> but they put a lot of demands on the graphics card.
> Definately need a higher end card with more RAM to handle
> dual screens.
No, no, NO!
Video RAM is mostly only used as a fast buffer cache to store textures in games and such. We don't use textures in MCAD, and even those who does probably only use a megabyte worth of it.
VRAM is also used for buffring the output to the screen, but even if you use twin 20" at 1600x1200 with 32-bit color, you only need less than 16 MB.
The amount of RAM on a CAD graphics card is IRRELEVANT with anything like 32 MB and above. Unless you are doing flashy presentations using a lot of textures, in which case you probably don't use Pro/E Wildfire.
What you DO need however, is a fast geometry accelerator. That would be a part of the GPU on the vidcard chip, not the VRAM, so the MHz the GPU is running at is interesting while the VRAM speed and amount is not.
As for dual screens - there is one issue that is important: the technology for this features two ways of operation.
One is where the graphics card sees the screens as two halves of a total. This means that your OS thinks the workspace is something like 3200x1200 wide. This is inconvenient, as it causes windows to span over the border and most popups appear in the middle, split by the monitor bezels. Nasty.
The other requires an extra driver component and it splits the screen into two, like 2x1600x1200, and program windows behave accordingly. If you click "maximize" they will only fill one screen. Popups appear in the middle of one screen or the other, depending. Much better.
However - the software implementation of how this works differ.
I had an ATI card and I didn't like at all how it owuld first span both screens and then shrink the window to fit one. I also got extra window buttons added to clutter the interface.
Then I switched to a nVidia card and it is much better, although many programs tend to only work on one screen and not the other. One program works on one screen but opens all right-click menus on the other. Annoying.
I don't know how it works on Matrox' and 3DLabs' cards, and I don't care to learn either. Old experience says that Matrox probably put a lot of care into the drivers, wheras 3DLabs paid a student to do it.