success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

BurntSushi · 2011-04-08 22:23:09

Since discovering the magic of a dual head setup, I've been seeking a triple head setup that didn't require Xinerama. After literally years of waiting, AMD's eyefinity opened a window of opportunity.

I thought I'd post my success story in case anyone else wants to do this as well (and doesn't know about this approach).

The obligatory pictures. (I also took this opportunity to build my first PC.)

The approach to getting this working is actually quite straight-forward. All you need is an AMD video card with "eyefinity" support. (Something in the HD 5000 or HD 6000 series.) The trick used is to attach your third monitor via Display Port. (Support for DP has been added to the radeon driver within the last year, I think. KMS works brilliantly with it as well.) I went with the HD 5570. (I don't game and I don't use compositing.)

The big hiccup here was getting the correct Display Port adapter. My first purchase was the Accell UltraAV DP to DVI active adapter. It claimed it was "ATI Certified." (And indeed, it is listed as supporting Eyefinity on AMD's web site.)

After getting everything setup, the monitor on the DP wouldn't turn on. I tried using Catalyst and got some half-successful results: I could enable my monitor up to a resolution of 1440x900 (its native res is 1920x1080). I went back to the radeon driver and found that I could do the same by forcing the 1440x900 mode via xrandr. (KMS wouldn't work with it either.)

After a day or two of this, I gave up on the idea that this was a driver issue. I dug deeper into the Amazon reviews and discovered someone who had a similar problem: they couldn't get their monitor above 1440x900. They actually recommended using a cheaper DP -> VGA adapter, which apparently has a higher success rate. (I suppose the claim is that the conversion is easier.) So I went with the Accell UltraAV DP with VGA Active Adapter.

The adapter arrived in the mail today. I hooked it up, and the obvious xrandr command gave me three monitors instantly.

And finally, I can say that pytyle works on three monitors :-)

N.B. I'm using Openbox, so I haven't used any heavy compositing, but xcompmgr's transparency effects runs quite well. (Even when resizing a window to stretch all three monitors.)

JavaAtom · 2011-05-15 06:45:20

BurntSushi,

I ran across your post while searching for the very same thing! Glad to know someone else is interested in a triple-monitor setup!

You were talking about getting the setup working such that it "didn't require Xinerama," but it sounds like Eyefinity is effectively Xinerama-on-the-card. Were you able to have three distinct monitor-desktops? If not, that would make me a very sad panda. :-(

BurntSushi · 2011-05-15 17:17:27

JavaAtom wrote:

I ran across your post while searching for the very same thing! Glad to know someone else is interested in a triple-monitor setup!

Indeed, we are few in number!

JavaAtom wrote:

You were talking about getting the setup working such that it "didn't require Xinerama," but it sounds like Eyefinity is effectively Xinerama-on-the-card.

No no. Xinerama is an X extension designed to merge multiple physical monitors into one large desktop. Its draw back is that it must be statically configured in xorg.conf and it does not support graphics acceleration.

For this reason, many people do not use Xinerama. Instead, to power multiple monitors, we use the RandR extension for everything except those using the nvidia proprietary driver---in which case, nVidia TwinView must be used. (TwinView is nVidia's own version of Xinerama that supports graphics acceleration.)

To make matters more confusing, when using the RandR extension to power multiple monitors, information about those monitors is still reported through the Xinerama extension (and the RandR extension), even though the Xinerama extension isn't the one powering those monitors.

JavaAtom wrote:

Were you able to have three distinct monitor-desktops? If not, that would make me a very sad panda. :-(

You'll need to be more precise, I'm afraid. Nearly all multi-monitor setups these days work by merging all physical heads into one desktop. The other archaic way of multiple monitors is to use separate Screens via X. This allows you to move the pointer across monitors but not windows.

Most window managers these days will use the information from Xinerama and/or RandR to create the "effect" of three independent desktops. Namely, window maximization does not span all connected monitors, but only the one that it is on. Invariably though, you are still using one desktop in the X sense.

In sum, unless you have very specific needs, AMD's Eyefinity is exactly what you're looking for :-) I can move windows across monitors just like I would be able to if I were using nVidia TwinView or even the outdated Xinerama extension. And I get graphics acceleration!

If you're going this route, I must further emphasize that you take care in purchasing the Display Port adapters. See my OP for details.

