Radeon X300 / Intel Extreme 915G

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.os.ms-windows.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,nz.comp (More info?)

I'm buying a system with the Intel 915G chipset. We need dual display so
we are getting a Radeon X300 with the PCI Express interface.

The Intel Bios only lets the accessory card be used as the primary
display adapter. At this stage I am presuming that the X300 will be dual
display so that it will show primary and secondary displays, and the
Intel onboard adapter will appear as the tertiary display, since it can't
be disabled.

The secondary display in this system will need to be overlay capable as
we want to be able to do stuff like DVD playback with subtitles and this
requires overlay support.

There appear to be two options

1. Use the X300 secondary for the secondary display. However my previous
experience with Radeons has been that the overlay is only enabled on the
primary display output.

2. Disable the X300's secondary output and use the Intel 915G output as
the secondary - assuming it supports overlay.

Any ideas there?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.os.ms-windows.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,nz.comp (More info?)

In article <MPG.1d0189fde430fffd98975a@news.chc.ihug.co.nz>,
Rob J <robj@nospam.nospam> wrote:

>The Intel Bios only lets the accessory card be used as the primary
>display adapter.

Why should any OS care what displays the BIOS uses, and how it uses
them? They can drive the display cards directly, without going through
the BIOS.

Or is this another Dimdows limitation?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.os.ms-windows.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,nz.comp (More info?)

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 23:02:19 +1200, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
<ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:

>In article <MPG.1d0189fde430fffd98975a@news.chc.ihug.co.nz>,
> Rob J <robj@nospam.nospam> wrote:
>
>>The Intel Bios only lets the accessory card be used as the primary
>>display adapter.
>
>Why should any OS care what displays the BIOS uses, and how it uses
>them? They can drive the display cards directly, without going through
>the BIOS.
>
>Or is this another Dimdows limitation?

Keep wanking, dipshit

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,comp.os.ms-windows.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,nz.comp (More info?)

In article <53sia1lqang495pk8fmfmt9n9cbk82fh7a@4ax.com>,
FreedomChooser <windowsfan@new.zealand> wrote:

>On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 23:02:19 +1200, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
><ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>
>>In article <MPG.1d0189fde430fffd98975a@news.chc.ihug.co.nz>,
>> Rob J <robj@nospam.nospam> wrote:
>>
>>>The Intel Bios only lets the accessory card be used as the primary
>>>display adapter.
>>
>>Why should any OS care what displays the BIOS uses, and how it uses
>>them? They can drive the display cards directly, without going through
>>the BIOS.
>>
>>Or is this another Dimdows limitation?
>
>Keep wanking, dipshit

I guess the answer must be "yes" ...