2D image/video quality recommendations
 

"Default" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Interested to know which set of cards now have the better image (and
video)
quality, nV or ATi?
Came across a guy who says his Quadro looks better on screen than a 9800P.
Can this be true?

In my opinion, ATI has the better 2D image quality than Nvidia cards up to
and including the GeForce4. I haven't seen the new Nvidia GeForceFX series
so I cannot confirm if ATI still has the lead. Also I haven't seen the
Quadro cards and can't really comment on that.
---
Anders

I just had a GF4 Ti4400 which had very good 2d compared to the older GForce
cards.
However, I recently upgraded to a MSI FX5900 and the 2d and video quality is
amazing. Quite a bit better than the Ti4400. Everything is much crisper,
even at higher resolutions. Probably due to the new 400mhz Ramdac. Playback
of videos like avi's and mpg's is amazing. Blows away my Ti4400 because
Nvidia put in a new video processor, much like Ati's.
I never had an ATI, but I can't imagine it being much better than the new FX
series.

As far as 2d performance, I did some benchmarking and the FX5900 is about
twice as fast as my TI4400.
This is great news if you do alot of Photoshop work, etc.


"Default" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Interested to know which set of cards now have the better image (and
video)
quality, nV or ATi?
Came across a guy who says his Quadro looks better on screen than a 9800P.
Can this be true?

Views much appreciated!

Thanks for the replies people, keep em coming in. Also, if you've come
across any online reviews that would be helpful too.
Cheers


"Default" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Interested to know which set of cards now have the better image (and
video)
quality, nV or ATi?
Came across a guy who says his Quadro looks better on screen than a 9800P.
Can this be true?

Views much appreciated!

I can personally guarantee if you get an FX900, specifically an MSI (since
that is what I have and I can't vouch for any other brands), you will not be
sorry. The 2d is amazing. That is one of the first things I noticed going
from a TI4400. And I usually wasnt one who could notice any diff in image
quality from card to card.
I've also heard similar stories from those with other brands of the FX
series.

"Default" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the replies people, keep em coming in. Also, if you've come
across any online reviews that would be helpful too.
Cheers


"Default" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Interested to know which set of cards now have the better image (and
video)
quality, nV or ATi?
Came across a guy who says his Quadro looks better on screen than a
9800P.
Can this be true?

Views much appreciated!

"edde" wrote in message
...
I can personally guarantee if you get an FX900, specifically an MSI (since
that is what I have and I can't vouch for any other brands), you will not
be
sorry. The 2d is amazing. That is one of the first things I noticed going
from a TI4400. And I usually wasnt one who could notice any diff in image
quality from card to card.
I've also heard similar stories from those with other brands of the FX
series.


Any idea if one can the same for an FX5600 Ultra?
Would prefer the cheaper option than a full blown 5900U which I'm probably
not even going to use.

edde wrote:
All believe all the fx series use the 400mhz ramdac, so image quality
should be the same.
Also, I do know that the improved video playback is included in the
fx5600 as well (probably all the fx series).

The speed of the RAMDAC dos not necessarily affect it's quality - the
resolution and accuracy of the the DAC is the issue, along with the quality
of components in the relevent driving circuits.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a string...

He was just referring to the new DAC, running at 400MHz, which may also have
been of better quality..


"Ben Pope" wrote in message
...
edde wrote:
All believe all the fx series use the 400mhz ramdac, so image quality
should be the same.
Also, I do know that the improved video playback is included in the
fx5600 as well (probably all the fx series).

The speed of the RAMDAC dos not necessarily affect it's quality - the
resolution and accuracy of the the DAC is the issue, along with the
quality
of components in the relevent driving circuits.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a string...

We noticed a definite improvement in 2D resolution and quality with the FX
5200 (Ultra and non-Ultra), FX 5800 (non-Ultra) and FX 5900 cards over the
GeForce4 cards - the 5200 Performance, well it's pretty much universally
accepted that this entry level card can't compete with a GF4 Ti card. As
for picture quality I have seen an FX 5900 (non-Ultra) right next to an ATi
Radeon 9700 Pro and to be honest I don't notice much difference. The ATi
display was a little brighter, but adjusting the gamma in the FX card to 1.2
from 1.0 fixed that. What was most important to me and the wife was
stability and reliability. The ATi drivers are good one release then
unreliable the next; but the nVidia ones seem to be consistantly good - as
long as you don't plunge into betas which range from excellent to mediocre.
Face it, at frame rates over 120fps all you get is bragging rights
(according to Intel and video production people anything over 80fps is
bragging rights as the human eye is not capable of detecting the difference
at rates over 80fps).

I will agree with an earlier post, the Matrox Millennium 400 and 500 series
cards produced fantastic clarity and brightness in 2D mode; but the FX cards
from nVidia are at least as good and have much better 3D speed. I don't
have anything from Matrox later than a 450 to compare with, so as for their
new cards, someone else is going to have to step up.

Ron

"Default" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the replies people, keep em coming in. Also, if you've come
across any online reviews that would be helpful too.
Cheers


"Default" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

Interested to know which set of cards now have the better image (and
video)
quality, nV or ATi?
Came across a guy who says his Quadro looks better on screen than a
9800P.
Can this be true?

Views much appreciated!