• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why buy expensive video cards?

S

sps

Member
Pardon me for this dumb question, but aside from gaming, is there any reason to buy a really expensive video card? How much of a bottleneck does the video card become for light graphics work (image manipulation in Photoshop, etc), web surfing, office applications, and 2D AutoCAD? I know games require the latest and greatest, but when you don't care about fps, is there still a need to spend a bunch on a video card, or will any decent quality video card with 16MB+ of RAM do just as good of a job for these applications?
 
Basically it's for gaming, and perhaps the odd bit of 3D design work (Although I think there are more specialised cards for those) 🙂
 
basically, not too much of a reason to buy expensive vid cards unless one is a hardcore gamer or light 3D graphics work. Though no doubt people decide to upgrade because they'd like to have the latest greatest etc. or because of the upgrade itch.
 


<< If you dont play games get something with good 2D quality like a Matrox or Raedon >>



Why the Radeon?? there are cheaper cards out there who have just as good image quality.

I would get a Matrox for 2D, a G200 if i could get one, a G400 if i couldn't.

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources
 
so people can brag about their hardware, just like a guys with a big penis bragging about it.
 


<< so people can brag about their hardware, just like a guys with a big penis bragging about it. >>



Really?? i never brag about my penis... ;-)

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources
 
Yeah, it really is mostly for gaming. I stuck my old TNT2 Ultra in my machine at work to replace the ATI Rage Pro it shipped with (blech). Absolutely no difference in AutoCAD (my primary app). Even if you do light 3D stuff, particularly in OpenGL, you really wouldn't need much more than a GeForce SDR.

But now I CAN play Q3A after work at decent FPS 🙂.
 
For 2D, a cheap Matrox card will do just fine, if you do not need dualhead, just don't get it.

BTW, wich other card can you connect two monitors to and get that kind of image quality on? And at what price? And can you choose between two monitors or a monitor and a TV on that card?

Matrox cards are the greatest when it comes to image quality, and they aren't expensive either.

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources (not for Matrox)
 
Radeons are not SLOW cards. When games use the third texture unit and have DX8 optimizations, you'll see Radeons on par with GF2s.

You can either pay $250 for a 32mb DDR GF2 (Creative) or $200 plus a rebate for the Radeon. When they offer nearly identical performance and the Radeon looks better I think the Radeon makes a VERY good value.
 
If you want 2D quality get a matrox, wnat gaming speed get a GTS or a Radeon. Matrox is even decent for light gaming even though the thought will make a hardcore gamer's hair curl...
 
Even for light 3D work, I would not get an expensive card. Its not worth it unless you have money to burn.
 
What's a 32MB TNT2 card cost? $70? Even the m64 is plenty fast for a normal system, and you can still play games on it (OK, jump my @$$, I hate spending big bucks on bleeding edge video).
 
I personally would not fork out the dough for the most recent top of the line video card. Why? Because all videocard makers (especially ATI &amp; nVidia) are dishing out low cost alternatives that perform extremely well without mortgaging your house! Also, by upgrading more often at a lower cost, you end up taking advantage of the latest technology videocard makers have to offer. While not having top of the line speed, you're often very far back of the big boys, considering the resolution most people play their games at!!!
 
Chemwiz-too bad Nvidia cards are known to have bad 2d. I would say anything above a Voodoo3 would be good enough for an occassional gamer, and those are cheap, with pretty good 2d.
 
In my opinion, the TNT2 and GeForce have better 2D quality than the V3s, particularly when you add-in that they also offer 32/24 bit color. The V5s have really nice 2D. The GF2s don't look as good to my eyes as the TNT2s did. Remember, the GeForce IS the Quadro with a few circuits unconnected, and the Quadro is the standard for low-mid priced PC graphics cards.
 


<< In my opinion, the TNT2 and GeForce have better 2D quality than the V3s, particularly when you add-in that they also offer 32/24 bit color >>

KillerApe - don't you mean 3D? Typo perhaps? 😉
 
no, not those bloody m64s! those things are worse than tnt1s 🙁 why not pay like $45 for a v3 2k and overclock it? my experience with m64 was a rather sad one (i managed overclocking the memory up to blistering 157mhz! 🙁)

edit: of course, i didnt buy one of these slouches; it was what they used in my roomate's dell. i know better where to spend my c@Sh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top