This device looks interesting, but I do have one observation. Why pay the $285 for the Tripplehead2Go, when the DualHead2Go is much cheaper, and then use the cards 2nd output for the third display? The DualHead2Go would appear as a 2560x1024 monitor, and the third monitor as 1280x1024, then place the video card drivers in Horizontal Span, creating the single 3840x1024 display.

WarMace, try the Matrox site, they have several screenshots of various games next to their list of games.

Edit: http://www.matrox.com/graphics/off [...] g/list.cfm

As for using multiple outputs on a graphics card, DirectX initializes a monitor as a Device, each device needs it's own copy of the entire scene to render, if you have multiple monitors the program has to explicity support it and has to render the scene to both devices seperately. Matrox's TripleHead2Go allows for a single device to be rendered to and then does the work of splitting up the image. Been a while since I wrote a windowed engine spanning two monitors... I forget if that needs to be explicitly supported in the engine or if Windows does the legwork of creating both devices.

in addition to that, windows only supports directX on the primary monitor. OpenGL works fine on secondary ones, but once you move directX to a secondary display bad things can happen. (slowdowns, freaky glitches or game crashes) I know this b/c I worked on a test platform for games on hybrid computer systems where one system could "theoretically" run up to 3 discrete games. In testing/prototyping we found that nasty issue w/ directX. OpenGL was fluid-smooth though.

I assume there are "fixes" for that (registry hacks?) as Matrox had triple monitor "support" on their parhelia cards... but I am not sure what they did to fix that directX thing unless they only supported openGL games? (e.g. UT has always been capable of both directX and openGL rendering paths) This triplehead box fixes it by only showing up as a single primary monitor.

I noticed that it only supports 60hz refresh at the highest resolution though. To me that is unacceptable unless I am reading the specs wrong... but many ppl (myself included) cannot stomach 60hz w/o a massive headache, and therefore could not use this triplehead.

I wasn't saying the matrox device would have issues with it at all, i was only adding to what you were saying about a true second device hooked to the 2ndary port on the card.

as for directX on the 2ndary (NOT the matrox device) try looking it up... it is known that directX on the 2nd device is problematic at best. I only mentioned my experience b/c it is first hand, if we just ran into our own issues and gave up then it wouldn't be much of a test now would it? we researched it out man, looking up and digging through tons of documents online and off. It is there, and it is not specific hardware issues, it is a m$/windows/directX issue. Vista will eliminate the problem according to m$, but we will have to wait and see if it ever even ships.

as a side "personal" test... try running a native directX game on your 2ndary monitor (assuming you have one, if you dont then how can you argue w/ me?) and see how hard it really is... not making your 2ndary into a primary, but actually running the game on the 2nd one. easiest way is in windowed mode if the game supports it. it truly sucks.

In that case therotically you would have a triple head on one video out, and a single monitor on the other video out, while set in spanning mode. Its hard to perdict how the PC would interperate this but i guess it will split the video 50-50.

That means you would have 50% of the image spanned across 3 monitors, and 50% on one monitor. That should cause serious distortion.

Dont forget to run the native resolution you require some serious hardware to be playable, the article used 2x 500$ videocards in SLI for example.

Also after a quick glance over the Matrox forums, they state they do not support it, but it theoritacally might be possable....

I think Matrox is back in the Gaming Game wih this fine product. =-)

Well, the 60hz issue is fully understandable. Just imagine the video bandwidth necessary to display at 100 hz refresh rate with that resolution. The method they use to split the image is pure analogic I assume, so raising the refresh rate would lead to a blury image, not only because the cables could reach their limit but the dac's and everything in the video card too. Maybe its not that bad with games, because the detail level is not that critical, but for text or professional apps the blur is totally unacceptable. Nice product, but it is still analogic. A native digital one makes more sense.

Im curious about something: If they split the scanline in two or 3 monitors, do they store the portions and then play them back at a different scan speed?(digitally stored). At what refresh rate do the monitors run for a given graphics adapter's refresh rate?

i remember the older matrox card, with 3 head. I played a couple games that supported it, and it is nice, lots of viewing area, adds imersion to the game. For fps, it is a toss up, rpg, with pvp, i would say no. But like Graw, or splinter cell, it would be sweet, it adds alot of imersion into the game, and as of today, that is something us gamers are demanding.

I myself am gonna try it. i run 4 monitors, off my system, 3 side by side, and a 4th taped ontop of my center screen. IT ROCKS for my work, but opbiously doesnt play games.. I would like some more imersion, 3 screens makes you very concious on your surroundings, and works your perphial system to the max. IE imersion.. (forgive the spellings, just drove 12 hrs, so tired)..

I believe that is in part the purpose of the Surround Gaming utility. A lot of games offer configuration options in the .INI files, or registry, to adjust field of view, and the utility does that for you. Also, changing a games resolution from 1280x1024 to 1600x1200 keeps the same pixel apsect ratio, while 3840x1024 is a different story, and the game will probably then show more.

Heres a link to some images with full resolution screen shots form in-game http://www.matrox.com/graphics/offhome/th2go/artwork.cfm

Personally, I think this would be better if somehow you could get a 'rear view' device. I remember some talk about this years ago, but never learned anything about it.

[EDIT]

Seeing how this device works (sort of) It sounds like you would have to have two tied together somehow (if possible) and have in game FOV set to 360 (with 6 monitors) I think it would be MUCH handier to have just two monitors, perhaps one above the other, used for online frag sessions

So if you're video card has dual monitor output, can you chain together two TripleHeads to get 6 monitors? That being said, can you chain them, and put three TripleHeads at the end of each port on the TripleHead? All awesome possibilities, but the first some seems a lot more likely than the second one. I'm thinking that even in that scenario, a computer would probably just see them as two seperate 3-monitor spaces.

-Kallenin

The monitor edge issue is obviously going to be annoying to all monitor users in multi-monitor configs... having said that, an ideal application for this would be multiple projectors (debating projector image quality is a whole other topic)....
If someone designed a 3-in-one projector setup that was compact enough to fit on/over a desk, with three screens (potentially even curved), then you could have a virtually seamless immersive environment for gaming.
Yes, this would be a bit pricey and "extreme", but then again, that's who this product is for. Ideally someone would come up with an "underdesk mount" projector that fires 3 images upwards through a hole/past the edge(could fire downwards for ceiling mount)... onto a small mirror array (1"-3" mirrors at close range would be more than enough, so a small "bump" on the desk basically), to redirect the image horizontally onto the screens without interfering with the line of vision (or being blocked by the user).
Or if small enough separately, 3 small projectors just sitting on the desk could do the trick, throw-distance being the main issue there. Sure would be fun to play though.