GF4 video quality

[p3z]

I recently switched from an ati 8500 to a PNY gf4 4200 and i notice a visible difference in video quality... I know that traditionally ati has better video quality than nvidia. I was just wondering if there is anything like with the gf3 where you could pull off some low pass filters and improve the video quality.

 

[Goi]

Nobody really messes around with the gf4 filters, since they've improved quite abit over GF3s. In fact, GF3s improved quite a bit from the older GF2s, which was pretty ghastly from what I've read. I find it surprising you still notice a difference...what monitor are you running, and at what settings?

 

[AnAndAustin]

Yeah, GF2's had awful image quality. GF3 were a bit better but still way nehind the Radeons. GF4MX are hugely improved GF2 cards while GF4TI are hugely improved GF3 cards. GF4TI cards should certainly be as good as the excellent Rad8500, at the very least up to 1280x1024x32 @ 75Hz+. GF3's in particular varied quite significantly by manu but this doesn't seem to be the case for GF4 cards.

Anyway, for those wanting to give up 3D perf and get maximum IQ then Matrox are the way to go, if happy with GF3 3D perf at Rad9700 pricing then there's Parhelia512. For people wanting very good IQ and excellent 3D without breaking the bank the GF4TI cards fit the bill VERY well indeed. A Rad8500/9000 is a good compromise between these for those often working in high res but still wanting ample 3D perf. For most a GF4TI is a good idea, at the very least until cheaper versions of Rad9700, Parhelia512 or the new nVidia cards are out.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Or you can always get a Voodoo 3 .

 

[Goi]

Haha! I'm still running my Voodoo3 on my 21" Nokia 445XPro at 1600x1200@32bpp@85Hz, and the image quality still R0X0Rs!

 

[308nato]

I still use a vooDoo3 in the kids old BX box. My ti-4600 has good 2d but the VooDoo owns it in that regard. That or I am just getting old.