Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which is the best choice (Corporate)

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 3, 2010 8:59:40 PM

Hello, I'm looking for advice on a matter and I am stuck.

I have 3 options I can see, and I can't decide which will be best. they each have + and - points to them.

We have 12 "new" Dell Optiplex 360 slimline PC's ready for deployment to some new employees. They need dual monitor setups, and we need to add a LOW PROFILE video card to accomplish this. Company wide we have used GeForce FX5200 PCI cards as a standard. All our Images for deployment have the drivers, and we can easily swap out a bad card for a new one if needed.

These new PC's can't take a standard size card, and it is not easy to find low profile cards that fit our needs. It MUST have VGA out, as all our standard monitors have only VGA in. Also these new PC's have in the BIOS a setting that if a PCI-E card is installed it disables the on-board graphics.

Here's our 3 options I can find for ~ $50 a card (we need a minimum of 12 for now)

1. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
FX5200 PCI so the drivers are built into our PC images we deploy, VGA out. We would still be using the on-board graphics for the default monitor, this for the second.

2. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Not a FX5200, but has the ability to run both monitors off the one card. Low memory (64mb) but for a work environment it should be ok.

3. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
PCI-E, and once set up low profile it has 2 outs. We'd have to buy this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
To use the DVI out. Again this would be in place of the on-board graphics.


Anyone have an opinion on this, or other options?

Thanks a ton!

More about : choice corporate

a c 235 U Graphics card
June 3, 2010 9:15:38 PM

of the all the options you listed, I would go with #3. Granted you need adapters but its still less expensive then the other options and they will last you longer when you eventually upgrade OS and monitors.

my personal choice, get the ATI 3450. They are cheaper, they need no adapters, perform better then the 8400GS, and use equal power (around 18w). Granted you need to distribute drivers.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
a c 130 U Graphics card
June 3, 2010 9:32:54 PM

+1

I 100% Agree with this, i dont see the drivers as being a deal breaker.

Mactronix
m
0
l
Related resources
June 3, 2010 10:16:58 PM

Thanks for the input, I'd like to see what others think though... the driver issue would arise as we'd have to document or label which PC's have the ATI. As of right now we have about 150 of the FX5200's deployed. It is the only card is use at our company.

Also I don't see the low profile riser in the ATI box. Is it something I'd have to find and purchase?


m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 4, 2010 6:42:30 PM

For work apps, provided you're not doing any 3d modeling or editting, none of these cards really offer a performance advantage. I use a macbook pro (Geforce 8600GT-M) and use a USB dongle (Diamond BVU195, about $70) to display to a second screen. The first screen uses the DVI port of my laptop. I'm using dual 24" monitors @1920x1200 and it works fine.
m
0
l
!