Since I'm experiencing some issues with my current setup (4870+GT120) I'd like to hear if the new cards work on 10.6.5 with at least two displays connected to it, and one of them in portrait mode. Ideally someone with three screens connected to a single card and two of them in portrait (on the DP outputs).
I'm considering purchasing a 15" MacBook Pro when the upgraded models are released. I do a lot of coding so I'd like to have at least one external monitor, maybe two. Can an external monitor be configured to portrait mode? That would let me see as much code as possible. Do the MBPs support dual external monitors? What resolution max? I realize that the new models haven't been released yet so it's hard to know for sure. I might just get a 27" iMac for now, then get a 13" MBP later. I'm switching from a 15" Dell.
I've got two 20.1" normal aspect monitors right now (Dell 2001FPs), both being driven by the GT120 in my Nehalem Mac Pro. I want to buy a third screen that I can put in portrait orientation to better display printed pages.
1) 24" widescreen aspect. 2) Ability to stand in a portrait orientation (tall, not wide) with the default stand. 3) Ideally a Dell model, since my other two screens are Dells (this would be nice, but is not essential). 4) Hopefully somewhat cheap (~$300).
I see plenty of 24" models on the Dell site, but it is not clear to me which ones can be mounted portrait on the provided stand. I don't care about the screen being able to pivot; I intend to mount it portrait and leave it there.
I know many say that the sheer volume of 16gb outweighs the speed difference between the two channel settings, but I'm wondering how 32-bit programs (mostly audio applications) will address the RAM best?
I ran some tests on my 2009 Quad Nehalem to try and determine what was up with the triple Vs dual memory "brouhaha".
I posted the results as a new thread because I think it will be useful information for a lot of quad owners, but it was originally going to be a reply to this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=735845
Here we go. Tesselator suggested 3 tests that could show the differences in speed between triple and dual channel bandwidth.
Quote:
As one idea I would maybe try creating a few very large images (16-bit, blank white, blank black, gradient fill) and then duplicating and deleting that layer repeatedly a few hundred times.
So I did them, 10 times each. I could have gone on, but the results were very very stable after the first 2 attempts.
Set-up: a 40Mpx, 16bit image (8000*5000). First test it was simply filled white; second test: black; and third test a black to white gradient. I added a fourth test, using a real (photo) 12Mpx RAW image from my Nikon D300.
I created (took a while!) an action with 350 repetitions of "duplicate layer" and "delete layer", followed by a red fill to let me know the action was done. The same action was used in all four tests.
The computer was restarted before each of the four tests, which may explain the irregularities on the first 1-2 attempts. Nothing else but PS4 was launched.
The results are interesting:
We can clearly see that the simple white and black fills show a speed difference of around 10%.
We can also clearly see that this difference disappears when a more complex image is used. The use of more complex images represents a much more realistical use of PS.
To make things even more realistic, I also tested RetouchActions's speed test on my own 12Mpx image. I use nearly all of the operations of that action on a daily basis, so it's a lot more representative of the work I do on PS.
Here are the results:
The results are clear: 11% increase in performance using 8GB of ram (Vs 6GB) when working on a 12Mpx image.
Added info: number of page-outs after running the 10 test series (after about 45 minutes of intense PS work): -17K when using 6GB (1.7K page-out avg). -10K when using 8GB (1K page-out avg).
For me the results are definitive: unless I plan on working only with full black or full white images (not even black and white!), having 8GB is better, even when working on smallish 12Mpx files. I imagine the differences would have been even greater using bigger file sizes of actual complex images.
What would now be interesting: someone with a 2009MP Octo doing the same tests at 12GB and 16GB.
Mac-mini, OS X Leopard: Suddenly my wife's Leopard Mac- Mini (monitor) screen shows a 'vibrating' display that is split into three distorted parts. I can see it is the Finder shown three times. Fixing Permissions does nothing. Is this a hardware or software problem?
