Radeon 2d Spectacular Image quality equaled!!

[noko]

The <b>2D image quality</b> of the Gainward CARDEXPERT GeForce3 PowerPack !!! was <b>spectacular</b>. Our notes clearly mark the card as "best" among GeForce3 cards in both the 1600x1200x32 at 85Hz as well as the 1800x1440x32 at 70Hz test. The 2D image quality of the Gainward CARDEXPERT GeForce3 PowerPack !!! was <b>right on par with the ATI Radeon DDR card we used for comparison</b>, leaving the other GeForce3 cards behind :redface: .

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1507" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1507</A>

Nice that the Radeon was used as a standard to judge the GF3 cards and only one ranked good enough to stand with it. Appears some of the other GF3 cards they tested in 2d are equivalent to my MX400 horrid 2d, with resolutions above 1024x768. To bad they didn't compare the color because that is another area the Radeon out does the Nvidia cards due to the 10bit DAC vice the 8bit DAC of the Nvidia cards. Of course the King of 2d rightly belongs to the Matrox G450 which was ranked number 1 (Excellent) and was also a standard. The MX was ranked number 5 (suck ass). This is the break down of 2d image quality as tested at AnAndTech of all the GF3 cards:

1. Matrox G450(Best)
2. Radeon DDR, Gainward CARDEXPERT GF3 PowerPack!!!! (good)
3. Morpheus, Hercules 3d Prophet III, SUMA Platinum GF3 (moderate)
4. ASUS V8200 Deluxe (poor)
5. MX, MSI StarForce 822, PowerColor Chameleon (worst) my rating (SUCK ASS)

So if you do Web designing, desktop publishing, 2d cad, programming with virtually no serious 3d then do yourself a big favour and get a Matrox G450 card.

If you do above but need 3d then get a Radeon DDR if you can't afford a GF3 or get the Gainward CARDEXPERT GF3 for the best of both worlds. I would wait on the Radeon2 if you have the cash, it seems to be brewing some very sweet aromas.

I just don't understand it, a high end graphics card usually mean high resolution gaming and big monitors, yet the majority of the GF3's are just not up to it in image quality. Radeon2 to the rescue.

<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by noko on 07/26/01 02:39 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[rcf84]

At Firing squad the Radeon AIW beat the hell out the G450.

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... Yummy

 

[rcf84]

At Firing squad the Radeon AIW beat the hell out the G450.

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... Yummy

 

[noko]

Yea, that was in 2d performance and not in Image Quality. Your right the performance of the Radeon 2d actually was faster then the GF2 2d performance which very few people knew about. In fact the GF3 2d performance as in speed is now just as fast as a Radeon DDR. Interesting that this aspect of a video card is lefted out. Comes into play when you start doing high resolution 2d work such as Desktop publishing etc. The Radeon's speed is virtually unmatched there.

<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed

 

[rcf84]

even the G550 cant touch it

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... Yummy

 

[rcf84]

LoL i just remembered this:

Radeon 2

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... Yummy

 

[pvsurfer]

That ranking falls in line with my (subjective) eval of the deliverable image/color quality of those cards. That's why, as a heavy Photoshop user, I chose the G450. But if I were also into 3D/gaming (which I'm not), I would have gone with Radeon instead.