Which DX9 2D card w/DVI $60 max, I'm NOT a Gamer!

[joshcloud9]

Hi,

I'm looking to upgrade my Hercules Geforce2 Pro which I seem to remember cost $275!
(I did the resister mod so MB Bios sees it as a Quadro2 Pro!)

It has 64mb mem and a core/mem speed of 200/400 but it only has 1 VGA, I use a Planar 19" LCD monitor.

Is there anything out there that will be significantly faster?

I am looking for mostly 2D performance, I rarely play games.

Required features:

Excellent 2D performance
DVI + VGA connector
DX 9 compatibility
128 MB mem
Must be a LOT faster than the 200/400 GF2 Pro!
MAX $60
Excellent drivers

I am under the impression that the ATI cards generaly give better image quality, is this so?

Any advice please, I do not want to get a Ti-4200 as I want DX-9 compatibility.
I am wondering if a Radeon 9600SE will be slower than what I have???

Thx much,
JC9

 

[Lonyo]

I think I read somewhere that nVidia cards are quite a bit faster in 2D than ATi cards, but I'm not sure where it was.
A 5200(nVidia)/9600(SE or non-pro)(ATi) are pretty much the only options you have, and if I can find the 2D speeds of the cards compared (which I'm sure someone did an article on), I'll post the link.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
I think I read somewhere that nVidia cards are quite a bit faster in 2D than ATi cards

thats the dumbest thing i have ever read. a tnt2 will be just as fast as a 9800XT in 2d.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

DX9.............but ur not a gamer.........$60

1) if ur not a gamer u dont need a DX9....if u jus want 2D u dont even need a DX 8 card!!!! like he said a TNT2 or even onboard will be fine!!!

2)60 will bag u a card alright....but a $60 card that supports dx9 will not be able to do much with DX9

3)u can pick a GF4 MX for very little and it will do the job....even if u do decide to play the odd game

4) do go for nvidia tho....their 2D looks better than ATI's

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Firstly, what do you need "DX9" for if you're not a gamer and just sit in the 2D world?

Secondly, even a 9600SE will bitchslap that hacked-up wannabe Quadro.

And finally, if you want to go for broke on the 2D image quality, get you a Matrox G450.

- M4H

 

[joshcloud9]

To tell the truth I have no idea why I want DX9 but it just seems to make sense to have the compatibility if I can have it!
I will actually be taking advantage of 3D compatibilities for Content Creation but not for gaming, I use Alias Wavefront MAYA 3D software, I really should be studying it more though...

Thanks for the comments on 2D performance. I am happy with NVids drivers so a little wary of switching to ATI after prior reputation as far as drivers goes

I believe that Open GL is important to for Maya. Maybe I should just get a NVidia FX-5700 (when price drops) and be done with it! Seems to be the "new" Ti-4200 on the block?

 

[Pete]

Do you mean DX9 for Longhorn? Because otherwise, if you don't game, "DX9" is really nothing more than a marketing bullet at this price point, at least with an FX 5200.

Do you mean 2D speed or 2D quality? I don't think you'll notice a speed difference between a 5200 and a 9600SE. Their VGA output should be similar, but Radeons may have a better DVI signal at high resolutions (read: 1600x1200).

Do you really mean $60 MAX? Because that leaves you with the FX 5200 as your only choice; I think the cheapest Radeon 9600SE is ~$66--and that one only supports one monitor.

Can you give us an idea of what programs you'll use this card for? That'd help us understand your desire for 128MB and DX9 but at a rock-bottom $60 budget.

Do you mean excellent Windows drivers, Windows multimonitor drivers, Linux drivers, ...? ATi and nV should be the same for Windows, but nV should be slightly better for Windows mulitmon and Linux.

In terms of speed, I think both the 5200 and 9600SE will be an improvement over your GF2 ... for games. In terms of desktop speed, I guess you'll see an improvement, but what are you doing that desktop speed will depend on your video card and not your CPU? Telling us why you did the Quadro mod should be the main clue.

 

[modedepe]

I'm not sure where you're coming up with the ideas about what you really require or want. You want a 128mb card that has dx9, but you don't game? Doesn't exactly make sense to me. If it were me, I'd probably go for the G450 that m4h suggested, just cause it'll have the best 2d image quality.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: joshcloud9
To tell the truth I have no idea why I want DX9 but it just seems to make sense to have the compatibility if I can have it!
I will actually be taking advantage of 3D compatibilities for Content Creation but not for gaming, I use Alias Wavefront MAYA 3D software, I really should be studying it more though...

For the amount you'd spend on a "DX9" card, you'd get a really crappy implementation. For example, an FX5200 or 9600SE. You can get a well-done DX8 card for the same - like a Ti4200.

Thanks for the comments on 2D performance. I am happy with NVids drivers so a little wary of switching to ATI after prior reputation as far as drivers goes

Don't believe everything you hear. If you take the time to properly clean out the system, either driverset is just as reliable. IMO, nVidia does have a bit of an upper hand in the CAD/CAM segment though.

I believe that Open GL is important to for Maya. Maybe I should just get a NVidia FX-5700 (when price drops) and be done with it! Seems to be the "new" Ti-4200 on the block?

Depends what you're doing, but a good OGL card wouldn't hurt you. It'll be quite some time before an FX5700 becomes as good of a deal as a Ti4200, which can currently be had for about US$65 in the FS/T forum or at auction.