JavaAtom · 2011-05-16 04:26:19

BurntSushi wrote:

For this reason, many people do not use Xinerama. Instead, to power multiple monitors, we use the RandR extension for everything except those using the nvidia proprietary driver---in which case, nVidia TwinView must be used. (TwinView is nVidia's own version of Xinerama that supports graphics acceleration.)
( . . .)
To make matters more confusing, when using the RandR extension to power multiple monitors, information about those monitors is still reported through the Xinerama extension (and the RandR extension), even though the Xinerama extension isn't the one powering those monitors.
( . . .)
Most window managers these days will use the information from Xinerama and/or RandR to create the "effect" of three independent desktops. Namely, window maximization does not span all connected monitors, but only the one that it is on. Invariably though, you are still using one desktop in the X sense.

My goal was the same type of setup as a dual-head configuration (running the radeon driver, not Catalyst). You've cleared up that question though.

I just ordered a Sapphire Radeon HD 5830 (Newegg # N82E16814102878) and, though your card has a regular DisplayPort, the port on this card is of the Mini variety. Thank god the Apple store is just down the road, eh?

BurntSushi · 2011-05-16 05:24:12

JavaAtom wrote:

Thank god the Apple store is just down the road, eh?

Ick. You'll probably overpay, but it might well be worth it given the finnickyness of DisplayPort adapters.

Good luck!

JavaAtom · 2011-05-21 02:51:58

Purchased a $39 Belkin Mini-DisplayPort to HDMI adapter (from within the Apple Store). Works flawlessly.

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-05-29 02:42:45

What commands in xrandr did you use to successfully achieve the screen resolutions between all 3 monitors?

BurntSushi · 2011-05-29 03:13:25

I use this:

xrandr --output DVI-0 --auto --pos 0x0 --output VGA-0 --auto --pos 1920x0 --output DisplayPort-0 --auto --pos 3600x0

You could replace '--pos' with something like '--right-of DVI-0', but my monitor-managing code sometimes wants to position monitors differently.

For reference, here's my xrandr output:

Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 5520 x 1080, maximum 8192 x 8192
DisplayPort-0 connected 1920x1080+3600+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 521mm x 293mm
   1920x1080      60.0*+
   1600x1200      60.0  
   1680x1050      60.0  
   1400x1050      60.0  
   1280x1024      75.0     60.0  
   1440x900       75.0     59.9  
   1280x960       60.0  
   1152x864       75.0  
   1024x768       75.1     70.1     60.0  
   832x624        74.6  
   800x600        72.2     75.0     60.3     56.2  
   640x480        72.8     75.0     66.7     60.0  
   720x400        70.1  
DVI-0 connected 1920x1080+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 510mm x 290mm
   1920x1080      59.9*+   60.0  
   1680x1050      60.0  
   1280x1024      75.0     60.0  
   1152x864       75.0  
   1024x768       75.1     60.0  
   832x624        74.6  
   800x600        75.0     60.3     56.2  
   640x480        75.0     60.0  
   720x400        70.1  
VGA-0 connected 1680x1050+1920+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 474mm x 296mm
   1680x1050      60.0*+
   1600x1200      60.0  
   1400x1050      60.0  
   1280x1024      75.0  
   1440x900       75.0     59.9  
   1280x960       60.0  
   1360x768       59.8  
   1152x864       75.0  
   1024x768       75.1     70.1     60.0  
   832x624        74.6  
   800x600        72.2     75.0     60.3     56.2  
   640x480        72.8     75.0     66.7     60.0  
   720x400        70.1

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-05-30 14:58:31

Wow! Thanks! That looks like it's exactly what I need. As soon as my the two more monitors I ordered get here, I'll be able to try it out. If I have problems I'll post back if not. I'll give you a picture of my setup .

BurntSushi · 2011-05-30 20:20:30

MrTolkinghorn wrote:

Wow! Thanks! That looks like it's exactly what I need. As soon as my the two more monitors I ordered get here, I'll be able to try it out. If I have problems I'll post back if not. I'll give you a picture of my setup .

Excellent. I'm subscribed to this thread, so I'll work with you to get it working if you hit problems. Just be aware that display port adapters have a reportedly non-trivial chance of not working correctly. And make sure you have an AMD card that supports Eyefinity.

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-05-31 06:59:03

BurntSushi wrote:

Excellent. I'm subscribed to this thread, so I'll work with you to get it working if you hit problems. Just be aware that display port adapters have a reportedly non-trivial chance of not working correctly. And make sure you have an AMD card that supports Eyefinity.

Well, I have a 5970 so no problem there. I went ahead and nabbed this adapter: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814999034 I'm fairly certain it will work based on the reviews. Obviously, this isn't going to be working with any Nvidia cards, but I don't have one of those, so not a problem here. After looking at your command, I'm absolutely confident this is doable, which makes me very happy. It wouldn't be possible to use xrandr if I were using two video cards, but even though the 5970 is 2 cores, I don't think that's going to be a problem since it's all on one card and looks as such to the system.

