Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Multiple PCI vid cards with Intel motherboards possible?

Tags:
  • Matrox
  • PCI
  • Intel
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 11, 2004 11:27:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even get one
to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?

My situation:

Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF motherboard
makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop (exclamation point in WinXP
Pro's device manager). The error given is "This device cannot find enough
resources to use (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.

I've contacted Matrox and they said to try a different PCI slot and upgrade to
the latest Intel BIOS. I tried both but still get the same problem. Matrox pretty
much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's. I've also tried
disabling the onboard video via device manager (there is no option in the
BIOS to do anything similar). I've contacted Intel, but all they sent was
references to integration guides and gave no response yet (a few weeks)
when I "escalated" the problem.

With AGP going away in favor of PCI-E, the multi-PCI card approach seems
like the best way to get multi-monitor support at this time, especially if you
need more than 2 displays. Unfortunately, this can't be done?

AJ

More about : multiple pci vid cards intel motherboards

October 11, 2004 11:27:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:M8Bad.8659$Rf1.7085@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even get one
> to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?
>
> My situation:
>
> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF motherboard
> makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop (exclamation point in WinXP
> Pro's device manager). The error given is "This device cannot find enough
> resources to use (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.
>
> I've contacted Matrox and they said to try a different PCI slot and upgrade to
> the latest Intel BIOS. I tried both but still get the same problem. Matrox pretty
> much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's. I've also tried
> disabling the onboard video via device manager (there is no option in the
> BIOS to do anything similar).

Is there a jumper on the motherboard to disable the onboard
graphics controller? I can't believe a system as recent as the
865GBF wouldn't have facility to do this.. Is it supposed to
"autoswitch" when a video card is installed? Check the bios
for an option to choose between AGP & PCI video.

Rick
October 12, 2004 12:38:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2t05iaF1pacs6U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:M8Bad.8659$Rf1.7085@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even get one
>> to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?
>>
>> My situation:
>>
>> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF motherboard
>> makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop (exclamation point in WinXP
>> Pro's device manager). The error given is "This device cannot find enough
>> resources to use (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.
>>
>> I've contacted Matrox and they said to try a different PCI slot and upgrade to
>> the latest Intel BIOS. I tried both but still get the same problem. Matrox pretty
>> much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's. I've also tried
>> disabling the onboard video via device manager (there is no option in the
>> BIOS to do anything similar).
>
> Is there a jumper on the motherboard to disable the onboard
> graphics controller?

No (not that I could find in the documentation anyway).

> I can't believe a system as recent as the
> 865GBF wouldn't have facility to do this..

The BIOS only has an option to indicate which graphics device should be
active at boot time: AGP or PCI. It doesn't actually disable either one though.
And yes, I tried it both ways.

> Is it supposed to
> "autoswitch" when a video card is installed? Check the bios
> for an option to choose between AGP & PCI video.

It actually works (the PCI video), but it knocks out the other device because
of the apparent resource conflict.

AJ
Related resources
October 12, 2004 12:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:8bCad.6057$5b1.287@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2t05iaF1pacs6U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:M8Bad.8659$Rf1.7085@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> >> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even get one
> >> to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?
> >>
> >> My situation:
> >>
> >> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF motherboard
> >> makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop (exclamation point in WinXP
> >> Pro's device manager). The error given is "This device cannot find enough
> >> resources to use (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.
> >>
> >> I've contacted Matrox and they said to try a different PCI slot and upgrade to
> >> the latest Intel BIOS. I tried both but still get the same problem. Matrox pretty
> >> much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's. I've also tried
> >> disabling the onboard video via device manager (there is no option in the
> >> BIOS to do anything similar).
> >
> > Is there a jumper on the motherboard to disable the onboard
> > graphics controller?
>
> No (not that I could find in the documentation anyway).
>
> > I can't believe a system as recent as the
> > 865GBF wouldn't have facility to do this..
>
> The BIOS only has an option to indicate which graphics device should be
> active at boot time: AGP or PCI. It doesn't actually disable either one though.
> And yes, I tried it both ways.
>
> > Is it supposed to
> > "autoswitch" when a video card is installed? Check the bios
> > for an option to choose between AGP & PCI video.
>
> It actually works (the PCI video), but it knocks out the other device because
> of the apparent resource conflict.