- M4H

 

[DeeSlanger]

RamDac = 2D speed

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: DeeSlanger
RamDac = 2D speed

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 2d "speed" is universal

 

[joshcloud9]

M4H thanks for the knowledgeable advice there

It looks like I have talked myself into the fact that I really do need 3D compatibility for Maya and speed is always useful and it seems that DX9 is hype that I don't need, so the Ti- 4200 is the deal to go for...

My system:

MSI KT3 Ultra ARU - Soon to upgraded to a NForce2 or KT600 MB
XP1700 - to be upgraded to a XP2600 or best pricepoint at the time
768 MB Mushkin (512 of 3000 + 256 of 3200)
Turtle beach SantaCruz sound card - Sounds great!
2000 XP TV card
and Burner etc

I actually had a Quadro4 750 and TI-4200 at one point (when buying and selling lots of stuff on eBay) the 4200 was faster in 3Dmark01 than the Quadro!

Cheers,
JC9

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: joshcloud9
I actually had a Quadro4 750 and TI-4200 at one point (when buying and selling lots of stuff on eBay) the 4200 was faster in 3Dmark01 than the Quadro!

Quadro-certified drivers are built for IQ and compatibility, not speed. I've got an NVS200 and NVS280 on the selling block right now myself as well.

- M4H

 

[joshcloud9]

A sidenote here:

My roomie was given a "system" by his friend because it was completely unusable (Win98).

System:
Dell flat thing that sits under monitor with built in NIC
Pentium2 400
222 ish MB of Ram (strange amount but that's what the board reported, it has onboard VGA? which I cannot disable in Bios)
3 pci slots, no AGP, no USB

So I thought what the heck and installed XP Pro w/slipstreamed SP1 (corp ed)
No Office or anything to bog it down, just Elements2 and few spybot/popup killers etc
Found an old dusty Matrox Millenium2 4mb PCI video card in the bottom of a box
Stuck in a 13gb 5400 hard drive aslo in bottom of said box
Got a new USB2 PCI card, hooked up to the $79 Logitech Webcam roomie bought at OfficeDepot (the most expensive part of his system!)
One more PCI slot left to be filled with Sound Card

The system actually works fine for surfing, webcam and IM'ing etc!

Needless to say the friend who donated the "unusable" machine was absolutely astounded that his old peice of junk was working so fast!!!

Now that's a 2D machine for you!

JC9

 

[BenSkywalker]

I will actually be taking advantage of 3D compatibilities for Content Creation but not for gaming, I use Alias Wavefront MAYA 3D software, I really should be studying it more though...

Maya is pretty much the most demanding 3D app you can run, if I were you I would forget moving from a 1700XP and drop that cash in addition to the $60 and pick up somehting along the lines of a FX5900 or an older Quadro(DCC or newer). If Maya is the most demanding app you run, your focus should be on the vid card.

 

[dchakrab]

I agree. Maya pretty much requires a $300 3D workstation card. How serious are you about Maya? ATI makes some good entry-level cards in that range, check pricewatch for more info. A move to a dual proc system would also be good to think about.

For the guys asking why he needs a card with that much memory if he doesn't game: check out the specs on an entry level 3D workstation. Gaming consumer-level cards don't come anywhere near what a dedicated machine for Lightwave or Maya rendering would consider the minimum acceptable entry-point.

If you're only playing around with 3D from time to time, anything from the Geforce line or a ATI Radeon card will work fine for you. Don't expect anything short of horrendous render times in Maya, though, unless you're willing to fork out a LOT of money for hardware. It might be cheaper to build a second $300 box to use as a render machine so your main rig is still operational, if you don't want to move to a prosumer level vid. card just yet.

On the other hand, if you can afford a legit copy of Maya, then you should drop a few more hundred and get a real 3D machine set up to really take advantage of it.

Dave.

 

[joshcloud9]

I'm just tinkering with Maya, learning the basics in the hope of utilizing my past experience in the "real" hands on animation world someday.
My budget is, at least for the time being very limited, I'm using a free copy of Maya. I did put together dual CPU rig (AMD MP2000 MB) with Quadro4 750 but let it go as I couldn't justify the cost depreciation of the rig...
So for the time being single CPU and yes a 2nd machine will a more versatile rendering solution than going dual CPU

 

[dchakrab]

Hmmm...in that case, i'd recommend dropping $50 on a vid card, and then getting in on a $300 Dell Deal. Most recent one is for a 2.6 G HT proc, if i'm not mistaken, which would be a nice render machine (or primary, depending on your other machine's current setup.

Increasing performance would be about $150 for a G of RAM. Probably more worthwhile to spend your money there if you can't afford a $1000 vid card.

-D.

 

[Peter]

Originally posted by: DeeSlanger
RamDac = 2D speed

Hell no. Not at all. The RAMDAC's maximum frequency (not a speed, mind) is just the maximum signal frequency that can go out the analog VGA plug with good signal quality. This limits the resolution and refresh rate, but is nothing to do at all with rendering speed, neither 2D nor 3D.

 

[Blastman]

If 2D quality is high on the list I would recommend a Sapphire 9600SE ?$70 Based on my experience with Sapphire, their cards tend to be very good in the 2D department.

 

[rbV5]

1) if ur not a gamer u dont need a DX9....if u jus want 2D u dont even need a DX 8 card!!!! like he said a TNT2 or even onboard will be fine!!!

DX9 can be important for 2D if you're not a gamer. DX9 supports DXVA and VMR9, both important considerations in an HTPC environment. As far as Maya, you can get very reasonable performance on a ti4200 class card, particularly if your not using Artisan or Paint effects primarily, so it should be great for Maya PLE.