bargain video card help

[apeoples]

I've been looking all night for a video card for a system I'm building, but just can't figure out what to get.

Athlon T-bird 1.33GHz/266
EPoX EP-8K7A

I want a card that has very good 2d support, 3d isn't that important, but i would like to play a game or two once in a while. While it has excellent 2d, I decided against the matrox g450 because of the total lack of 3d. Athought it might be cool to hook up another monitor, I don't have plans to get one soon.

I also decided against radeon because of reports of instability in win2k. Is this correct? Or only certain Radeons?

Another factor is that i have a 19' monitor and I use 1600 x 1200 and I want to make sure I can do that smoothly.

I would also like to spend under $100 if possible... maybe $80 range? I just want something decent, not spectacular. Obviously I don't need cutting edge (at the moment).

Can anyone point me towards a few cards they can recommend?

 

[Dark4ng3l]

Hmmmm you basicaly rules out everything with good 2d and I doubt you can fin much for 80$. Used voodoo's or Ati rage cards would be good but neither have very good win2k support. The only manufacturer with realy great win2k drivers is nvidia and most of the cards have poor 2d and they are also on the expensive side. Your best bet would be a radeon le.

 

[HappyGamer2]

LOL, you are in between a rock and hard spot.

 

[Cpt. Duke]

I would get the Matrox G450. It seems image quality in 2d is your primary goal. The Matrox will certainly be best at 1600 X 1200. Although the G450 has weak 3d performance compared to the most recent cards by ATi and nVidia, I think it would be acceptable for the occasional game. Plus, the G450 can be had for under $100...

I guess I may be wrong, but WTH...

 

[richleader]

Matrox would be smart, in this case.

 

[manuelku]

well because you stated that you just play game once a while, I guess g450 isn't that bad, even a g400 can fulfill your favor. I mean you will get like 40-60 fps at 1024x784 in Q3, it's more than enough for your eyes to see.
Matrox has one card that is still existed that is totally lack of 3D, and it it Millennium MGA 2meg pci... even millennium2 has some 3D like S3 Virge3D

 

[apeoples]

Thanks for the advice!

I was leaning towards the G400 or G450 but was hoping I could find something with better 3d - guess not.

I was looking at the benchmarks in the reviews I was reading, and compared to the other cards, the matrox's looked pretty bad - but I guess it's like comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari - they're both damn fast. I'm sure I'll be happy with the performance with the Matrox, and since I'm not spending TOO much on it, I won't feel bad upgrading at a later date.

Ok... so now the question is between the G400 and the G450! I can't find it just now, but I think I saw a review where the 450 wasn't much faster than the 400, maybe even slower - I'll take a look at that and compare prices.

Again, thanks - this is my first time building a computer, so I'm somewhat of a newbie. Thanks for going easy on me!

 

[yasha]

A Kyro I wouldn't be a bad idea!
newegg has them for $63 shipped.

 

[Torghn]

Well my Radeon works fine in Win2k with the latest drivers, 2D is great an NOTHING come anywhere near the Price/Proformance ratio of a Radeon LE.

 

[apeoples]

Wow, the Radeon LE looks like it might be what I'm looking for. It has good 2d performance, but also good 3d. I read here that you can overclock it to make it the same speed as the regular Radeon DDR, as well as activate HyperZ (which is disabled on the LE) http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1473&p=4
So IF these 'tweaks' work, the only thing the LE lacks is the fan, which I could work out later I suppose.

However that same article (and another it refers to) mentions driver problems in W2k with the radeon. Are these being resolved? I guess I could always use a dual boot system and use w98 for games, 2k for regular use - seems to be better performance in 98 anyway (ATI vs NVIDIA: Driver performance under Win98 & Win2K).

So.. for the Matrox, I gain the cool dual monitor thing (but I only have one) but I lose 3d performance. Sounds like the Radeon would be the better choice. If I would only have problems with a few games (at most) then it sounds like the best choice for me.

So... can anyone talk me out of a Radeon? Or should I order one tonight?!

