Anand, I had some questions on the G450

[Alphacowboy]

For the TV output, you said it supports up to 1600x1200, but a standard TV only supports 640x480 and with s-video sometimes 800x600... now this is what I've always wondered about consoles, the N64/Playsation2 obviously renders the image at a higher resolution than 800x600 and then must down size it for the TV to display, now is that what you ment by 1600x1200 to a TV, I am looking for a card that has the Best TV output, what should I use, any ideas? My V3 is the best solution I have found so far, my TNT 2 sucked and my old Intergraph Voodoo Rush did a better job than the TNT! Any info on this would be helpful! Thanks.

Yeah yeah I know, by a HDTV, that one by TI looked pretty sweet!

 

[Thor_Sevan]

First of all N64 and PSX don't render in higher resolutions. N64 AND PSX render in native 320-200 (or 300/200) low quality resolution and offer VERY poor texture filtering quality. And what would be the point of rendering in higher resolution if you must stretch down later ? That would be a no use performance drop. I "Think" that Dreamcast renders in 640/480 (16 bit) or 1024 but I am not sure. PSX2 sucks anyways ! bleheheh

G400 (max) has very nice TV-out features !

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

AFAIK, Thor, the PS didn't offer any sort of texture filtering at all. That is the reason for the incredibly ugly textures.

The N64 had edge anti-aliasing and some sort of texture filtering (dunno which though). Thats why most N64 games looked better than any PS game.

 

[Soccerman]

"N64 AND PSX render in native 320-200"

actually the N64 can render 640X480, and it does with most new games.

the I saw the Dreamcast on a 15" flatpanel monitor running at least 640X480. I asked the sales clerk (this was at CompuCenter I think) what res, and he couldn't tell me. all I know, is that it looked alot more like a computer then a console normally does in terms of resolution.

 

[Pariah]

The N64 can render at 640x480. Turok2 is one game that comes to mind that uses it. Most standard TV's support up to an 800x600 equivalent. What connection you use to the TV doesn't effect "resolution" (TV resolution is measured in vertical lines, not pixels) capability, only clarity and colors.

 

[Thor_Sevan]

Yeah but you must have the memory pack or something similar to give a video ram boost. If not, you are limited to 320-200.
And damn it is slow... I mean, James-BOnd... a nice and cool game but sooo slow sometimes. I think it goes down many times below 10 FPS.

Anyways, PC's are best ! hehe

 

[Alphacowboy]

All of this I understand, and I have asked this question before with no real good answer, why does the actual quality of the image look so better from a console than a video card. For example most of the games that I try on my TV look ok but not as good as what a console will do? The frame rate kicks ass but the quaility just doesn't do it for me! now I know that a TV doesn't have the quality of a monitor, and I don't expect it to! What I want is a good picture that is not fuzzy looking. Like I said the V3 3000 is the best solution that I have found. Yes I know TV's don't have a resolution, but the max "resolution" an anolog TV can support is 640X480 on a standard RCA composite video input, and 800X600 on S-Video! Anyway, does anybody know why a DVD player can output such an awesome picture and a $350 video card looks like $hit?

 

[Thor_Sevan]

G400 max does the JOB.
I watch DVD on my TV and its very high quality.

 

[Soccerman]

if you're looking for a comparison, anand did a comparison quite a while ago.. take a look for it in his archives.. it included the V3, an ATi card, Matrox G400 (as far as I remember), and I think that's all.

as for TV's being able to support 800X600. I highly doubt that. I suspect that they can take in an 800X600 signal and downmix it to 640X480, but TV's as far as I know (NOT HDTV, just TV's) don't have more pixels then is required by NTSC (512X something I think). yes even the newer ones that "support" 800X600. besides, for anything that you do on a computer, having interleaved scan lines on TV makes worse, when comparing the same resolutions on monitors and TV's.