2D/desktop & VIVO quality: GF4 vs. GF-FX?

[bluemax]

It's been a while since this has really been an issue so I need a refresher....

GF2's were notorious for rotten 2D quality... many were fuzzy and unacceptable. Some GF3's were as well, but fewer.

Was this problem pretty much eliminated with the GF4 lineup, or was it not until the GFFX that things really got sharp and clear across the board?

Same goes for the recording capabilities regarding VIVO. I want my video camera contents to look nice as a video disc.

I'll be using VGA output on a 21" CRT.... clear output is important. I'm asking about nVidia because those are the offers I've recieved on VIVO cards. It's either a GF4 4200, 4400 or 5600 (used) or go to ATI and get the AIW VE new or 8500DV used.

I don't need a TV tuner at all.... but I want good video input quality for my video camera.

 

[Gurck]

My Leadtek 4600 seemed perfectly clear to me, I notice no change in 2d quality now that I upgraded to a 9800pro - however this is subjective and I'll be the first to admit that, while I have good vision, I'm not very discerning. For example, JPGs look the same to me as BMPs unless high compression is used.

 

[DaFinn]

Well, the fuzziness in the early GF cards was mainly due to crappy components used by 3rd party manufacturers in their cards. I have in the office still some Quadro 2 MX cards (GF2 MX) that have absolutely georgeuos 2D.

What comes to GF 4 line and up, I have not heard anybody complaining about the 2D quality. I've had Ti4200/ Ti4600 and now FX5900Ultra and all have great 2D!

VIVO quality again is completely up to the components used in the cards. No GPU has built in Video-IN functionality, all have a specific chip on board. It's the quality of this chip that determines the quality...