Last edited by MrTolkinghorn (2011-05-31 06:59:59)

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-06-04 20:15:49

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5960242/IMAG0020.jpg

There ya go! It's working perfectly . Sorry about the seriously crappy phone picture, and since I just installed them, I have some serious cable management to do... I absolutely love it. I had to add this to my xorg.conf though, to let me set a virtual resolution before I could just run the command.

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Default Screen"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Virtual 5760 1200
EndSubSection
EndSection

Also, I used the pixels to adjust where my monitors were due to their different aspect ratios / size (the two I bought are 1920x1080 and my main is 1920x1200), so the command I ran looks like this:

xrandr --output DFP3 --auto --pos 0x100 --output DFP1 --auto --pos 1920x0 --output DFP2 --auto --pos 3840x100

Last edited by MrTolkinghorn (2011-06-04 20:17:05)

BurntSushi · 2011-06-04 21:08:32

Sweet! I'm glad it's working for you!

As for the virtual resolution---are you using the proprietary AMD driver? If so, then yeah, you'd have to do that. In particular, the proprietary driver doesn't support KMS, so the virtual resolution isn't set for you.

If you have the open source driver, then you should totally enable KMS---you shouldn't need to set the virtual resolution.

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-06-04 21:50:44

I am using the propietary AMD driver... Is there an advantage I would see to kms?

BurntSushi · 2011-06-05 01:03:41

MrTolkinghorn wrote:

I am using the propietary AMD driver... Is there an advantage I would see to kms?

Well, you can't use KMS with the proprietary driver, so if you need the proprietary driver, you'll have to do without KMS.

As far as the advantages of KMS... I suppose you could investigate further, but there are three primary advantages that I particularly enjoy:

1) No need to set virtual resolution in xorg.con
2) Resolution is automatically configured when in the console.
3) Very quick tty switching (fantastic if you have multiple X servers running simultaneously).

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-06-05 01:07:13

Well... I don't think I'm gonna change, I have no problem setting the virtual resolution in x, it's working perfectly, and I do definitely need 3d effects at their best. I also don't use a lot of tty shells, so as it is, I'm very happy with it the way it is. Don't fix what aint broke as they say, the advantages don't affect me...

dameunmate · 2011-06-06 00:35:18

Thanks for the heads-up! That's almost my dream setup (including the maps all over the walls in your photo! )

Can I use the Sapphire RADEON HD 5670 for a three monitor setup in Arch Linux with Openbox? Do the open source drivers work with this card?
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/ … iew.aspx#1
http://www.lambda-tek.com/componentshop … productTop

Also is it possible to have two monitors in portrait and one larger one in landscape?

I originally bought the Matrox M9138 which has three miniDisplayPort outputs for the same purpose but it all broke with the update of Xorg (see my frustrating topic on the subject).

Last edited by dameunmate (2011-06-06 00:44:58)

BurntSushi · 2011-06-06 02:16:48

dameunmate wrote:

Thanks for the heads-up! That's almost my dream setup (including the maps all over the walls in your photo! )

Haha, excellent! Here you go.

dameunmate wrote:

Can I use the Sapphire RADEON HD 5670 for a three monitor setup in Arch Linux with Openbox? Do the open source drivers work with this card?
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/ … iew.aspx#1
http://www.lambda-tek.com/componentshop … productTop

I would say yes. Just make sure that the card you buy has Eyefinity support. Your first link says the card does, but the second link doesn't mention it. I don't know if *every* new card automatically has Eyefinity, or if AMD releases separate models with and without Eyefinity.

And yes, the open source drivers work brilliantly. They work great with compositing too, but you'll likely be unable to beat the proprietary driver in performance.

It should be as simple as installing the driver and issuing the appropriate xrandr command. (See this thread.) I don't think I even have an xorg.conf.

dameunmate wrote:

Also is it possible to have two monitors in portrait and one larger one in landscape?

I can't speak to the proprietary driver, but I don't see why not with the open source driver. It supports the full RandR 1.3 spec the last time I checked, which would enable you to do that.

I just checked; I was able to use the '--rotate' option via xrandr with one of my monitors successfully.

dameunmate wrote:

I originally bought the Matrox M9138 which has three miniDisplayPort outputs for the same purpose but it all broke with the update of Xorg (see my frustrating topic on the subject).

Ah, I remember looking into that option, but it didn't seem too popular and the support for it on Linux didn't look too hot.

