AOA Forums AOA Forums AOA Forums Folding For Team 45 AOA Files Home Front Page Become an AOA Subscriber! UserCP Calendar Memberlist FAQ Search Forum Home


Go Back   AOA Forums > Hardware > Graphics and Sound cards; Speakers and other Peripherals


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 12:16 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: September 2001
Posts: 5,957

Cool Wish I didn't have these problems

Talk about a dilemma. I've worked myself hard into this...

So, for my gaming/workstation box, I have two of the best video cards (if you don't include the next generation):

Hercules Geforce 2 Ultra

Radeon 64DDR VIVO

I'm using the Hercules at the moment, and noticed a marked drop in 2D quality when she fired up and I ran 3dMark 2001. Funny thing, the Ultra doesn't score all that much higher than the Radeon card. Radeon has sold me, nvidia is for pure frames, sacrificing image quality in the process.

So, off to that 'worldwide garage sale' auction site with it.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 12:20 AM
fireball_87's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Posts: 596
Send a message via AIM to fireball_87

Re: Wish I didn't have these problems

Quote:
Originally posted by Pinky
Talk about a dilemma. I've worked myself hard into this...

So, for my gaming/workstation box, I have two of the best video cards (if you don't include the next generation):

Hercules Geforce 2 Ultra

Radeon 64DDR VIVO

I'm using the Hercules at the moment, and noticed a marked drop in 2D quality when she fired up and I ran 3dMark 2001. Funny thing, the Ultra doesn't score all that much higher than the Radeon card. Radeon has sold me, nvidia is for pure frames, sacrificing image quality in the process.

So, off to that 'worldwide garage sale' auction site with it.
lol- how mutch you want for your ultra? itll woop my mx any day. but im straped for cash right now.
__________________
duel athlon xp 1700+'s
msi k7d mobo
ati radion 8500 all in wonder 128mb
512mb crucial pc 2100 ddr
sound blaster audigy
120gb 7200 rpm WD hard drive
40x12x40 cd burner
16x dvd
450wpsu
alienware style green case (:

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 01:49 AM
Jon's Avatar
Jon Jon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 67
Send a message via ICQ to Jon

I know your dilemma well.

I have a Radeon 64MB VIVO in my secondary box (2 X P3 1125 on VP6) that I use purely for web browsing, etc. My gaming rig is equipped with a GF3 and the 8K7A+ 1.4 @ 1.67. I use it for gaming only as I agree on the lack of 2D quality it has when compared to the Radeon.

Guess you could say I enjoy the best of both worlds!
__________________
:]
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 03:13 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: September 2001
Posts: 5,957

Quote:
Originally posted by Jon
I know your dilemma well.

I have a Radeon 64MB VIVO in my secondary box (2 X P3 1125 on VP6) that I use purely for web browsing, etc. My gaming rig is equipped with a GF3 and the 8K7A+ 1.4 @ 1.67. I use it for gaming only as I agree on the lack of 2D quality it has when compared to the Radeon.

Guess you could say I enjoy the best of both worlds!
If only everyone had these problems .
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 06:15 AM
surlyjoe's Avatar
AOA Staff
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: caliland
Posts: 2,723

the radeon 64ddr is a hell of a card, how much faster would you say the ultra was? , I think the radeons are quite a bit cheaper also
__________________
"Many people die at twenty five and aren't buried until they are seventy five"
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 26th September, 2001, 06:10 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: September 2001
Posts: 5,957

Quote:
Originally posted by surlyjoe
the radeon 64ddr is a hell of a card, how much faster would you say the ultra was? , I think the radeons are quite a bit cheaper also
I didn't even hit 4100 in 3dMark2001 with the 21.81 detonators and the Ultra card fully tweaked... the Radeon tweaked gets 3700, and with VIVO and better 2D quality for $160 brand spanking new, I'd say it's a steal.

Hence, Ultra is up for auction.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 6th October, 2001, 03:20 AM
SJAXKINGPIN's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: October 2001
Location: Central IL.
Posts: 149
Send a message via Yahoo to SJAXKINGPIN

While I'm an NVIDIA man, I will admit they're pretty low on the totem pole when it comes to the crispness of 2D graphics. The Radeon is, of course, more crisp and has better color saturation. However, if you're more concerned about 2D than games, there is no better 2D display than that produced by Matrox.

The primary reason why most NVIDIA Cards have poor 2D and ATI and Matrox's are so good is the filters in the RAMDACS. While almost every manufacturer of NVidia based cards follow their reference design for board layout, they are free to use whatever ramdac they choose. This accounts for the great variety of 2D (especially at high resolution) graphics among NVIDIA cards. ATI and Matrox make their own, so they control the quality of the RAMDAC on their cards.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 6th October, 2001, 03:26 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: September 2001
Posts: 5,957

Quote:
Originally posted by SJAXKINGPIN
While I'm an NVIDIA man, I will admit they're pretty low on the totem pole when it comes to the crispness of 2D graphics. The Radeon is, of course, more crisp and has better color saturation. However, if you're more concerned about 2D than games, there is no better 2D display than that produced by Matrox.

The primary reason why most NVIDIA Cards have poor 2D and ATI and Matrox's are so good is the filters in the RAMDACS. While almost every manufacturer of NVidia based cards follow their reference design for board layout, they are free to use whatever ramdac they choose. This accounts for the great variety of 2D (especially at high resolution) graphics among NVIDIA cards. ATI and Matrox make their own, so they control the quality of the RAMDAC on their cards.
Makes perfect since, but then again... all Nvidia cards have poor 2D, haven't seen one that isn't poor in that dept; which means the manufacturer's are choosing to skimp in the ramdac filter; so either way ATI wins for have good 3d and excellent 2d.
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PC problems have gotten too bad for me... JC Denton CRASHED! 7 16th September, 2005 10:39 PM
EP-8RGA+ Problems, problems problems and misery offie EPoX MotherBoards 12 17th September, 2003 08:13 PM
Red Hat problems Con OS, Software, Firmware, and BIOS 4 16th March, 2003 10:50 PM
8RDA+ Problems Problems Pogue EPoX MotherBoards 3 8th February, 2003 01:26 AM
EP 4PEA+: PROBLEMS on PROBLEMS!..Need help.. darkstar11 EPoX MotherBoards 13 24th November, 2002 09:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:42 PM.


Copyright ©2001 - 2010, AOA Forums
Don't Click Here Don't Click Here Either

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0