I haven't seen too many reviews where they extensively compare the 2D quality of the X800 vs the 6800 video cards. I've used a Geforce 2 at 1600x1200 a long time ago and text was a blurry mess. I would like to run at this resolution (or higher) for my desktop. Anyone seen any articles comparing this issue?
X800 2D Quality vs 6800 2D Quality
- Thread starter DPmaster
- Start date
nitromullet
Diamond Member
- Jan 7, 2004
- 9,031
- 36
- 91
In 2D it's not about the quality, but about the FPS... Nothing worse than getting a slide-show when playing a mean hand of solitaire. 
For 2D it is more a matter of what your monitor can do and at what Hz it can do it at. I had an 8500 64mb and a Mitsubishi Diamondtron 19" and 1600x1200 was no problem at all, I didn't like my text and icons being that small, but was no problem at all FPS wise. Your monitor might have been the problem.
I care, actually. So should anyone who spends a long time each day looking at an analogue monitor.
I can't imagine either would be less than great at their prices. It's been a little while since the GF2's cheap-o filters.
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
i DO care, more so than any 3d functionality. then again, i am not going for either one of these cards.
AFAIK, ati is still the only one that has a complete dvd acceleration featureset. plus i heard their YV12 is better than nvidia's. i use my 8500 with YV12 + VMR9 renderless and its just gorgeous
Originally posted by: VanillaH
i DO care, more so than any 3d functionality. then again, i am not going for either of these cards.
AFAIK, ati is still the only one that has a complete dvd acceleration featureset. plus i heard their YV12 is better than nvidia's. i use my 8500 with YV12 + VMR9 renderless and its just gorgeous
I'm convinced that the only reason he said that is because he's a complete nVidia fanboy. Read some of his other posts and you'll see what I mean. :roll:
It wasn't the monitor because the 2D quality was crisp and sharp when used with a Matrox Parhelia card. The monitor could handle a higher resolution (2048 x 1536 @ 85Hz) than the video card could put out at an acceptable resolution. The Geforce 2 cards were notorious for having horrible 2D. I want to run a desktop resolution of 1920 x 1440 @ 85Hz and not go blind (the Matrox could do this but I also want a good gaming card as well).
You typically can't go wrong with a Built-by ATi card or even a Sapphire. nVidia's cards are all made by various third parties, some of which are very cheap when it comes to 2D filters and components. You have to read reviews and be very careful in that regard.
I second that. I?ve had 2 Sapphire cards (7500, 9100) and the 2D was excellent on both of them. My BB ATI 9600XT has even slightly better 2D than the Sapphire cards.
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
i thought you could... but matrox isnt necessarily better. for what i know, matrox is unrivaled for analog tv output. when it comes to monitors ati and matrox have different color tones the former being on cooler side, but you prolly know this already. what made me steer toward ati was its superior video playback. matrox cards arent too hot if you primarily use your computer to watch avi files...
nitromullet
Diamond Member
- Jan 7, 2004
- 9,031
- 36
- 91
I think that ATi still has better 2D image quality. Although I have not messed with the R420 or NV40 cards. I personally have a GeForce FX 5900 and the 2D image quality is certainly not bad or blurry, but I recently built a rig for my Mom with a Radeon 9800 Pro. I built the rig at my place (using my monitor) and then brought it to her when I was done with the build and install. The 2D image quality on the 9800 Pro was fantastic. I have never used a Matrox card so I can't comment on how it compares to that, but I don't imagone that anyone would have any complaints. Have you considered getting a workstation card like a FireGL or Quadro? These cards appear to offer wonderful 2D IQ at extremely high resolutions.
I thought about getting a FireGL card or a Matrox...this card would be for a photoshop/painter/video editing machine. I wasn't sure about the Quadro because it was made my nvidia...they haven't had the best record for 2d quality (unless it's different for their workstation/CAD video cards).
Leadtek's nVidia cards have the best 2D quality (at least the last time I heard). Supposedly they even beat Matrox's (pre-Parahelia though).
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
pre gf3 cards looked horrible due to poor RF resistors manufacturers used to cut the cornders. with vdd mods or whatever they are called, any nvidia card can be modded have clear and sharp image. but if you are into watching lots of video files like i do, ati is still way to go...
yhelothar
Lifer
- Dec 11, 2002
- 18,409
- 39
- 91
Saying ati quality vs nvidia quality is like saying sedan quality vs coupe quality.
It matters completely on the brand.
If you got a cheapass brand like jaton or pine, then sure, the 2D quality is going to be crap.
But if you got a good brand, like gainward, leadtek, or hercules, then the 2D quality would be as good if not BETTER than ATI cards.
There was a test run by matrox that compared the VGA quality between BBA R8500, a reference geforce4ti, and a matrox parhelia, and ATI came out last, while nvidia came second.
It all depends on what brand it is.
Stop saying nvidia quality is bad, that's like saying sedan quality is bad.
It matters completely on the brand.
If you got a cheapass brand like jaton or pine, then sure, the 2D quality is going to be crap.
But if you got a good brand, like gainward, leadtek, or hercules, then the 2D quality would be as good if not BETTER than ATI cards.
There was a test run by matrox that compared the VGA quality between BBA R8500, a reference geforce4ti, and a matrox parhelia, and ATI came out last, while nvidia came second.
It all depends on what brand it is.
Stop saying nvidia quality is bad, that's like saying sedan quality is bad.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
Nvidia is completely dominant in workstation and cad cars. Any quadro FX card in the lineup will kill any ATI worstation card. That is one area where Nvidias performance and quality are undisputed. Although ATI hasn't had very many worstation cards so they are still very new at it. My prediction is that ATI will gradually become more competitive in that area.
-Kevin
You obviously haven't read any of my other posts, because I say just as many good things about ATi as I do about Nvidia.
If you want good 2D quality, you'll buy Matrox. If you don't, then it's obviously not enough of a priority that you're willing to sacrificed 3D performance for good 2d quality. Like I said, no one cares.
Originally posted by: VanillaH
i DO care, more so than any 3d functionality. then again, i am not going for either one of these cards.
AFAIK, ati is still the only one that has a complete dvd acceleration featureset. plus i heard their YV12 is better than nvidia's. i use my 8500 with YV12 + VMR9 renderless and its just gorgeous
Nobody cares about that stuff either. It's not games, so nobody cares.
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Insomniak
Originally posted by: VanillaH
i DO care, more so than any 3d functionality. then again, i am not going for either one of these cards.
AFAIK, ati is still the only one that has a complete dvd acceleration featureset. plus i heard their YV12 is better than nvidia's. i use my 8500 with YV12 + VMR9 renderless and its just gorgeous
Nobody cares about that stuff either. It's not games, so nobody cares.
thats pretty absurd man. i used to play games too you know.. when OP asked for 2d quality i am inclined to think he did care at least.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter