Radeon DDR all the way IMHO. The 2d quality is worse probably only to the matrox. However, the matrox blows @most 3d apps, whereas the Radeon DDR is a very good contender in 32 bit performance. Also, the Radeon DDR will hardly put a dent in your wallet at only $85 shipped! (www.newegg.com)
Another vote for Radeon DDR. I have an AIW Radeon (if anyone has a right to gripe about ATI's drivers, the owners of AIW Radeons do :/), and only wish I could use newer drivers that were compatible with Oni and such.
Have not seen Radeon but Voodoo 3,4,5 is better 2D than Matrox G400 and NVidia definitely. That was several people opinion when we saw it. Was the same monitor.
this is a silly question. 2d speed is very much the same between all the cards. and if you don't go above 1024x768 chances are you won't see a difference in any of them.
haven't you heard of the search function?
(Geforces are known to give poor images above 1024x768)
<< this is a silly question. 2d speed is very much the same between all the cards. and if you don't go above 1024x768 chances are you won't see a difference in any of them. >>
As usual you completely miss the point. Where did he say anything about speed?????
The monitor display will be setup at 1280 x 1024 x 32. Right now I'm using a Matrox 2D/3D (card is great in 2d) card with 8megs and a Voodoo 2 with 12meg add-on card. Please don't laugh it paid for
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.