Can anyone suggest a good card for $100-$200?

[Aardy]

Can anyone suggest a good graphic card from $100-$200?

I'm not much of a gamer but do work with some Photoshop and watch movies on my computer.

Don't really need a TV capture function since I'll be cancelling my cable order soon but was wondering what would be a good way to go about wiht capture other than ATI's All-in-Wonder

 

[McArra]

9600Pro VIVO should be a nice choice. If you rather like NVidia, then a 5600U rev2 VIVO (is it more expensive than $200?) would be fine too. If you like pure perfomance/IQ for your money and forget about VIVO, 9700np would be the best choice (over $200).

 

[ironique]

9700 non-pro, if you caqn get one for $200, else get the 9500pro (roughly $185). The MSI 5600 Ultra would have a good choice too if not for its price!

 

[thornc]

I'm currently looking at this one, MSI 5600 VIVO!

The whole bundle seems very nice... and here in europe I'm looking at prices in the $180 range!!

 

[Schadenfroh]

if your not a gamer and use photo shop, you dont need a 9700/9600 etc. i personally think you should get a matrox. you can also get a capture card for < 50 off new egg

 

[Jeff7181]

If you're not using it for games or anything, you could go with a card that's 4 or 5 years old and it would play DVD's just fine. Even a GeForce3 would be overkill. Do they make GeForce2 MX cards with VIVO?

 

[Pete]

Clearly define how much of a gamer you are, and we can more clearly specify what card to buy. Let us know your PC specs, too (CPU, RAM, MB, power supply).

For instance, a casual gamer who doesn't play many recent games but values good 2D & DVD may be best served by a cheaper ~$60 64MB Radeon 9100/9000P. A more serious gamer may opt for a ~$110 4200. And a forward-looking gamer may opt for a $165 9600P, or, best yet, a ~$200 9700.

 

[thornc]

Originally posted by: Pete
For instance, a casual gamer who doesn't play many recent games but values good 2D & DVD may be best served by a cheaper ~$60 64MB Radeon 9100/9000P. A more serious gamer may opt for a ~$110 4200. And a forward-looking gamer may opt for a $165 9600P, or, best yet, a ~$200 9700.

Which I could get those kind of prices here.....

 

[Aardy]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
If you're not using it for games or anything, you could go with a card that's 4 or 5 years old and it would play DVD's just fine. Even a GeForce3 would be overkill. Do they make GeForce2 MX cards with VIVO?

Let's say the last time I played a real game hours on end was StarCraft Im not intensly into games but would appreciat a good graphic card.

What are Matrox?

Computer I'm going to build
-200GB HD
- AMD 2500XP + (I have yet to buy a mobo and processor)
- 512 mb RAM (will expand later)

 

[Schadenfroh]

What are Matrox?

they are the oldest graphics company that is still in business. they are the kings of 2D image quality. they are very big in the multimonitor and business portion of the market. not in the mainstream or entusiast tho. they are a private company too.

 

[Pete]

I don't think it's wise to pay for featuers/speed you won't use, so, judging by the Starcraft comment, I'll recommend a $60 64MB 9000P/9100 now. If you find you need a faster card a few months down the line, you can spend more then.

 

[aircooled]

Any Radeon core will do just fine for photoshop.....

 

[Corporate Thug]

9600 pro, 9500 pro, 9700 non pro in that order

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: shady06
9600 pro, 9500 pro, 9700 non pro in that order

Did you not read his post? He's not a gamer... spending $150-$200 on one of those would be insane.

Hell... the Voodoo3 2000 in the computer I'm using right now will do just fine for photoshop and DVD playback.

Seriusly Aardy... you don't need even a $50 video card for 2D apps... if you want to be able to play the occasional game, I'd say go with either a GeForce3 or a GeForce4 Ti4200 64 MB. The GF3 being less than $75, and the GF4 being just under $100... both will do absolutely fine if you don't turn AA and AF on. If you want to future proof it a little bit and have DX9 compatability, the GeForceFX 5200 Ultra would be an option, but not a very good one in my opinion, as it's slower than GF4 Ti4200 in just about everything, but it doesn support DirectX 9 which is what new games will use... however, the FX5200 Ultra probably doesn't have the kahunas to run newer games like Doom3 when it comes out.

 

[ironique]

Jeff has a point, for a non-gamer, spending $200 is an overkill. A simple 9000 Pro would fit the bill quite well. I'd also say a good matrox card but I can't be certain. I've never used one, I only know what I've read about them.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: ironique
Jeff has a point, for a non-gamer, spending $200 is an overkill. A simple 9000 Pro would fit the bill quite well. I'd also say a good matrox card but I can't be certain. I've never used one, I only know what I've read about them.

The reason I haven't recommended an ATI solution is because of driver issues. From his posts, I'm assuming his computing habits are more casual than hardcore... so chances are he doesn't want to, or know how to deal with driver problems... and nVidia is the way to go to ensure driver stability in everything.

 

[ironique]

ATI driver issues are near negligable these days. Hardly any problems encountered. I've been running on and 8500LE 128MB for quite since october last year, I haven't encountered any driver problems whatsoever! ATI has come a long way since the plagued initial 8500 driver release. Besides, most driver issues are in the gaming arena and not in the 2D arena, and since Ardy aint no gamer, the more reason he has to be confident in purchasing an ATI card.

But this ain't an ATI or nVidia thing anyway. I'm not interested in starting a flame war here. A Ti4200-8x would actually be a more future-proof choice than a 9000Pro, but then again, a 9500Pro would be an even more future-proof choice, DX9 and all. So I guess it all depends Mr. Aardy.

 

[Jeff7181]

If I'm not mistaken, aren't there still issues with Counter-Strike?

 

[ironique]

Hey Jeff, relax man! I aint tryin to pick a fight here. I'm just saying its probable Aardy wont be playin Counter-Strike coz he aint a gamer as such. I haven't played CS in quite a long while so I wouldn't know if there are still issues with it. My suggestions to Aardy are just my opinion. They may not be 100% correct coz I aint no expert. They are merely suggestions. so don't bite my head off over this. This is a forum, different views and opinions are expected.

 

[Jeff7181]

Relax? If I relax any more I'll fall asleep. I'm just pointing out that ATI does have some driver issues, even with a game as old as CS... so he might want to go with a more "plug and play" solution.

I think YOU need to relax, lol. I wasn't "biting your head off" ... I was explaining why my opinion is what it is.

 

[ironique]

Point taken Jeff.

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
If I'm not mistaken, aren't there still issues with Counter-Strike?

I don't have any with my 9100. Like I said, I'd recommend a ~$60 64MB 9000P for guaranteed good output options and quality, and decent performance. But a GF4MX should be fine, too.

 

[Aardy]

Thank you guys for all your opinions. Greatly appreciated but please don't fight over something as little as this.


I was looking in the Ti4200s as well as AIW 9000. Would anyone know of any great deals?

I'm actually getting confused with all the different versions they have of each card.

 

[Aardy]

Another ques...would it be better to get a TV capture card and a video card separately or go wiht AIW? I don't think Nvidia has anything for capture do they?

 

[Pete]

Separately, as you can keep the capture card when you inevitably upgrade your video card. It just makes things easier, end gives you a wider field of video cards to choose from.

nV has their Personal Cinema. ExtremeTech did a few reviews comparing it to ATi's AIW cards, if you're curious.