Upgrading from a V770 to a Radeon DDR 64, I expected the 2D difference to blow me away...

[dennilfloss]

At 1152x864x32, the only difference I see on my AV195-TF is that the colours are a bit more vibrant. The small fonts don't look different. BTW, I'm using the 4.13.7075 drivers in W98. Did I just spend $400Can just to improve my framerate (I don't play FPS often)?

 

[oldfart]

I just took out a Herc GF2/Pro that I borrowed for the weekend and put my Radeon back in. The difference on mine was substantial. I use the same res as you, 1152 x 864 on a Mitsu 900U 19". The Herc had horrible 2D. Blurry as hell. The Radeon is MUCH better. 3D on the other hand....the Pro is a sweet card!

 

[RoboTECH]

dennil, the difference really gets more intense at and above 1280

 

[dennilfloss]

My eyes are too bad to spend hours reading the forums @ >1152, even with IE set at largest fonts. Blame old age for that.

 

[dealwithit]

so RoboTECH-
at 1024x768 the 2d difference between Geforce2Pro and Matrox G400 is negligible?

 

[EvilDonnyboy]

Well colours will be more vibrant, but image sharpness won't be astoundingly better. It depends on how crappy the GTS is.

 

[RoboTECH]

Matrox is a different story

I've had the pleasure of using a Matrox 200, and had a Matrox 400 at work for a short period of time, and no 2d card I've ever seen compares

however, even the Creative Labs 64MB GTS, which is possibly the worst 2d card I've seen, wasn't so bad @ 1024