2d graphics

G

Goride

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
276
Right now I am trying to piece together a computer system for my step-dad. I myself am a gamer and i would easily go with an ATI or Nvidia card to push those framerates in 3d graphics as fast as possible.

However, thats my computer, not his. He doesn't play any games that require any sort of real power. But he does take a lot of pictures on his digital camera and will probably starting to scan older pictures. He won't be doing any sort of real editting with Photoshop, but he will be doing some minor editing (perhaps as he gets more skilled, he may get mroe into it though). However, the quality of the pictures is important.

So I would like to ask what are some of your guys' recommendations on cards that do really well in the 2d area.

From what I hear Matrox puts out some really nice cards for 2d, but i noticed that the prices seemed really high (at Newegg) considering the stats that they had. For example a $102 card only has 32mb ram, and a 64mb ram is $155.

I realize different cards would use it differently, but it just seemed 'weak' to me, heh.


EDIT:

Here is a link for a search of Matrox cards at Newegg for easy reference:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...=48&manufactory=1291&DEPA=1&sortby=14&order=1

BTW, i am in no way partial to Matrox, I'm open to other ideas, its just what I had heard.
 
matrox is MADE for 2d work stations and from the word on the forum the 2d quality is insane.
 
Matrox is without a doubt the king of 2D and image quality.
G550 (or even G450, G400, or old G200) would be a decent card for your needs.
A P-series card (P650/750/Parhelia) would be even better, if you think he will ever get into more advanced photo editing, as the P-series cards can do 10bit giga-color (something nobody else offers).
Parhelia also offers a Photoshop plug-in that enables Photoshop to take full advantage of gigacolor.
Add to that, the multi-monitor cababilities of any Matrox card, which makes photo editing a joy (you can have your pic shown full screen on one display, and a zoomed-up copy on the second display for fine-tune editing).
 
Odds are, a motherboard with onboard video (ATI, nVidia or Intel are safe) would suit your dad just fine. If it turns out later that your dad gets into some insane 2D work & needs a pro card, you can always upgrade but it's hard to un-spend money.
 
Gigacolor is crap. It reduces the bit-depth in the alpha channel to get more color-depth. (IE. a standard system would be 8 bits RGB and 8 bits alpha channel or 8/8/8/8, gigacolor is 10/10/10/2.)

Don't count gigacolor as a feature.

And no, Matrox cards are not MADE for workstations. Each generation was originally intended for gamers, but each generation has failed to back up Matrox' hype with performance, thus they re-vamp their line-up and advertising and suddenly it's a workstation card. Don't any of you remember that ultimate gaming experience propoganda crap with triple monitors and the Parhelia?

Not to say that they don't have good 2D, because it is definitely some of the best, but don't let the underwhelming price/performance ratio fool you; it's not expensive because it has revolutionary 2D, it's expensive because Matrox doesn't have the prodcution numbers that ATi and Nvidia have.

If ameoba's suggestion doesn't sit well with you, I'd suggest going with an older ATi card.
 
He told me he is totally against onboard video. We had a problem with it on his last computer (he purchased from Gateway) and it was hard to upgrade. (also had to use PCI slot instead of AGP)

He would like a decent graphics card though, because he plans on using this computer for at least 4-5 years or so, and doenst really want to mess around upgrading, so I alloted around $120 for the graphics card.

And Matrox did have that one $102 card, but like i said, it just really seemed like it was weak. (although i havent seen any benchmarks or anything like that) I just know i can get more than 32mb ram and 64bit from ATI for example. But if the Matrox would still perform better under 2d environments with lower memory/etc. then I'd still go with it.

Thanks for your input thus far. :)
 
I'd say a G400/450. I hear the 550s are actually slower or something? You could prolly get those 400/450s for really cheap now. Dedicated is almost always better than integrated. And since it wont be gaming, he'd love it :) I know I loved my G400...
 
I wouldn't touch a G400 or 500 if future-proofing was the idea.
A DX9 compliant card would be desirable for Longhorn, and you can get them at this price range with excellent 2D quality.

The output quality of most modern video cards is quite excellent, and ATI tends to be among the best. For $120 I second the 9600 non-pro (not the SE version) recommendation.
It has decent 3D performance for the money, uusally features passive cooling (no fans to break) and 2D quality should be near-perfect with a BBA, Sapphire or Gigabyte.
 
Originally posted by Neurofreeze
Gigacolor is crap. It reduces the bit-depth in the alpha channel to get more color-depth. (IE. a standard system would be 8 bits RGB and 8 bits alpha channel or 8/8/8/8, gigacolor is 10/10/10/2.)

Don't count gigacolor as a feature.

And no, Matrox cards are not MADE for workstations. Each generation was originally intended for gamers, but each generation has failed to back up Matrox' hype with performance, thus they re-vamp their line-up and advertising and suddenly it's a workstation card. Don't any of you remember that ultimate gaming experience propoganda crap with triple monitors and the Parhelia?

Not to say that they don't have good 2D, because it is definitely some of the best, but don't let the underwhelming price/performance ratio fool you; it's not expensive because it has revolutionary 2D, it's expensive because Matrox doesn't have the prodcution numbers that ATi and Nvidia have.

If ameoba's suggestion doesn't sit well with you, I'd suggest going with an older ATi card.
Click to expand...

No, you're wrong. Matrox originally designed the G200-450-550 for businesses and graphic artists. Gaming was the last thing on their mind, for every card except for the M3d and the Parhelia. The originals, like the Millennium 8mb (when most cards had 2mb) and Mystique were set for businesses that could afford that kind of thing. They never intended to compete for gamers attentions, their cards have always been weak at that. That's why they sided with PowerVR for the M3d, which also failed, if you'll remember... They stopped trying long ago.
 
He told me he is totally against onboard video. We had a problem with it on his last computer (he purchased from Gateway) and it was hard to upgrade. (also had to use PCI slot instead of AGP)
Click to expand...

There's a major diffrence between a quality mobo that just happens to have onboard video, and a crap-ass OEM board that's forced to use onboard. Getting an nForce2 with onboard video (or one of the newer Radeon onboards) just means that you have the option of running it you're not forced to use it, since most boards have the AGP slot. Besides, there's no way in hell you're getting a 'future proof' card that'll be good in 4-5yr for $120 unless all you want is 3D screensavers.

Your father's aversion to onboard video appears to be irrational; the reason you're building the system for him is that, presumably, you know your ass from your elbow & he doesn't. Your job, as the expert, is to tell him what his options really are and not let him get taken in by hype (positive or negative).


If you still inisist on a separate card, get something like a Radeon9600 or cheaper geForce FX with passive cooling. They should be in your price-range, he'll like the silence & you'll like knowing that there's one less cheap-part that can fail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top