Nforce2 integrated graphics image quality?

[FishTankX]

I've decided to go with the Nforce2 for an interior decorating editing type rig (I assume that means photoshop and a bit of 3dmax or whatever) and i'm wondering how good the 2d quality of the Nforce2 sollution in general and how it compares to the Radeon series.

 

[Sid59]

the intergrated videp NForce2 boards?

 

[TROGDORdBURNINATOR]

That depends entirely on the manufacturer of the system board. Unlike ATI, Nvidia has little direct control over the quality of video at high resolutions because ALL of their consumer products are made by a third party. Quality can range from excellent to extremely poor.

 

[squidman]

But isnt it the same with ATI? I mean, it doesnt have as many 3rd party distributors as nVidia, but still has Sapphire, then Asylum or something, etc. I guess the quality/performance doesnt rely entirely on the vendor - its what vendor does to make their product stand out. Asus has regular Ti 4200 and "Super Fast". No actual difference, except for the core and memory runing at fater speeds, and appealing heatsink. PNY, for example, is conservative, and is not popular per se. PNY makes ti4600, but so does leadtek. In leadteks case, to beat the competition, and to further establish themselves as #1 overclockable card makers - leadtek added an awesome cooling device to its ti4600. In embedded videos case, however, when used with nVidias reference drivers, the performance would entirely rely on memory make/speed, and cpu make/speed.

 

[Wolfsraider]

yes other than the original 9xxx series where ati was shipping all the boards at first, i believe that each ati partner (third party) is the same as nvidia.
thats why powered by cards were often shunned, as ati doesn't support them (or i should say didn't support them unless it has changed).

 

[FishTankX]

I'm talking about the Nforce2 420D. Like, the IGP? Like, how the integrated graphics do.

 

[FishTankX]

^BUMP^

 

[Schadenfroh]

the performance is equal to a geforce4 mx 440

 

[FishTankX]

Can anyone tell me how the image quality stacks up to built by ATi parts? And Nvidia's run of the mill MX440s?

 

[TROGDORdBURNINATOR]

Poorly compared to built by ATI parts. But then...so does the FX 5900 Ultra
"The only problem we encountered with our GeForceFX 5900 Ultra board was that the analog video output was incredibly blurry. For a $499 card we would expect better, and we can only hope that shipping cards won't have the horrible output we noted on our reference board"-anandtech review
That's the Nvidia reference board. Don't expect anything to be based off it to do any better.
Kyle from hardocp swears by ATI's image quality and is willing to lose a few FPS for it based on his comments in his speech when he was giving away the door prizes and his review of the 5900.
Of course, it's integrated video, what do you expect?
If you want real image quality, you're stuck with Matrox or ATI.

 

[squidman]

Not necesarily. LeadTek 4600 kicks a lot of ass too. And matrox is real poo poo.

 

[aircooled]

My nForce2 Shuttle XPC has good 2D but my radeons are sharper. If 2D is your only concern then any built by ATI (or Sapphire) Radeon will do you well.