Hello everyone!
I'm currently building a studio computer and I'm looking for a suitable videocard. I will be using the videocard for 2d applications only (although it's not a problem if the card has 3d, but it's just not important that it performs well in 3d).
I'm looking for a videocard with the following properties:
- very low power consumption
- passively cooled
- dual screen
- acceptable 2d quality @ 1280*1024
- not a matrox (due to horrible past experiences)
- low price (if possible)
What's the general concensus on the best videocard for this purpose?
Thanks in advance!
Low power, dual screen video card
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
Umh, if it's just that 
(any other brand could have the same problems)
Otherwise, I would say that for your request, if it's analog output, I would say that my general consensus is a Matrox G400 that can be found for cheap somewhere (I use one for ages).
Otherwise, if you're not forced to have a single card, 2 PCI cards will do the same, for example, IIRC, Diamond PCI card were good, no ? And they should consume much less than actual AGP cards (they didn't even had heatsinks).
(any other brand could have the same problems)
Otherwise, I would say that for your request, if it's analog output, I would say that my general consensus is a Matrox G400 that can be found for cheap somewhere (I use one for ages).
Otherwise, if you're not forced to have a single card, 2 PCI cards will do the same, for example, IIRC, Diamond PCI card were good, no ? And they should consume much less than actual AGP cards (they didn't even had heatsinks).
-
NeilBlanchard
- Moderator
- Posts: 7681
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
- Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
- Contact:
I can vouch for Matrox, too.
Hello:
You should give Matrox another chance -- they have the best dual monitor support in Win2K, and they have dual DVI outputs, and the best 2D image quality going. Though ATi's are close, and are less money, and more 3D speed. Matrox is my first choice, and ATi my second.
You should give Matrox another chance -- they have the best dual monitor support in Win2K, and they have dual DVI outputs, and the best 2D image quality going. Though ATi's are close, and are less money, and more 3D speed. Matrox is my first choice, and ATi my second.
-
Edward Ng
- SPCR Reviewer
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:53 pm
- Location: Scarsdale, NY
- Contact:
I've had my share of experience with a good several ATi-based graphics adapters and really have to tell you that, while they come in second, it's a very distant second (and barely superior to nVIDIA-based cards). This is the current state of image quality (nVIDIA used to be much worse, particularly in the GF3 generation of cards!); ATi has not gotten any better, while nVIDIA has been working with their a-i-b (add-in-board) partners to improve quality, so while nVIDIA is catching up to ATi, neither of them are really even close to Matrox (or Apple, but that's a different story all together) when it comes to 2D image quality, particularly at higher resolutions and refresh rates (try 1600x1200 @ 85Hz, if your monitor can handle it, on a Matrox, and then try it again on an ATi-brand (fabbed by Sapphire, actually) card or an nVIDIA-based card, and the difference is immediate and obvious).
I cannot, however, speak for Quadro or FireGL cards; their prices are much higher than regular cards built on the very same chipsets (R350, NV30 etc.), so I figure something is going in there, and probably improved filters are part of that, but I have not seen it for myself, and cannot personally make any guarantees about them; anyway, they're quite expensive!
Finally I want to mention one thing that sort of irks me about my Millennium G550; with my Radeon card, Photoshop's hardware alpha channel support worked fine; working with images that have alpha channel data was blazing fast, such as transforms etc. with feathered layers etc. On my G550, it appears that Photoshop cannot recognize the hardware alpha channel support, or G550 chip simply cannot do it, because even with that feature enabled, transforms on items with alpha blending is choppy and laggy as all get-out. Other than that, however, I much prefer using my G550 over any ATi- or nVIDIA-based adapter I've used, and for that reason I stick to it.
Perhaps you had issues with your previous Matrox card, and they may have been related to any myriad number of things (more likely either a registry/driver issue, or plain incompatibility with the mainboard), but I've got only that one flaw to talk about with my G550; honestly I've got at least as many little quirky issues with my ATi-based cards, anyway.
-Ed
BTW The main reason for all this bad IQ is due to cost cutting on the part of a-i-b fabricators, by using cheaper filter caps onboard, after the RAMDAC; these filters are required to meet FCC standards, and in no way actually help image quality! Matrox and Apple pour extra funds into maintaining the highest IQ standards by purchasing and using the very best filter components on their cards and in their computers; this is why! This happens to also be why, I surmise, Quadro or FireGL cards may have properly clean filters on them; look at the astronomical prices on those cards!
Also, although you probably already know, by utilizing a flat panel display with DVI-I input, you can completely bypass this issue entirely. However, you also probably know as well as I do that the color gamut, contrast and particularly, black and white levels of LCD displays cannot come close to a good ol'-fashion CRT; however (since I do not know what line of work you're in), if you can spare the money and can risk the loss in color and black level accuracy, DVI-enabled flat panels may be the best solution for you...
