Good video card?

[COKE CAN]

I need a decent video card, mine is about shot. Which is better, agp or pci? I was looking at the ATI 9250 or 9550. What are your opinions.

[tim]

What do you want it for? Games, Photoshop, PC or Mac. I got a card recently for my new machine, nVidia 6600GT, works great for games and well for Photoshop. Matrox are often recommended if you just need 2D, you don't need their latest most expensive card either.

[Citizensmith]

Good for what? Purely for photography one of the older Matrox cards are the best bet as they excel at 2D. Search here and there is a few topics where specific models got mentioned.

For general use an Nvidia GF6600 is about the best price/performance break. About $135 and available in either PCIexpress or AGP.

For an older 2D card PCI is fine. For gaming or 3D rendering then AGP is a significant upgrade. PCIexpress is better but there isn't much taking advantage of it. Get PCIexpress if your motherboard supports it and AGP if it doesn't.

[Citizensmith]

heh, trumped to the post. :)

[COKE CAN]

Yea, I just need it for everyday use. PS is the most I'll be using it for.

[Citizensmith]

Yea, I just need it for everyday use. PS is the most I'll be using it for.

But the thing is do you think you'll ever want to play games on it or do any other 3D tasks. Sticking with the Matrox line gives you marginally better 2D performance but totaly sucks at 3D. If you ever think you may be tempted to play any game that's come out in the past couple years the Matrox will be a complete failure and you'll be upgrading.

[KevC]

Avoid third party ATi cards. I know it applies to MediaPCs and HTPCs more, but their image quality really blows compared to the "true blue" Ati cards.

In this day and age, if you get a recent video card, the image quality is about equal, so just find one that's best for you.

Citizensmith is right, you need to remember that Matrox is purely a video card for business company. The Parhelia is an awesome Photoshop and CAD video card, but it lags even behind the 8500 in strength.

Pick yourself up a 6600 or x700 and you'll be fine :)

[Rob612]

It depends on what you need. Al other have pointed out, if you only do 2D, any Matrox will do the job beating anybody else hands down. Otherwise, you have to turn to something different.

[mrclark321]

I have a 6800 256mb....I love it!! What's $600 for a video card...lol

Dan

[COKE CAN]

I have a 6800 256mb....I love it!! What's $600 for a video card...lol

Dan

That's $500 towards a lens

[Citizensmith]

It depends on what you need. Al other have pointed out, if you only do 2D, any Matrox will do the job beating anybody else hands down. Otherwise, you have to turn to something different.

I disagree with the hands down thing. On certain displays it may provide better colors and crispness than other cards. However the difference is minor and can be totaly lost to a crap monitor. I'm not saying they aren't better at 2D, just that the difference is slight. We could maybe say the Matrox cards are the 70-200 f/4L and the current decent 3D cards a 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Sure the f/4 has an optical edge but the 2.8 IS does so much more. :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

The current gaming cards may be 70-200mm IS or F/4's...

the Matrox are the 200mm f/1.8's @ 2d.. and to the discerning eye.. the difference is indeed significant. I run my Sony FW 900 24" AG monitor on two seperate PCs via the two independant inputs the Siny is equipped with.

the A/B comparison of Matrox 16MB G-400 Vs. nVidia 128MB G-force is night and day... in fact.. it's a lot iek the difference between a 70-200mm L zoom and the 200mm f/1.8L prime :)

[Rob612]

On certain displays it may provide better colors and crispness than other cards. However the difference is minor and can be totaly lost to a crap monitor.

IMHO the difference - at least for what concerns my personel experience - is not so minor. Of course you are perfectly right on the output. A crap monitor will kill any video card, no matter which one. To use a Matrox (or perhaps any other high end 2D card) with a crap monitor does not have any sense.

And yes, maybe the "hands down" was a little above the line, but I am a big Matrox fan. :D

[Citizensmith]

The current gaming cards may be 70-200mm IS or F/4's...

the Matrox are the 200mm f/1.8's @ 2d.. and to the discerning eye.. the difference is indeed significant. I run my Sony FW 900 24" AG monitor on two seperate PCs via the two independant inputs the Siny is equipped with.

the A/B comparison of Matrox 16MB G-400 Vs. nVidia 128MB G-force is night and day... in fact.. it's a lot like the difference between a 70-200mm L zoom and the 200mm f/1.8L prime :)

So does all this mean that the 64mb(shared) of onboard crap a lot of consumer desktops ship with is a Phoenix 28-300 f/4.0-6.3?

[Andy_T]

I am very happy with my Matrox Parhelia 512, and find that it is also very decent for the games (I play nothing extremely demanding - like CS Condition Zero).

Best regards,
Andy