from 2016 to autumn2018: Using A Video Splitter To Extend Monitors / Cheap Alternatives To Matrox Triple Head?

keftaparty

@Michel

I'm using the SDI version of the fx4 with 1080p50 signal. I'm using the display port input with 3840x2160 p50

Works very good.

Michel

@keftaparty

Thanks, good to know.

Best Michel

bonemap

Hi,

I have been interested in the Datapath FX4 for some time. However, I can not see that it provides a compelling case over the Matrox TH2Go. In particular the price of the Datapath fX4 unit is $1900 USD compared to the Matrox TH2Go $300 USD. I can operate 2 x TH2Go on a MacBook Pro simultaneously and achieve 6 x video heads for less than 1/3 of the cost of the Datapath. With the two TH2Go I can operate in configurations of 2,3,4,5 and 6 heads. This appears to me something of great flexibility and economy over the Datapath solution. Please correct me if I am wrong.

DusX

@bonemap
I agree, yet I have had trouble with using a TH2GO when sending HD over SDI.
First, the TH2GO (displayport edition) supports max 3x 1920x1080 at 50hz, this is a problem in (or can be) in North America.
Second, the output isn't always SDI friendly, I have found that the default 1280x720 60hz output settings are not accepted by Black Magic mini converters (a timing issue I think).
Just a couple things to be aware of.

bonemap

@dusx

Thanks for the reality check! You are right of course, cabling and resolution is going to be a big part of the equation. I am having trouble justifying the price tag of the Datapath units at the moment but that might change.

Best Wishes

bonemap

Fred

The data path units offer a gerat deal of flexibility and features over the matrox hear, you can specify very specific resolutions and refresh rates, right down to pixel timings, you can also clone and crop displays within the setup and it is all hardware based and 100% reliable. They also give rotation and complete custom resolutions. Matrox gear is OK, but very limited compared to the datapath gear and as @DusX says, they are not great with timings and the drivers are dodgy, they are engineered withe different mentality, the datapath has enough processing power to do anything that it possible with as many pixels as they can push, the matrox gear is spec'd above its capabilities and in reality is much more limited. The datapath feels and acts like a pro piece of gear and the matrox stuff can work in a lot of situations, but it is easy to find situations where the matrox falls flat.

bonemap

@fred said:

The data path units offer a great deal of flexibility and features over the matrox

I hear you. Considering the price difference between the two options it is probably not wise to make a comparison anyway. The cost for the Datapath FX4 in Australia is $2600 + freight, I will have to wait for a big commission or grant before I will be seeing one anytime soon.

Best Wishes

bonemap

Fred

@bonemap I would suggest, if the opportunity arises, to rent one for a show and try it. One word of warning, to do the config on OSX it is terminal only, but the windows tool has a gui.

tomthebom

Thank you so much for all your input! All your comments make it easier to make the decision.... Best regards to everybody!

DearVolunteers

Is Matrox TripleHead still working?

For mac their drivers don't go past Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard. I'm running Monterey 12.4

https://www.matrox.com/en/vide...

If matrox is no longer an option, what else is out there in a similar price range?

Woland

@dearvolunteers

I can try to see if I have the correct adaptors to test my MatroxTriplehead2Go DP Edition on my Monterey M1 Mac, but I imagine that it would still work. It works fine on my Intel Mac Pro which is running Mojave.

Best wishes,

Woland