It seems you already have experience with DisplayPort, so I guess I don't need to give you the obligatory warning regarding the DisplayPort adapters. (See this thread.)

BurntSushi · 2011-06-06 02:28:11

I forgot to mention... My day-to-day workflow uses Xmonad, but I've run Openbox, KDE (with KWin) and a homegrown window manager quite successfully as well. Also, compositing in KWin is fantastic---with the open source driver.

Last edited by BurntSushi (2011-06-06 02:28:33)

MrTolkinghorn · 2011-06-06 03:31:10

BurntSushi wrote:

dameunmate wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up! That's almost my dream setup (including the maps all over the walls in your photo! )
Haha, excellent! Here you go.
dameunmate wrote:
Can I use the Sapphire RADEON HD 5670 for a three monitor setup in Arch Linux with Openbox? Do the open source drivers work with this card?
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/ … iew.aspx#1
http://www.lambda-tek.com/componentshop … productTop
I would say yes. Just make sure that the card you buy has Eyefinity support. Your first link says the card does, but the second link doesn't mention it. I don't know if *every* new card automatically has Eyefinity, or if AMD releases separate models with and without Eyefinity.
And yes, the open source drivers work brilliantly. They work great with compositing too, but you'll likely be unable to beat the proprietary driver in performance.
It should be as simple as installing the driver and issuing the appropriate xrandr command. (See this thread.) I don't think I even have an xorg.conf.
dameunmate wrote:
Also is it possible to have two monitors in portrait and one larger one in landscape?
I can't speak to the proprietary driver, but I don't see why not with the open source driver. It supports the full RandR 1.3 spec the last time I checked, which would enable you to do that.
I just checked; I was able to use the '--rotate' option via xrandr with one of my monitors successfully.
dameunmate wrote:
I originally bought the Matrox M9138 which has three miniDisplayPort outputs for the same purpose but it all broke with the update of Xorg (see my frustrating topic on the subject).
Ah, I remember looking into that option, but it didn't seem too popular and the support for it on Linux didn't look too hot.
It seems you already have experience with DisplayPort, so I guess I don't need to give you the obligatory warning regarding the DisplayPort adapters. (See this thread.)

As for the portrait / landscape in non open-source drivers, I'm sure it would work, you can set whatever virtual resolution you want.

One question, with the open-source drivers, if I was to not set a virtual resolution, what would that look like. It's difficult to describe what I want, but here, I'll try. As it is, I believe my resolution is actually 5760x1200 even though my screens on either side is 1080, so my mouse can go up, past the edge and be lost just north of my 1080p monitors in the "extra" 120 pixels. My windows still snap just fine to the screen edge and everything though, so if I were to switch to the open-source drivers, would my screen edge be at the 1080part of those monitors and the 1200 of my middle monitor?

Also, dameunmate, I have, and probably will have two monitors in portrait and my middle in landscape, so I don't have to turn my head so much, I'm currently in the process of building a monitor mount that will do that. I even built my desk, 1.5 inch tubing for the supports, wooden struts, and a nice 80 inch piece of glass on top, so it's a simple matter to build my monitor support and then bolt it on to the back of my desk, that way I don't lose as much of my desk space to my monitors, plus, in portrait for the side monitors, it'll be amazing. I may need to get a world wall map that's a great idea, very classy, and it could be useful too! (Sadly, that picture doesn't show the Taylor Swift poster just to the left, or my ginormous serenity poster on my door ) Those French memo boards (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=c … 20&bih=995), are awesome for posting lots of pictures all at once, and adding a great touch to my room.

Not all 5670's actually support eyefinity, see here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/28635 … -eyefinity

Based on the ports on the back of that card, it looks like it should work (it looks very similar to this one which does support eyefinity), this graphics card, which is a very similar model that has it for sure.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814102870

And, based on these specifications, it does appear to support eyefinity.

http://www.dabs.com/products/sapphire-t … -7281.html

But, I would advise away from a passively cooled graphics card like the one you picked out. I have had problems with passively cooled gpu's in the past. unless you have high airflow in your case or a side fan which will be blowing directly on the gpu, I'd try and pick up a gpu which has a fan on it...

Last edited by MrTolkinghorn (2011-06-06 03:50:12)

BurntSushi · 2011-06-06 14:10:30

MrTolkinghorn wrote:

One question, with the open-source drivers, if I was to not set a virtual resolution, what would that look like. It's difficult to describe what I want, but here, I'll try. As it is, I believe my resolution is actually 5760x1200 even though my screens on either side is 1080, so my mouse can go up, past the edge and be lost just north of my 1080p monitors in the "extra" 120 pixels. My windows still snap just fine to the screen edge and everything though, so if I were to switch to the open-source drivers, would my screen edge be at the 1080part of those monitors and the 1200 of my middle monitor?