 

[Poncherelli]

I'm going to agree with Yasha, Kyro could be good idea as well, its cheap and performs well

 

[spanner]

My friend Matrox G550 marginally outperforms my TNT2 which is more then adequate for games, even if its not a 60+ fps monster. I am probably going for a G550 which has slightly more 3d performance

 

[spanner]

oops, my friend had a G400

 

[mitaiwan82]

wow when I see a good CPU go w/ a budget video card, my heart sinks...ANYWAYS if you gotta have it for under 100, then go for the LE

 

[CandyKid]

I'd get the radeon VE it's 70 bucks at newegg i believe (check the video/cpu check list) and it has the same features as the LE (i believe) but gives you the dual monitor support.

So 2d, 3d, and dual monitor.

 

[GT578]

Just get an LE...and no LE is not same as VE ...VE has a crippled core. I dualboot and it works fine this way....use win2k for homework and anything else....and win98SE for games. Oh yeah...and my LE O/C to 195/195 with a cooling kit from 2cooltek...not bad for under $100.

 

[apeoples]

<< I dualboot and it works fine this way....use win2k for homework and anything else....and win98SE for games. >>



I think this is what I'll do. The LE BLOWS the VE away, dual monitors isn't something I'll use anyway - I can upgrade if I feel I need it in the future.



<< wow when I see a good CPU go w/ a budget video card, my heart sinks... >>



Yes, I know what you mean. But... I'm not a gamer... YET. I want the 3d support to try a few games out, maybe I'll get hooked, maybe not. At least I'm not spending a fortune, and I'll still have good 2d support.

So... looks like the Radeon LE. Thanks everyone for helping out a newbie.

 

[T2T III]

<< I also decided against radeon because of reports of instability in win2k. >>


Even though it looks like you've made your mind up and are going to purchase the Radeon LE, this should be a good choice for you. I purchased the Radeon VE and it's being returned. I need dual monitor support, good 2D quality and some 3D speed. I pulled it out and purchased a GeForce MX400 with Twinview support and I'm quite happy. I'm running Windows 2000.

Some issues that I experienced with the Radeon VE: The HydraVision stinks compared to nVidia's Twinview software / technology. Every time I'd move my mouse while playing a DVD movie, the movie would pause and hiccup horribly. TwinView does a much better job when I'm playing a DVD on one screen and running applications on another.

I'm not a Quake player, so I don't need to get a better card. Actually, Nascar 4 looks pretty good with my GeForce MX400 board and having two LCD screens is real sweet.

 

[apeoples]

Well, I haven't ordered it yet.

If that DVD problem is all you have, then it's not a big problem for me. I don't watch DVD's on my compter, I have a standalone player on a big screen TV. (after this compter I need to work on that sound system!)

Is the only problem with this Radeon LE a few bugs with GAMES in win2k? Becase I'll probably just play the games in win98se (dual-boot) since performance is better there anyway. As long as there aren't any other problems in win2k (um... web, excel, word, etc) then I don't think I'll have any problems.

 

[HappyGamer2]

well if you have dual boot system and only need simple windows 2d stuff a radeon card will do just fine, so would a voodoo5 if you could find one cheap enough. a voodoo4 would be ok yo but it is slow for high res gaming.
kyro2?

 

[apeoples]

Ok - finally found some Kyro reviews - (Value Gaming Video Card Shootout

Looks like the Kyro I doens't stack up to the Radeon VE, and the VE doesn't stack up to the LE... but between the LE and the Kyro II there might be some competition. But the Kyro II is about $40 more than the Radeon LE. Especially with the potential for overclocking the LE, that still seems like a better performance/price choice.

As for the voodoo4 - it doesn't seem to stack up in
this review to the Radeon DDR 32MB which the LE basically is when you overclock it. (anandtech review)

And the voodoo5 is $30 to $40 more.

So it still looks like the Radeon LE is it for me - thanks for continuing to make more suggestions - altough it's made me put the purchase off a day or so to do more research. I guess that's a good thing though! (I'm open to more suggestions though!)