 |
 |
ADC to DVI, then DVI to S-video - will it work?
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I´m in the process of making my G5 a mean, lean video machine. I´m too lazy to convert divx-movies into formats that my DVD-player can read, so I´ve just bought Apples DVI-to-video adapter so that I can display the movie on my TV through the S-Video output of the adapter.
However, getting back to that lazy part again, it´s too much of a hassle to exchange the DVI-to-video adapter with the original DVI-to-VGA adapter (which I use for my monitor) each time I want to watch a movie.
So, since my Dual G5 has a graphic card with both a ADC output and DVI-output, and I´m not using the ADC output at all - would this work: I buy a ADC-to-DVI adapter. Then I connect the DVI-to-video adapter to the ADC-to-DVI adapter, which then has the S-Video cable that goes into the TV.
Yes, it will look like an old russian science lab that hasn´t got an increase in funding since Stalin, but: Will I get a video signal on my TV?
Ø.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The City Of Diamonds
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't see why it wouldn't.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Powaqqatsi:
I don't see why it wouldn't.
Me neither - except for one thing, which entered my head about ten minutes ago: I have the 9600 card with only 64MB memory. Perhaps 64 / 2 = 32MB memory per port is too little?
Will video on my TV look funny (not John Cleese-funny, but strangely funny)? Or slow? Or something inbetween?
Thanks!
Ø.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The City Of Diamonds
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by oivindi:
Me neither - except for one thing, which entered my head about ten minutes ago: I have the 9600 card with only 64MB memory. Perhaps 64 / 2 = 32MB memory per port is too little?
Will video on my TV look funny (not John Cleese-funny, but strangely funny)? Or slow? Or something inbetween?
Thanks!
Ø.
Not at all, it would even work with like 4MB/screen. Quartz extreme needs 16MB minimum per monitor so you have plenty with 32 per monitor. And if the secondary monitor is not on it doesn't use any memory so the full 64MB go to you primary monitor.
EDIT: by the way TV resolution is really low (unless you have something like a HD television) so you won't even notice the difference.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Admin Emeritus 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
OK, first let me clear something up: Quartz Extreme is not bound by VRAM, but by the model of graphics chip (though it does prefer as much VRAM as it can get). If you had an unsupported graphics chip and 1GB of VRAM, you still couldn't run QE.
On the Mac, the VRAM is indeed evenly split between graphics outputs. But 32MB on a Radeon 9600 is plenty.
Anyhow, your suggested setup should not work. Why? Because the DVI standard doesn't have any S-video signals. ATI's recent cards use the DVI connector, but when they detect the adapter, they switch off DVI signals and instead output S-video. (This is also why you can't use that adapter on older DVI cards -- they don't know to look for the adapter and switch signalling.) It is highly unlikely that the card even thinks to look for the S-video adapter on the ADC port, since they never envisioned it being connected there.
Instead, just spring for an ADC->VGA adapter for your monitor, and then you free up the DVI port to use the S-video adapter.
As for display quality: assuming the quality is comparable to that from a PowerBook's S-video output, the quality should be quite good indeed. It behaves just like any other monitor, other than being limited by the TV's low resolution.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by tooki:
Instead, just spring for an ADC->VGA adapter for your monitor, and then you free up the DVI port to use the S-video adapter.
Indeed...this is what I concluded with...it´s by far the easiest solution.
Thanks for all your help...splendid!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The City Of Diamonds
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by tooki:
OK, first let me clear something up: Quartz Extreme is not bound by VRAM, but by the model of graphics chip (though it does prefer as much VRAM as it can get). If you had an unsupported graphics chip and 1GB of VRAM, you still couldn't run QE.
But doesn't QE get disabled when you go below 16MB per channel ? I always thought it was like that. I knew QE support has to do with de type of GPU but I also thought they put in the 16 meg as a minimum amount of VRAM to use QE. So if you have a QE capable GPU but only 8MB of VRAM (there aren't any like that, just theory here) it won't work. (without any hacking that is).
Right ?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|