Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
First, I am no techy, so forgive me for my questions.
The video cards mentioned on this thread, mostly, require hooking up your monitors with a "Display Port" cable. After doing a search, most monitors with a "Display Port" cost much more than monitors with a VGA and/or DVI input port.
So, do you use an adapter?
What are the thoughts on something like this instead?
Just thought I would ask before I make a BIG mistake.
DVI and Display Ports have different specifications and do not have process electronical signals. You should therefore purchase a graphics adapter, which is compatible to both specifications.
New graphics adapters from NVidia or AMD will autodetect whether they are connected to a DVI or DisplayPort Monitor.
Example: NVidia graphics adapter NVS 295 has two DisplayPorts. You can use them to connect two DVI monitors (via a DisplayPort - DVI-D adapter). This is possible, because the graphics adapter is capable of detecting, whether you have connected DisplayPort or DVI monitors.
In the same way you may connect 4 DVI monitors to the ATI FirePro 2460 Multi-View adapter.
What I do not know is whether you are allowed to connect different types of monitors (some of the DVI and some of them Displayport), I would not do that anyhow.
I returned the $3,000 F-25 from trading computers / falcon trading systems a couple weeks ago. It ran great but they advertised a massively powerful i7 sent me a Intel Xeon W3520, which isn't even offered in their line up.
I was pissed because it ranked 78th looking at the same benchmark test page fallout posted earlier.
The president of the company said they usually use i7 950 but assured me his guys got it running up to speed. But it wasn't as fast as the 950 out of the box so I wanted it replaced. He had the balls to tell me the processor is located in the hard drive so they could just mail me a new one...
What's weird is they might have been doing me a favor. A knowledgeable member here pointed out to me that Xeons are preferred for workstations. They can also support ECC memory that makes it less likely to crash.
My verdict is they use cheaper components but test the voltage settings closely (on the higher end models at least) while overclocking them to run well. If yours holds up you will probably love it and also love that they will remotely remove viruses for you.
I think I'm going with a Z400 because they make sure theres are running well too. I think a quad core xeon with at least 3ghz and 12mb ram is plenty - but am tempted to go all out on one of the six core w3600's so the CPU will stay fast.
Might eventually try and build one with 2 or 4 screens using fallout's recommendations to run charts on and so I don't have to leave the office to browse the internet and check mail.
with multiple monitor systems.....If not ready purchased you might ck http://jncs.com/...there prices are quite good and their service is impeccable... they stood behind every single problem and have remote hookup where they addresed every questionable problem they could.
Will try to make attachments latter from office. Just trying to help.