Have you tried different PCI slots? Check your motherboard
manual and see which slots share with onboard devices.
Usually PCI slot 1 shares with the onboard video -- if that's
the case don't use slot 1. You preferably want a slot that
doesn't share with any onboard devices: video, USB, etc.

Beyond that I don't have any other suggestions, except to wait
for support either from someone else here or from Intel.

Rick
October 12, 2004 1:05:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2t0afuF1q2d82U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:8bCad.6057$5b1.287@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> "Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:2t05iaF1pacs6U1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message news:M8Bad.8659$Rf1.7085@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>> >> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even get one
>> >> to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?
>> >>
>> >> My situation:
>> >>
>> >> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF motherboard
>> >> makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop (exclamation point in WinXP
>> >> Pro's device manager). The error given is "This device cannot find enough
>> >> resources to use (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.
>> >>
>> >> I've contacted Matrox and they said to try a different PCI slot and upgrade to
>> >> the latest Intel BIOS. I tried both but still get the same problem. Matrox pretty
>> >> much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's. I've also tried
>> >> disabling the onboard video via device manager (there is no option in the
>> >> BIOS to do anything similar).
>> >
>> > Is there a jumper on the motherboard to disable the onboard
>> > graphics controller?
>>
>> No (not that I could find in the documentation anyway).
>>
>> > I can't believe a system as recent as the
>> > 865GBF wouldn't have facility to do this..
>>
>> The BIOS only has an option to indicate which graphics device should be
>> active at boot time: AGP or PCI. It doesn't actually disable either one though.
>> And yes, I tried it both ways.
>>
>> > Is it supposed to
>> > "autoswitch" when a video card is installed? Check the bios
>> > for an option to choose between AGP & PCI video.
>>
>> It actually works (the PCI video), but it knocks out the other device because
>> of the apparent resource conflict.
>
> Have you tried different PCI slots?

Yes (as I stated in my original post).

> Check your motherboard
> manual and see which slots share with onboard devices.
> Usually PCI slot 1 shares with the onboard video -- if that's
> the case don't use slot 1. You preferably want a slot that
> doesn't share with any onboard devices: video, USB, etc.

I tried 3 of the 6 slots and got the same result.

>
> Beyond that I don't have any other suggestions, except to wait
> for support either from someone else here or from Intel.

I hear ya. I was hoping Intel would get back to me, but they haven't
so I thought I'd throw it up here for people to chew on.

AJ
Anonymous
October 12, 2004 6:48:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message...
> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even
> get one to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?

Wouldn't touch an Intel manufactured motherboard with a bargepole, but
multiple PCI display cards on a third party manufactured, Intel chipset
motherboard is no problem at all, both AGP/PCI and multiple PCI.

> My situation:
>
> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF
> motherboard makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop
> (exclamation point in WinXP Pro's device manager). The error
> given is "This device cannot find enough resources to use
> (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.

Strange.

> Matrox pretty much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's.

Not that it helps you much, but they're almost certainly right.

> With AGP going away in favor of PCI-E, the multi-PCI card approach seems
> like the best way to get multi-monitor support
> at this time,

The best approach at the moment is arguably AGP plus a PCI card, especially
if you're talking about Matrox products, as there's no PCI-E card from them
as yet. Having said that, multi-PCI should work without issue.

> especially if you need more than 2 displays.

If you only needed three, a Parhelia would probably be the easiest option at
the moment. However, from a theoretical point of view

> Unfortunately, this can't be done?

It can be, and is normally a plug and play deal. I've never had any issues
of this sort configuring a multiple Matrox card system, and I've assembled a
good dozen or so over the past few years, all of which would have been on
Intel chipset motherboards, normally made by Abit.

Unfortunately, there's very little I can think of bar Matrox's advice about
the PCI slots, BIOS and so-on. I take it the WinXP installation you're
talking about has the latest Intel chipset drivers, service packs and so-on
installed?

