I need awesome 2D, better 3D. Which Card?

[mfs378]

I am looking to upgrade the video in my PC, and need something with great 2D, and better 3D than my current GF3. Right now I have a Leadtek GF3, whose output starts getting blurry at 1600x1200x85Hz, and only gets worse above that. I have had a system with a G450 hooked up to this monitor (iiyama vision master pro 512) before, and the quality was significantly better.

I want to get that good quality while increasing my 3D speed. I plan on playing HL2, so from the 3D perspective, I am leaning towards an ATI, but I am still up in the air.

Oh, and it should have a RAMDAC fast enough for at least 1600x1200x100Hz.

Any ideas?

 

[Corporate Thug]

as far as 2d, i think nvidia and ATi are equal and matrox is best. the problem is matrox sucks in the 3d world. ATi has much better IQ than nvidia in the 3d realm. if u plan on pkaying HL2, grab a 9800 NP or a 9800 pro if u can afford it. or you can wait til the 9800XT comes out but expect to pay around $400. also, if you want a cheaper alternative, get a 9600 pro. it all depends on your budget really

 

[mfs378]

The thing is, I need the better 2D in order to justify the purchase. I want to up the resolution of my monitor for 2D tasks, which is what I will be using it for 85% of the time. If all it does is improve 3D, then I can't really get away with it. However, I don't want to downgrade my existing 3D, since I will be doing 3D stuff at least some of the time.

 

[Schadenfroh]

parhelia?

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: mfs378
The thing is, I need the better 2D in order to justify the purchase. I want to up the resolution of my monitor for 2D tasks, which is what I will be using it for 85% of the time. If all it does is improve 3D, then I can't really get away with it. However, I don't want to downgrade my existing 3D, since I will be doing 3D stuff at least some of the time.

A lot of older Geforces had terrible 2D IQ. The newer ones have gotten better, but some are not as good as others. IMHO (this is subjective, anyway - there's no specific way to benchmark it), the nvidia cards that I have seen have not been quite as clear as the ATI cards, but the difference is not much (unless you happen to be doing lots of text work on a CRT, but then you should probably have an LCD anyway).

FWIW, I'd go with a built-by-ATI card, or one made by Sapphire (who makes some ATI cards, if I understand correctly).

 

[MercenaryForHire]

*whistles*

For clear text at 16x12@100, you're pushing into the realm of workstation cards. Might I suggest a FireGL or Quadro series (ATI and nVidia respectively)?

If you really want to play HL2, you might be wise to wait until the next generation of cards is released. Just judging by your post, it seems like you've got a fair chunk of change to spend on this upgrade. Consider holding off and getting a next-gen card (R9900, NV40) which will set you up nicely.

Could also ask the folk in the Video forum.

- M4H

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: mfs378
The thing is, I need the better 2D in order to justify the purchase. I want to up the resolution of my monitor for 2D tasks, which is what I will be using it for 85% of the time. If all it does is improve 3D, then I can't really get away with it. However, I don't want to downgrade my existing 3D, since I will be doing 3D stuff at least some of the time.

you can get a matrox but dont expect to do any gaming at all, 9800 pro is the best balance of 2d/3d availiable IMO

 

[Ardan]

I concur with other people. I would say to get an ATI card, and a 9800 or 9800 Pro...if I could wait, I would though. I am not an ATI fanatic--i'm simply going with what I know . Just saving anyone else the trouble of agruing with me, being that I only have nvidia cards. I like like the GF4 Ti4200 that I have...it has 128Mbs of memory and it is good with 2D. I would know because I do a lot of work with text on a crappy monitor and it looks good. On the good monitor it looks WONDERFUL, so you can't go wrong with that. However if you intend to play HL2, then I would say to get a 9800 or 9800Pro card...but I would wait to see 3rd party benchmarks and real performance from the game first. We're just going on their tests and hey--you never know what the future could bring.

 

[bacillus]

9800 pro is the best balance of 2d/3d availiable IMO

I concur!

 

[Trente]

I had a Matrox G450; Nothing has ever came close to its output quality...

 

[Alkali]

Matrox has the best 2D cards, and the Parhelia would be perfect for you.

However, if you actually want really good 3D too, then you simply have to look at an ATi 9600Pro/9800Pro.

If money is no object, a workstation card is perfect, the ATi FireGLX1 is £600, or you can go nVidia and have a Quadro... These will give excellent 3D as well as excellent 2D, although the 3D will be about 10-20% slower (compared to desktop equivalents) on the workstation cards on the whole.

 

[MDE]

The workstation cards should blow through OpenGL though, and we all know that Doom III is going to be OpenGL.

 

[Eug]

as far as 2d, i think nvidia and ATi are equal and matrox is best. the problem is matrox sucks in the 3d world. ATi has much better IQ than nvidia in the 3d realm. if u plan on pkaying HL2, grab a 9800 NP or a 9800 pro if u can afford it. or you can wait til the 9800XT comes out but expect to pay around $400. also, if you want a cheaper alternative, get a 9600 pro. it all depends on your budget really

Every time I want to believe that nVidia's cards have caught up, a new purchase of a nVidia card proves that belief wrong.

The problem is that nVidia 2D quality is far too variable. Some brands are in fact good, but some just suck badly. A recent GeForce 4 MX purchase netted me the worst image quality (aside from a $15 S3 bargain bin card) I have seen in the last 3 years. IMO, it was completely unusable. OTOH, I have never seen an ATI or Sapphire card in the last 3 years that had truly bad VGA video quality.

I had a Matrox G450; Nothing has ever came close to its output quality...

I have a Matrox G450 in an Athlon machine. The Matrox is very good, but the Sapphire Radeon 9100 I have in my PIII box is superior IMO at least up to 1600x1200, and the drivers are better. Beyond 1600x1200 though, I can't say much because my monitors are not suited for higher resolutions. (My preferred resolution at 19" is 1400x1050, and anything beyond 1600x1200 makes my eyes bleed.) BTW, the VGA quality on this Sapphire 9100 at 1280x1024 with my Samsung 172T LCD monitor rivals DVI (although DVI is still better).

Also, what monitor are you running? IMO for text 2D quality in general (assuming you have good quality equipment): DVI TFT > VGA TFT > VGA CRT shadow mask > VGA CRT aperture grill.

I have NEVER seen text quality with a good video card on an aperture grill monitor even come close to VGA quality on a top end TFT monitor with a similarly good video card. The same could be said for a shadow mask monitor too, but at least it was a bit better.

 

[Trente]

Also, what monitor are you running? IMO for text 2D quality in general (assuming you have good quality equipment): DVI TFT > VGA TFT > VGA CRT shadow mask > VGA CRT aperture grill.

I'm using an LG Flatron 795FT Plus 17" Monitor.

It is a combination between shadow mask and aperture grill...


Click here for review!

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: bacillus

9800 pro is the best balance of 2d/3d availiable IMO

I concur!

me too

if only it was the best balance of IQ and price id be getting one
have to settle for a 9600pro though, should be far better than my gf3 at any rate

 

[mfs378]

So when is this newer version of the 9800 coming out? And what about the entirely new generation of cards?