Graphics card for non gamer

[Ohboy108]

I need some help in deciding on a graphics card. I'm running XP Pro on an 820 D box with 2 gigs of ram. My current card is an NVidia 6600 with 256 megs of memory. I don't do any gaming but do still image editing and some video work. Nothing major, just for personal use. Will I see a difference in performance if I move up to an Nvidia 8800GT or 8800GT OC each with 512 megs of on board memory. The new card would then be used in a new box I intend to build later in the year with a Quad core.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[chris312]

There's no reason to upgrade if you don't play games. If you want to improve image editing and video work you should instead upgrade to 4GB of ram. I went with 4GB in my new computer because it was cheap and it has made video editing super easy to work with.

 

[halcyon]

Why would you upgrade to a gaming video card if your not a gamer?
Your 6600 is plenty good for you.

+1

 

[romulus47plus1]

+2

 

[Ohboy108]

Thanks for the input. I want to upgrade to speed up redraws and to see if I can generally get snappier performance.

 

[Ohboy108]

also, I work for Best Buy and sometimes you just want to buy something with your discount

 

[halcyon]

Thanks for the input. I want to upgrade to speed up redraws and to see if I can generally get snappier performance.

Well, you could get nice, low cost, passively cooled 8600GT and you'd have all 2D power you'd ever need if you're feeling like the 6600 is holding you back. ...but to be honest I think even the 6600 has pretty snappy RAMDACs so I'm not sure how much more you'll get.

Try rolling back to 16Bit color and see if your performance improves noticably.

If you're set on upgrading and have good airflow consider something like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121076

It should accelerate Vista's Aero (if you decide to use that) and give you solid 2D performance. I have one of these in my 8-year old daughter's rig driving a 22" and a 15" LCD, she gets rock solid 2D performance and can even play her occasional Dress Up the Barbie games.

 

[hannibal]

Matrox is still good card in 2D, if you want to have image guality...

 

[Andrius]

From what I can tell (I just replaced my 6600GT with an 8600GT last month) there is no difference with the redraw speed in 2d mode.

You would likely need to upgrade the CPU/motherboard/RAM/disks to see a signifficant change in redraw speed.

 

[halcyon]

From what I can tell (I just replaced my 6600GT with an 8600GT last month) there is no difference with the redraw speed in 2d mode.

You would likely need to upgrade the CPU/motherboard/RAM/disks to see a signifficant change in redraw speed.

That doesn't surprise me at all. The reason I mentioned the 8600GT is because it should have decent Vista Aero support and at least let you dabble in gaming.

Matrox G200/400, etc. is still great for all around 2D performance but has no 3D performance to speak of. Its certainly not a recommended card for anything that uses 3D, such as Vista's Aero. Many scoff at Vista's Aero but its 2008, the days of the 2000 looking Windows interface are not missed by me at all. ...besides Aero gives my 8800GTX something to keep it amused while not gaming.

 

[Andrius]

The 8600GT is an excellent card for 80EUR. It doesn't do well in games but there are alot of passive cooled versions that don't even run too hot.
That's the main reason I swapped the 6600GT with an 8600GT. The 6600GT fan was dying. I could hear Scotty from it "Captain! I can't give you more powah! We're already doing 120%" with a silly scottish accent. GREASEJOB!...

I've never cared much for "3D pink elephants in yellow thongs carrying fully rendered 3D folders from one edge of the screen to the other" while I was waiting for my filecopying it to finish. Eyecandy FTW. Overdoing it is what the problem really is.

I'd rather see a small popup in a corner of the screen displaying average and current transfer rates and an accurate time estimate!

 

[halcyon]

The 8600GT is an excellent card for 80EUR. It doesn't do well in games but there are alot of passive cooled versions that don't even run too hot.
That's the main reason I swapped the 6600GT with an 8600GT. The 6600GT fan was dying. I could hear Scotty from it "Captain! I can't give you more powah! We're already doing 120%" with a silly scottish accent. GREASEJOB!...

I've never cared much for "3D pink elephants in yellow thongs carrying fully rendered 3D folders from one edge of the screen to the other" while I was waiting for my filecopying it to finish. Eyecandy FTW. Overdoing it is what the problem really is.

I'd rather see a small popup in a corner of the screen displaying average and current transfer rates and an accurate time estimate!

Give Vista time, she'll get there, she's come a long way already.

 

[Andrius]

The problem is it doesn't really offer anything to me right now. I need my programs to work flawlessly for work.

As for time, it was the same with XP (came out in 2001) my first install was a disaster in Late October 2001(nothing worked, no drivers, every other click caused some annoying sound ..., alerts, popups, ... BLARGH!). I waited until SP2 was out and the major issues with it were worked out. Second install was April 2005. Never looked back. Stupid 137GB limit in WIN2K.

I think the same will happen with Vista 64bit in about a year or when the next service pack comes out.