If the option is open to you, have you tried setting this graphics solution
up on another motherboard? Suppose it could be a fault in the particular
example board you're trying, or indeed the 865GBF design. If nothing else,
trying another board should rule a couple of problem areas in or out.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace .nospam with .com in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com
Get the most out of your digital photos www.dabsxpose.com
October 12, 2004 10:33:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"Richard Hopkins" <richh@dsl.nospam.co.uk> wrote in message news:416be0d5$0$10618$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote in message...
>> Has anyone gotten multiple PCI video cards (actually, I can't even
>> get one to work) to work with an Intel Motherboard?
>
> Wouldn't touch an Intel manufactured motherboard with a bargepole, but multiple PCI display cards on a third party
> manufactured, Intel chipset motherboard is no problem at all, both AGP/PCI and multiple PCI.
>
>> My situation:
>>
>> Installing a Matrox G450 PCI into a PC with an Intel 865GBF
>> motherboard makes the processor-to-pci-to-csa bridge inop
>> (exclamation point in WinXP Pro's device manager). The error
>> given is "This device cannot find enough resources to use
>> (code 12)". This wipes out my network connectivity.
>
> Strange.

I was surprised also.
>
>> Matrox pretty much indicated that it was Intel's problem and not their's.
>
> Not that it helps you much, but they're almost certainly right.

You'd think though that they'd want to correct this issue on this nice MB that
has 6 (!) PCI slots from numero uno.

>
>> With AGP going away in favor of PCI-E, the multi-PCI card approach seems like the best way to get multi-monitor support
>> at this time,
>
> The best approach at the moment is arguably AGP plus a PCI card, especially if you're talking about Matrox products, as
> there's no PCI-E card from them as yet.

Again, I don't see the value in buying anymore AGP cards. If you have one already
or can get the onboard AGP to work, that would be the way. But I can't see investing
in AGP right now (unless they become dirt cheap).

> Having said that, multi-PCI should work without issue.

"shoulda/woulda/coulda"... :( 

>
>> especially if you need more than 2 displays.
>
> If you only needed three, a Parhelia would probably be the easiest option at the moment. However, from a theoretical point
> of view

I read here that triple display is really just stretched display rather the highest
resolution on each individual monitor. So it's different than the dual head mode.
So triple head vs. dual head appears to be apples and oranges (not the same
thing) when using one Matrox card.

>> Unfortunately, this can't be done?
>
> It can be, and is normally a plug and play deal. I've never had any issues of this sort configuring a multiple Matrox card
> system, and I've assembled a good dozen or so over the past few years, all of which would have been on Intel chipset
> motherboards, normally made by Abit.

Doesn't work for me anyway I've tried it with the popular Intel board.

> Unfortunately, there's very little I can think of bar Matrox's advice about the PCI slots, BIOS and so-on. I take it the
> WinXP installation you're talking about has the latest Intel chipset drivers, service packs and so-on installed?

Yes, of course. I new BIOS has become available since this issue began
and I was hopeful that I'd be able to pop in the Matrox card and have it
working, but still no go.

>
> If the option is open to you, have you tried setting this graphics solution up on another motherboard?

It used to be in my old PC which also had onboard AGP that could be turned
off in the BIOS (not the the onboard AGP in my new system is the problem
though). So yes, it works in another board (which is what I'd expect).

While I suspect that these 2 pieces, vid card and motherboard, are
incompatible (but probably fixable with a modified BIOS or firmware or something)
I'm kinda hoping someone else can confirm that they get the same result
when they try the same thing.

> Suppose it could be a fault in the particular example board you're trying, or indeed the 865GBF design. If nothing else,
> trying another board should rule a couple of problem areas in or out.

No, that's research and product development for Matrox to pursue. I don't have
that kind of budget.

The only good thing about not being able to run the Matrox card I already have
is that all that heat it generates (it runs VERY hot) won't be dumping in my new PC.
(I direct a Zalman fan on it when it's installed, but maybe multiple cards, because
of the heat issue, is not a good idea anyway).

AJ
October 13, 2004 4:24:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote:


>
>The only good thing about not being able to run the Matrox card I already have
>is that all that heat it generates (it runs VERY hot) won't be dumping in my new PC.
>(I direct a Zalman fan on it when it's installed, but maybe multiple cards, because
>of the heat issue, is not a good idea anyway).
>
>AJ
>

I had heard that the Parhelia was hot but the 100, 200, G400MAX (modified
with a Passive Heatsink) G450PCI, G400PCI and the P650 I have are all
passive cooled and none of the PCs they are installed in have anything
apart from the standard CPU fan and PSU heatsink fan. All are in use and
many run all day/all year without a problem.

This was on of the reasons I liked Matrox as I like my work PCs to be as
quiet as possible. The children get Nvidia cards with noisy fans for their
games :-)

The reason I mention this is it sounds as if you may have a problem, I do
not know how hot any of my cards run as I take the view that if they do not
crash there is not a problem but most of the MB run at about 15c over
ambient (about 32c at this time of year) and the only blue screens I have
had on this lot in the last year was caused by Pinnacle Studio being
installed and 3 Hard disk failures everything else is fine and dandy.

By the way you are right about the Stretched display on the Parhelia which
is why one of my main systems is an G400Max and 2 G450PCI cards running 5
screens (Via 133 Chipset though, I have not bought an Intel chipset since
the BX days).
October 14, 2004 1:04:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"Andy@nospam.co.uk" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:m30qm0liakosvc8vd67ot16d4ea6td1dpp@4ax.com...
> "AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>The only good thing about not being able to run the Matrox card I already have
>>is that all that heat it generates (it runs VERY hot) won't be dumping in my new PC.
>>(I direct a Zalman fan on it when it's installed, but maybe multiple cards, because
>>of the heat issue, is not a good idea anyway).
>>
>>AJ
>>
>
> I had heard that the Parhelia was hot but the 100, 200, G400MAX (modified
> with a Passive Heatsink) G450PCI, G400PCI and the P650 I have are all
> passive cooled and none of the PCs they are installed in have anything
> apart from the standard CPU fan and PSU heatsink fan. All are in use and
> many run all day/all year without a problem.

Well did you every open up the case and touch the heatsink or the card directly
after it's been on awhile? My G450 PCI is almost too hot to touch. I was
considering getting a P650 card (passively cooled also) but that won't get me
independent triple head display (not that I have 3 monitors anymore now anyway).

>
> This was on of the reasons I liked Matrox as I like my work PCs to be as
> quiet as possible. The children get Nvidia cards with noisy fans for their
> games :-)

I like passively cooled too. But mostly so I can direct a quiet fan (like the
Zalman units) on the card. Those small high speed fans (like cpu fans) are
untolerable.


> By the way you are right about the Stretched display on the Parhelia which
> is why one of my main systems is an G400Max and 2 G450PCI cards running 5
> screens (Via 133 Chipset though, I have not bought an Intel chipset since
> the BX days).

That sounds like the setup I want to achieve but sadly Matrox and Intel aren't
talking to each other. :( 

AJ
October 15, 2004 4:17:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"AJ" <ng@newsgroups.net> wrote:


>> I had heard that the Parhelia was hot but the 100, 200, G400MAX (modified
>> with a Passive Heatsink) G450PCI, G400PCI and the P650 I have are all
>> passive cooled and none of the PCs they are installed in have anything
>> apart from the standard CPU fan and PSU heatsink fan. All are in use and
>> many run all day/all year without a problem.
>
>Well did you every open up the case and touch the heatsink or the card directly
>after it's been on awhile? My G450 PCI is almost too hot to touch. I was
>considering getting a P650 card (passively cooled also) but that won't get me
>independent triple head display (not that I have 3 monitors anymore now anyway).
>

Most of My CPUs get too hot to touch as well but if they are not crashing
they are working just fine by my standards. There is some argument to
cooling HDs due to the bearings or capacitors due to the electrolyte but
little to show any advantage to running a bit of silicon at 40c instead of
60c. The silicon will last for years anyway regardless of temp.

I like using the PCs I build, I have been building them from the days of
the first Z80 I soldered together and even went through the super cooling 8
fans on an Overclocked Celeron 333 stage. Nowadays I just want quiet, guess
I am getting old :-)

As an aside all the machines run @home projects so are running at 100% all
the time they are on.

Andy
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 1:29:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

Hello, I am currently having the exact same problem. I purchases a
Matrox G450 to run my 4 monitors on an Asus P4C800E Montherboard and I
lost my Network cabability and my PCI to CSA cannot confitgure to the lack
of Resources. Did you find a solution to this problem?
March 3, 2005 1:20:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"JeQ" <quinn1@frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:116c891775246edaca1563527ba8df3b@localhost.talkaboutcomputing.com...
> Hello, I am currently having the exact same problem. I purchases a
> Matrox G450 to run my 4 monitors on an Asus P4C800E Montherboard and I
> lost my Network cabability and my PCI to CSA cannot confitgure to the lack
> of Resources. Did you find a solution to this problem?

I had the same problem with an Intel 865GBF motherboard. Intel said it was not
their goal to support every video card under the sun. Matrox said it was
Intel's problem. So I never got the G450PCI to work in my machine.

AJ
!