Ah, that's called "dead area." I could rant about it for days, but no, that isn't going to go away. It is related to X, not to the drivers.

Even with multiple monitors, there is only one "root" window. With X, windows must be rectangular. Since your monitor layout could quite easily take on a non-rectangular layout (as yours does), there is a slight disconnect. The root window must be rectangular and big enough to encompass your monitor layout. Invariably, this creates "dead area"---places on the root window that are not visible on any monitor, but do in fact exist.

The good news is that dead area is easily calculated, so programs that are smart won't place windows there. The bad news is that a lot of programs aren't smart and your mouse can still move there. I've always thought that one could "warp" the pointer away from dead area, but the fact that nobody has done it (and it would be easy to implement) suggests it is infeasible.

groundnuty · 2011-06-06 23:35:47

great thread! For months I heard people saying things like "there is no reason why eyefinity shouldnt work with 3head + 1xscreen" / "it will probably work" etc... but I was unable to find any prof that somebody got the bloody thing working

My dream setup would be:
3x head + 1x xscreen + composition + acceptable 3d performance.
As I read this thread I assume that this is duable?

One info that I'm missing... anyone here plays games with wine?
Atm I have crappy GeForce 9400 GT + twinview and SC2 on lowest setting was working fine. If I would go with setup described here, should I expect any problems? I would imagine that the card I will buy will be >> my current one and even if ati drivers offer worse performance for such gaming experience in worst case I would end up with the same performance I have now - am I right?

Thx for all the help!

BurntSushi · 2011-06-06 23:53:39

I don't play games at all on Linux, so I can't be of much help in that area.

groundnuty wrote:

My dream setup would be:
3x head + 1x xscreen + composition + acceptable 3d performance.
As I read this thread I assume that this is duable?

I am achieving precisely that setup with the open source driver, although my daily workflow only includes using xcompmgr for compositing. However, I do use KDE (with KWin + OpenGL) on occasion, and the compositing effects work great! I've also tested a live Ubuntu 11.04 disc and Unity ran fine.

It looks like MrTolkinghorn is using the proprietary driver, but I don't know if he's using compositing. Honestly though, given that my open source driver appears to handle compositing fine (with KDE), I think you'll be golden.

As has been mentioned in this thread, the keys are 1) getting a card that says it supports Eyefinity and 2) getting an appropriate display port adapter. (Read this thread :-))

dameunmate · 2011-06-07 12:31:55

Thanks everyone, I will report back if I try it. However my friend's given me an ASUS nvidia 8600 GT that may keep me going with one monitor until I get the other two.

My monitor has a DisplayPort input so I'm assuming I don't need to worry about adapters?

just don't stare at that flat projection world map for too long - Greenland is not bigger than Brazil or Australia!

BurntSushi · 2011-06-07 15:52:52

dameunmate wrote:

My monitor has a DisplayPort input so I'm assuming I don't need to worry about adapters?

Indeed. (Unless you get a card that has a mini-DisplayPort input.)

dameunmate wrote:

just don't stare at that flat projection world map for too long - Greenland is not bigger than Brazil or Australia!

Haha, duly noted :-)

Arch Linux

#1 2011-04-08 22:23:09

success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#2 2011-05-15 06:45:20

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#3 2011-05-15 17:17:27

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#4 2011-05-16 04:26:19

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#5 2011-05-16 05:24:12

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#6 2011-05-21 02:51:58

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#7 2011-05-29 02:42:45

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#8 2011-05-29 03:13:25

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#9 2011-05-30 14:58:31

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#10 2011-05-30 20:20:30

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#11 2011-05-31 06:59:03

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#12 2011-06-04 20:15:49

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#13 2011-06-04 21:08:32

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#14 2011-06-04 21:50:44

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#15 2011-06-05 01:03:41

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#16 2011-06-05 01:07:13

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#17 2011-06-06 00:35:18

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#18 2011-06-06 02:16:48

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#19 2011-06-06 02:28:11

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#20 2011-06-06 03:31:10

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#21 2011-06-06 14:10:30

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#22 2011-06-06 23:35:47

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#23 2011-06-06 23:53:39

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#24 2011-06-07 12:31:55

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

#25 2011-06-07 15:52:52

Re: success with triple monitors using eyefinity and xf86-video-ati

Board footer