that kind of screen real estate?
    #15     Feb 4, 2009
  6. Tresor


    He gave me his login to FSC intranet and these cheap cards cannot be installed in number greater than 1, but I will confirm this with him.

    I have one small empty corner in my room that these monitors will fit. Already measured everything :D
    #16     Feb 4, 2009
  7. 570s are hardly "cheap".. at about $160 each.

    It could be "their configurator" is set up that way to pump the sales price. YOU need not be bound by such limits.

    If nothing else, get the computer with ONE 570 and get a 2nd one from somewhere else.
    #17     Feb 4, 2009
  8. Tresor


    OK, so your recommendation is NVIDIA rather than ATI
    #18     Feb 4, 2009
  9. Nvidia is the Big Dog in this market... I haven't had the pleasure of using anything from the Fire GL line.

    You probably can't go wrong with either, but 2X, 570s, is likely your best and lowest cost solution.

    I have Nvidia Quadro NVS cards in all of mine... though lesser than FX570. Then again, I'm not running 30"ers, either.
    #19     Feb 4, 2009
  10. Tresor


    Actually, I will pay for the machine half of the price of one 30''er so the price of the graphics card does not bother me much.

    I am more concerned if my electric installation can handle the power consumption (given 4 x 30''er). Only for this sake it is worth to have low power consumption GPUs.
    #20     Feb 4, 2009