...oh yes and the DVI-enabled CRT displays won't do you any good, because the DVI-A portion of the DVI-I interface is the part that DVI-I-enabled CRTs utilize, and that portion of the DVI-I interface still passes through the FCC-spec filters! Only flat panel displays, which are natively digital technology, utilize the DVI-D portion of a DVI-I interface (There is simply no reason for a display manufacturer to build into their CRTs RAMDACs to convery a digital signal to analogue if every darn video card in existance already does this, and CRT technology is naturally analogue).
I cannot, however, speak for Quadro or FireGL cards; their prices are much higher than regular cards built on the very same chipsets (R350, NV30 etc.), so I figure something is going in there, and probably improved filters are part of that, but I have not seen it for myself, and cannot personally make any guarantees about them; anyway, they're quite expensive!
Finally I want to mention one thing that sort of irks me about my Millennium G550; with my Radeon card, Photoshop's hardware alpha channel support worked fine; working with images that have alpha channel data was blazing fast, such as transforms etc. with feathered layers etc. On my G550, it appears that Photoshop cannot recognize the hardware alpha channel support, or G550 chip simply cannot do it, because even with that feature enabled, transforms on items with alpha blending is choppy and laggy as all get-out. Other than that, however, I much prefer using my G550 over any ATi- or nVIDIA-based adapter I've used, and for that reason I stick to it.
Perhaps you had issues with your previous Matrox card, and they may have been related to any myriad number of things (more likely either a registry/driver issue, or plain incompatibility with the mainboard), but I've got only that one flaw to talk about with my G550; honestly I've got at least as many little quirky issues with my ATi-based cards, anyway.
-Ed
BTW The main reason for all this bad IQ is due to cost cutting on the part of a-i-b fabricators, by using cheaper filter caps onboard, after the RAMDAC; these filters are required to meet FCC standards, and in no way actually help image quality! Matrox and Apple pour extra funds into maintaining the highest IQ standards by purchasing and using the very best filter components on their cards and in their computers; this is why! This happens to also be why, I surmise, Quadro or FireGL cards may have properly clean filters on them; look at the astronomical prices on those cards!
Also, although you probably already know, by utilizing a flat panel display with DVI-I input, you can completely bypass this issue entirely. However, you also probably know as well as I do that the color gamut, contrast and particularly, black and white levels of LCD displays cannot come close to a good ol'-fashion CRT; however (since I do not know what line of work you're in), if you can spare the money and can risk the loss in color and black level accuracy, DVI-enabled flat panels may be the best solution for you...
...oh yes and the DVI-enabled CRT displays won't do you any good, because the DVI-A portion of the DVI-I interface is the part that DVI-I-enabled CRTs utilize, and that portion of the DVI-I interface still passes through the FCC-spec filters! Only flat panel displays, which are natively digital technology, utilize the DVI-D portion of a DVI-I interface (There is simply no reason for a display manufacturer to build into their CRTs RAMDACs to convery a digital signal to analogue if every darn video card in existance already does this, and CRT technology is naturally analogue).
-
wumpus
- Patron of SPCR
- Posts: 946
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:57 pm
- Location: Berkeley, CA, USA
- Contact:
DVI or VGA? My standard recommendation is the ATI 9600, which runs just crazy cool (trivial passive) and offers very good 3D performance to boot.- very low power consumption
- passively cooled
- dual screen
- acceptable 2d quality @ 1280*1024
- not a matrox (due to horrible past experiences)
- low price (if possible)
I doubt you'll have any analog (VGA) output issues at that particular res, but as Edward states, it can vary by manufacturer due to variances in quality/type of the analog output circuitry. This is very hard to predict; it varies by card and monitor, and on top of that, some people are less sensitive to it than others.
As Edward also points out, the general quality of 2D analog output HAS improved across the board over the last few years.. probaby because manufacturers realize that 21" CRTs are dirt cheap now and people are quite likely to run their cards at 1280x1024 or higher.
Anyway, it is definitely a good idea to get a "name brand" for this reason instead of generics (Sapphire). The likelihood of quality components in the analog output circuitry is much higher, anyway.
A little late into the fray, but I'll add my own voice to the Matrox chorus. My lab is all 2-D. I've tried several ATI cards and have been very disappointed. My current favorite is the Matrox G650 which is the cheapest/best card I've found that has dual DVI output. If you can go analog, the older G450 or G550 is excellent. For my very limited gaming, the Matrox boards are just fine. I'll leave the 3D screamers for other intrepid folks.
BTW, there *is* a slight glitch with some MB and some matrox models that makes the BIOS boot screen unreadable (though the OS is fine). Check out the "firmware" patch at Matrox's web site for a Q&D fix if you encounter this problem.
BTW, there *is* a slight glitch with some MB and some matrox models that makes the BIOS boot screen unreadable (though the OS is fine). Check out the "firmware" patch at Matrox's web site for a Q&D fix if you encounter this problem.