Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What are the best PCIe video cards for TEXT display and no noise?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 23, 2007 6:12:00 PM

Can someone please list few of the best PCIe video cards for crisp text display and no noise (fanless?) i.e. not for gaming but mainly for viewing text documents, surf the net, view pics, etc?

Btw, I have ATI Radeon X300SE 128MB (OEM).

(Preferable less than $100 and work with ~300W PSU)

Thanks.
August 23, 2007 6:20:13 PM

Your X300 isn't bad. For something better you could look to Matrox.
August 23, 2007 6:44:12 PM

I checked gpureview.com and 7600GS is better than X300, is this true from gaming perspective? Does anyone know if 7600GS is better than X300 from text perspective?
Related resources
a c 176 U Graphics card
August 23, 2007 6:58:08 PM

What makes you ask the question? Did you like your x300, but it died on you? Is the x300 still working, but its p!ssing you off with bad text on your screen? Give us some background please so that we know what we are dealing with.

BTW, most of the time if you want things to look better, you need a better monitor. Not all are created equal. If you have a good monitor, make sure your settings are correct. (72Hz or better if its a CRT, and you are using the native res of your LCD.)
August 23, 2007 8:59:56 PM

My X300 still works and I'm happy with it. However, I need a new one for my other system with integrated video. I want to install the best of the 2 (7600GS & X300) on my main system. I chose 7600GS because it's fanless.

Btw, I have 2 Dell 20 LCDs (2007FP & 2005WFP).
a c 365 U Graphics card
August 23, 2007 11:45:20 PM

The video card does not have a major impact on text quality. The text quality is limited by the LCD panel used in a LCD monitor.

6-bit TN (used by many monitors including all 22" monitors) are inexpensive and have fast response times; meaning they are good for gaming. However, the monitor can only create 262k of colors, through a process called dithering it can blend colors to create (inaccurately) the other 16 million colors. This dithering process tends to make both text and images a bit fuzzy.

8-bit LCD monitors on the other hand, can actually create all 16.7m colors and does not use dithering at all. Therefore they can display crisper text, images and colors. The downside is they are more expensive and a little slower than 6-bit TN monitors.

Pixel pitch is another factor that determines how sharp text and images appear on screen. The lower the pixel pitch, the less space there is between each sub-pixel. That means sharper texts and images.
a c 176 U Graphics card
August 24, 2007 6:02:24 AM

frankca said:
My X300 still works and I'm happy with it. However, I need a new one for my other system with integrated video. I want to install the best of the 2 (7600GS & X300) on my main system. I chose 7600GS because it's fanless.

Btw, I have 2 Dell 20 LCDs (2007FP & 2005WFP).


If the x300 works and you're happy with it, why are you spending the extra money on the 7600GS? As a matter of fact, why are you spending any money if the new rig has onboard video? Depending on which onboard it is, it might be as good, if not better then your current x300. When in the 2D world of text, the video card doesn't play much into the equation. I vote that you try the onboard first, and buy another x300 if it isn't to your liking.
August 24, 2007 5:17:06 PM

My system integrated video is Intel Q965/Q963 Express. Is this good enough for text display?

My understanding is DVI is always better than VGA output, is this true?
a c 176 U Graphics card
August 24, 2007 5:24:18 PM

I don't follow intel graphics, so I'm not 100% sure. I do know that is a modern graphics core from intel, so you won't find much better onboard. I still vote you try it.

I'm not sure I'd say DVI is always better then VGA. One is digital, one is analog. They both have their pluses and minuses. I don't think one will look much different from the other.
August 24, 2007 5:45:21 PM

jeez, use onboard graphics. ANYTHING will do text. wtf?
August 24, 2007 6:04:06 PM

Changing your video card will not make any difference in the 2D world of text. You may experience a difference between an analog and a digital signal, but only if your analog cable is a low-grade cable. If your display looks fuzzy on the integrated graphics, make sure you are using a high quality cable that is rated for up to 1600x1200. Bargain basement cables are usually only rated for SVGA (1024x768) display, and will output a poor quality image on the LCD.

In any case, the only reason to upgrade to a discrete graphics card would be if you absolutely cannot get the analog output of you integrated graphics to work for you. The differences between the discrete graphics cards do not apply to the 2D environment, so if you decide to purchase one, get the cheapest one that has a DVI output (and meets any other requirements you may have, like passive cooling). NewEgg sells a bunch of graphics cards in the $30 price range that would be more than sufficient.
August 24, 2007 6:24:18 PM

asgallant said:
Changing your video card will not make any difference in the 2D world of text. You may experience a difference between an analog and a digital signal, but only if your analog cable is a low-grade cable. If your display looks fuzzy on the integrated graphics, make sure you are using a high quality cable that is rated for up to 1600x1200. Bargain basement cables are usually only rated for SVGA (1024x768) display, and will output a poor quality image on the LCD.

In any case, the only reason to upgrade to a discrete graphics card would be if you absolutely cannot get the analog output of you integrated graphics to work for you. The differences between the discrete graphics cards do not apply to the 2D environment, so if you decide to purchase one, get the cheapest one that has a DVI output (and meets any other requirements you may have, like passive cooling). NewEgg sells a bunch of graphics cards in the $30 price range that would be more than sufficient.


Thanks for your reply. This makes lot of sense, however, first I experience myself the difference between digital and analog signal using the cable comes with the LCD. Secondly, I read on cnet review, they rated one is better than others in term of text display so this means to me that all cards not not equal to display crisp text!
August 24, 2007 6:45:11 PM

6200TC its like 35 bucks
August 24, 2007 6:57:03 PM

I run dual monitors on my system. One is over DVI and one is over Analog and there is absolutly no difference between the images. They are the same model displays and I have even switched the cables around to test it. I did this to see If I needed to buy and additional DVI cable, which I didn't.

As for text quality between onboard and add-on video processing, I have personally never seen a difference in quality between the many onboard and add-on cards that I have used.

Maybe I've just been lucky, but I don't think so.
December 1, 2008 8:00:58 AM

My gosh after reading all these post it seems to me you people don't know what you're talking about. I may not know technically what I'm talking about either, but here is my experience and it is based on fact.

1. I bought a new computer in March/2008 which has a Asus P5GC/MX1333 motherboard and the onboard graphics that is built into the motherboard did not display as good a picture on my 19" Sony CRT monitor as the nVidia GeForce 8500 does.

2. However, the GeForce 8500 sucks compared to the Diamond G640 video card (in another computer built in 1997 Pent II) that I used to drive the same exact Sony monitor with. I mean there was a huge difference in text and picture quality.

So, to the original poster. Whatever you do, do NOT buy one of the PCI-Express nVidia cards like the 8500, 8600 or 8800 for 2D work. These nVidia cards are designed for gaming and their picture quality quite frankly sucks.

Now, the best cards for 2D seemed to be manufactured between 1999 and 2001 as AGP or PCI slot cards which presents a dilemna for you and/or people like me who have PCI-Express slots, but are only concerned about 2D picture quality and color. Most everything designed now days for PCI-Express is the 3D garbage for gaming that cost 150 to 300 dollars. From what I've read the Matrox G550 (PCI-Express) is very good, but not quite as good as the the old Matrox G450 (AGP slot). So, I can not write an ending to this story as I am still researching it. But it is frustrating because of all the nonsense over 3D, and what about the rest of the world that doesn't go gaming?

!