2D: Matrox contenders?

andyrossmeissl

Junior Member
Jul 15, 2003
3
0
0
Hi there-

My video card crapped out on me recently, so its time for a new one. I've got have a high-performance card because I have the Sony GDM-FW900, but I don't ever use the 3D features of the newer fancy cards. I've heard that Matrox is the way to go for high-performance 2D (I'm looking at the P650) . . . are there others I should consider?

TIA,
Andy
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: aircooled
Yes Matrox tops 2D. Next in line would be ATI....
Built by ATI, and some Powered by ATI cards have good IQ (Sapphire builds some built-by-ATI cards, so theirs should be fine, but some of the cheaper powered-by-ATI cards use low quality components and suffer from freaking terrible 2D image quality - such as my ancient no-name Radeon VE knock off). I haven't had extensive experience with Matrox cards, but am thinking about getting a P650 if they ever become available. :confused:
 

BoomAM

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2001
4,546
0
0
Originally posted by: AmdInside
I have both ATI and NVIDIA. To me, ATI looks sharper but NVIDIA looks more vibrant.
Thats cos nVidia cards have "Digital Vibrence". Which ATIs cards also do, but you have to edit the setting yourself.

 

MrPabulum

Platinum Member
Jul 24, 2000
2,356
0
0
From my experience (at res. 12x10 and 16 x 12), ATI does it best, followed by Nvidia. Though I should also say that the G4s 2d quality impressed me. Nvidia has come a long way since the original Geforce 256. ;)
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
from my experiance, we have nvidia/3dfx/matrox cards at home and we hav a 8500 at school. I can not tell the differance between the asus geforce4 TI 2D and the 8500. The matrox card 2D is better than both and my voodoo3 suprisingly is almost as good as the matrox.