video card advice?

FD
Posted By
false_dmitrii
Nov 4, 2004
Views
216
Replies
3
Status
Closed
Along with the monitor, I’m also thinking of upgrading my video card from a Radeon 8500 in the next few months. When I bought the Radeon, I was replacing a Matrox G200. There was a visible decline in 2D speed and performance, but I’m not sure about the quality of static images. There was a distinct color shift on the desktop–the blue background got darker, and previously distinct color regions were now hard to tell apart. But there were too many potential variables such as default profile and gamma settings that I wasn’t really aware of at the time. I’m not sure what overall impact a new video card would have on *static* 2D quality.

When I bought the Radeon, the consensus seemed to be that nVidia’s cards used lower-quality 2D circuitry and were both slow and blurry as a result. But that was several years ago. Is there still a difference in 2D quality between new ATI and nVidia cards, say in the $200 range? And what sort of 2D shortcomings should I expect from either maker? I like having 3D performance as well and don’t want to spend more for less from a Parhelia (if it came to that, I’d probably be better off just digging out my G200 again 🙂 ), but I’d still like to know what exactly sets higher-end 2D graphics cards apart. I’m not sure where to find 2D-oriented graphics card reviews.

false_dmitrii

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

H
Hecate
Nov 5, 2004
On 3 Nov 2004 20:02:37 -0800, (false_dmitrii)
wrote:

When I bought the Radeon, the consensus seemed to be that nVidia’s cards used lower-quality 2D circuitry and were both slow and blurry as a result. But that was several years ago. Is there still a difference in 2D quality between new ATI and nVidia cards, say in the $200 range? And what sort of 2D shortcomings should I expect from either maker?

Yes, the Radeons still have better 2D than the nVidia based cards.

You shouldn’t have any problems with a Radeon if you’re using proper colour management.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
FD
false_dmitrii
Nov 5, 2004
Hecate …
On 3 Nov 2004 20:02:37 -0800, (false_dmitrii)
wrote:

When I bought the Radeon, the consensus seemed to be that nVidia’s cards used lower-quality 2D circuitry and were both slow and blurry as a result. But that was several years ago. Is there still a difference in 2D quality between new ATI and nVidia cards, say in the $200 range? And what sort of 2D shortcomings should I expect from either maker?

Yes, the Radeons still have better 2D than the nVidia based cards.
You shouldn’t have any problems with a Radeon if you’re using proper colour management.

Thanks, Hecate (it is *you*, right? 🙂 ). Hope my nVidia motherboard stays happy with my next card.

false_dmitrii
H
Hecate
Nov 6, 2004
On 5 Nov 2004 10:55:47 -0800, (false_dmitrii)
wrote:

Yes, the Radeons still have better 2D than the nVidia based cards.
You shouldn’t have any problems with a Radeon if you’re using proper colour management.

Thanks, Hecate (it is *you*, right? 🙂 ). Hope my nVidia motherboard stays happy with my next card.
<g> Yes, you’d have noticed if it was the idiot 🙂

Good luck 🙂



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections