What drivers are you using?
4.2s currently, also have run the 3.4s and the 4.1s with the same result.
You can just add a PCI card and switch the primary/secondary in the drivers while in windows. I'm suprised its that poor to go to those lengths, as thats not my experience. Your card is new enough, maybe make an exchange?
In terms of clarity the board is razor sharp up to 1280x1024@100Hz or 1600x1200@75Hz, it starts to fall off slightly @1600x1200@85Hz and by the time its to 2048x1536@85Hz it is extremely poor. For swapping display adapters, does that option appear in device manager if you have multiple displays?
unless of course you oversaturated color.
You ever use good calibration tools? They come with a set of images printed out that you hold next to the monitor to adjust the color, this isn't about oversaturation this is about having the proper amount of color. For nV boards I had DV set to less then 1/8th of the way up, that's what it took to calibrate it properly. Color bleeding is even worse then undersaturated colors for me, that would have me already pulling the board out.
This is a perfect example of when somebody has brand loyalty
I've never had brand loyalty when it comes to vid cards, that's a myth that people who don't like the truth tell themselves. The last nVidia board I bought was a GeForce2Pro, in the last year I bought two ATi boards. At this moment I'm leaning towards Matrox as I already explicitly stated. This is mainly about 2D quality and I spent enough on my monitor that I want the best, I don't care who it is that offers it.
BFG
AGP automatically takes the primary display role so you'll probably have a great deal of difficulty getting the PCI card to be the primary display device.
Every mobo I've had since the SS7 days has had primary display selectable in the BIOS(AGP or PCI).
But Matrox doesn't have digital vibrance either.
They allow you to adjust color, that's all that's needed to calibrate a board properly. DV actually is less then optimal for proper calibration as the drivers that support it don't allow full control over each color channel, but it is a lot better then no control at all. I'm not even sure if Matrox will be good enough to push the monitor at the highest setting, but it handles 16x12@85Hz better then ATi so at least it would be a step in the right direction.
So you're saying that when you increase the resolution your 2D looks better on your nVidia card than it does on your ATi card? If so you've either got a defective ATi card or there's some issue with your setup.
Looks better on my Gainward board but it has always been better then any ATi part I've seen for 2D(if I picked one up it would likely be an old Gainward or a 5200). On my BFG when pushed it has the same issues with higher resolutions, slightly better @16x12 85Hz but as bad @20x15, but it doesn't have issues with color. Still would rather go Matrox as I stated, but at least with nV I'd have some control over color.
oldfart
I dont like oversaturated colors either. I do too much photo editing and DV movie work for that. I need the screen to look as close to real as possible. Some digital cameras (Kodak) have the same issue. They oversaturate the image which does give it more "pop", but is not as true as a Canon which has more muted color, but is more accurate.
It's not oversaturation I'm looking for, it's accurate color levels. Color bleeding has always been a pet peeve of mine- and for the record I also prefer Canon digital cameras to Kodak's
🙂 If I use my Canon's OSD to view pictures versus the monitor it looks like the photo has been sitting under direct sunlight for a few weeks on the monitor.
As far as 2D goes, I run a flat panel with DVI. I only really run the native 1280 x 1024 res, and it's razor sharp. I haven't really tried a high res CRT with it.
With DVI you don't have to worry about color calibration nearly as much as you do with a CRT though(obviously), and 1280x1024 the board is razor sharp up to 100Hz.