I am looking at my 24 inch LED and wondering how one might configure a dual monitor setup with two of these. The single cable is too short for any arrangement but CPU directly behind the monitors. Not enough length to get both to the floor under my desk or with the CPU to the side of one.
how to setup dual monitors. I have a 2009 Mac Pro with a ATI Radeon HD 4870. I dont see the options in the Display settings. Also I I get nothing on the second monitor?
I would like to use the machine to do powerpoints at our church. I want to use the internal monitor and an external monitor (projector) to do the powerpoints. I want it to work like the my iBook with the screen spanning hack installed.
if not then i will probably end up using a g3 desktop instead.
I�m looking to setup another monitor for my 07-08 iMac, I have tried searching and googling for an answer but don�t seem to have had much luck, so I have got a few questions.
1. Is my iMac even able to support dual monitors?
2. If so how would I go about this?
3. Will just any monitor work or has to be a certain type?
I am looking to run a dual monitor setup with my mac mini. Can someone point me in the right direction on what is needed (if anything). Both monitors are brand new, but neither have hdmi.
I have been running my macbook pro open, with a single monitor running beside it. I have come to the conclusion that I would benefit from two large monitors while working at home.
I know I need to buy the dualhead2go DP edition, but what Im not sure about is the cables I need to hook up to my monitors. I haven't yet decided what two monitors I am going to hook up to it, although they will be exactly the same and have HDMI connections.
What I am planning on doing is Getting the Dual Head 2 go, along with 2 DisplayPort to HDMI converters, and 2 HDMI cables, Correct me if Im wrong, but this should work?
Also, If anyone is currently using a dual head to go, how is the performance? I wont be doing any gaming, so that is not an issue, but for day to day tasks I assume everything will run fine? Im running the 330 in my 15' MBP.
I need a bit of insight as to how to maximize the performance (and if there is any) with dual display setups on both my MP1,1 and 5,1.
First off, MP 5,1. Currently I'm running a 30" ACD off a DVI and 23" of a MDP to DVI on a 5870. The 30" is my main work display - the 23" is pretty much running trivial things, like browsers, finder, iTunes, etc. Since VRAM is being split between the two displays, would I benefit from installing a second video card to just run the 23" monitor and dedicate the 5870 to just run the 30" ACD? If yes, what should I use? I have an old 7300, but If there's anything better out there that's non cable powered, I'll get it. Also, there are times (rarely) when I need to run Windows 7-64bit to do some 3d CAD work - would having video cards from different vendors (hence different drivers) cause W7 to go nuts (conflicts, etc)? I can live with just the 30" on W7. I want to get get the most out of 5870 and 30" ACD while not running into conflicts under OS X by introducing another video card.
Second, MP 1,1. It's windows 7 64-bit machine only. I have OS X installed, but since I use it for work I never boot into it. It's running a 27" display (1920x1200) on DVI and 23" (1680X1050) on MDP to DVI adapter. Again, the bigger display is my work area, and the smaller one runs browsers, outlook, etc. I do 3d CAD work, so more VRAM I dedicate to my main display, better it is. So back to my original question...what are my options? I do have that 7300 hanging around, but, again, I'm not so thrilled on mixing video card vendors and drivers. Should I just get some sort of low grade Windows based ATI Radeon card (don't care much of OS X on that machine).
I've got a friend that was using her Mac SE original from 1990 or so up until year 2004, at which time I insisted she get hooked up on an iMac g3 333mhz -- and I tried to get her an Apple Tech out to NC where she is to put a new hd in that old machine and some memory.
Well she's been running 9.2.2 and now it's time to go to Panther on an iBook 500mhz that I've upgraded with new hd and memory etc.
But I don't have the original set up guide. Yes, I downloaded a "users manual" off Apple but I need the basic booklet that came with the original machine -- or a download of it.
Anyone got one? Also anyone got a good Panther tutorial for someone who barely knows how to use OS9?
Just ordered a 17" MBP and am looking to use a dual monitor setup with an HPw22. I've tried to do some research on my own but am still unsure about what adapter I should go with as this is my first time attempting to run a dual monitor setup. Below are the specs of the monitor for the interfaces with a link to the entire specs.
Interfaces 1 x VGA - 15 pin HD D-Sub (HD-15) , 1 x DVI-D - 24 pin digital DVI
[URL]
I was just wondering what someone who is a bit more knowledgeable about this would recommend getting adapter wise. Can I go with either the Mini DisplayPort to VGA or Mini DisplayPort to DVI since my monitor has both? Is their an advantage to one over the other?
I have a new 2010 MBP and I'd like to hook up two external monitors to it, more specifically, two ASUS VW246H 24-Inch Widescreen LCD Monitors. Either via HDMI or DVI connections. I've found various usb monitor adapters, but i've read that many can't quite 'keep up' and I really can't seem to find a solid solution out there. So does anyone have a dual monitor setup they currently use, if so, what are you using to connect the mini display port to both external monitors.
Installed without problems on a 3 y.o. 15MBP and a new iMac. See no performance issues so far, but I HATE the fact that the FULL SCREEN photo viewing is no longer there! I just hate it, that there is absolutely no way to view pictures full screen. period. (this was THE MOST important feature of iPhoto.) As such, zooming in full screen is NOT available anymore either, instead of floating windows with adjustments, etc., zoom, effects, you get stupid permanent bars that you can't even move anywhere. Also, gone is ability to quick launch a full screen slideshow. You are now asked to select photos for a slideshow first, and then create that slideshow. In Classic you will get an ability to view these full screen, thats the only way. The stupid music that accompanies classic is ... well, stupid. I just wish the Apple store in Bethesda MD had it installed so I could see how horrible it is, before giving them $79 for a Family Pack! My money now goes to Adobe for LR3, a much, much better suite! Forgot to mention, this version is NOT 64 bit, and it does not recognize dual-screen mode either, something that Adobe implemented years ago. Shame on APple for dummifying a simple photo viewer to the iPhone level.
When i select a portrait photo the preview on the right shows the correct orientation, but when i click print the full print preview (and then the printout) has turned to landscape trimming the top and bottom off the photo. This has only happened since Yosemite.
I know apple says you need two GT 120's for a dual screen, but couldn't you have a MDP for the first screen, then get a DVI to MDP adapter for the second screen? or would OSX not recognize it?
I want to use my i7 as MediaPlayer. So I've connected to iMac video out a Plasma TV. There a way tp switch off only the iMac monitor when I'm wathing some video on my TV?
I have recently (4 weeks) upgraded to Aperture 3. I noticed in one project today that some previews that should be landscape are forced and distorted into portrait mode and vice versa in the preview. Opening the image shows the image in the correct orientation. Updating preview seems to make no difference. I'm reluctant to rebuild from masters as I have made many alterations to this project (2500 images). Here's a screenshot:
I just picked up a 2010 Mac Mini. Intel 2.4 cpu, installed a OWC SSD and 8gb of RAM. Anyways, using the HDMI to DVI that was included, anytime I switch to have the monitor rotated 90 degrees so it is in portrait, the quality goes away. The text no longer looks clear, the display seems to lag, and if I drag a window, the image tears really bad. Just confirmed this also happens with a mini display port to dvi connection. I have also tried 2 different DVI cables, both a single link and a dual link.
Does Keynote have the ability to work in a Portrait Layout?
I know that Microsoft's PowerPoint gives you the ability to work in either Portrait or Landscape. I can't seem to find anything about this for Keynote. Therefore, I am assuming that it does not exist. Please don't tell me that I don't need it.
Been trying to add a page I made in landscape mode to my portrait based document but if I do that I either change the whole document into portrait or landscape which isn't ideal. How to use both modes in the same document?. Like I can I make page 1 portrait and say page 3 landscape?
I was told that the new 5k imac can support one external 4k display via thunderbolt, but the 5k imac cannot itself be rotated into portrait mode (on a vesa mount for example). If I connect an external 4k display via thunderbolt to the new 5k imac, can the external display be rotated into portrait mode so I can have 3840 pixels vertically on the 4k display?
Info: iMac with Retina 5K display, OS X Yosemite (10.10)