Interesting debate, 2D performance for modern cards?
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Interesting debate, 2D performance for modern cards?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    103

    Interesting debate, 2D performance for modern cards?

    Well, I just got in to this debate with someone about something that on the one hand seems obvious, but on the other hand, neither side had any real proof to show.

    Here's the link:

    http://www.angelfire.com/linux/tempo...4865/2D-3D.txt

    Please read it and tell me what you think, the person seems insane, but...well, I don't know, let me know if anything I said was wrong (and preferably with some proof or something, hehe).
    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
    Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester
    2x512MB Crucial Ballistix DDR400 @ 201MHz, 2-2-2-8
    PCIe XFX GeForce 6800GT
    WD 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
    WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB
    Lite-On DVD-RW SOHW-1633S
    ThermalRight XP-120

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    3,265
    2D quality differs a lot among different card types and brands

    Matrox is probably still the best

    Nvidia 6xxx line generally looks great, at least when sticking with the good brands, I havent tried Inno and such, so I dont know about those.

    You want to know how bad the IQ gets in 2D, get one of the cheapest FX5200 cards you can find.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    103
    Well, I ran two computers, one with a Voodoo 3 and another with an FX 5600 and they both looked exactly the same at the same res as far as I could tell, plus this guy was talking about "fastest", not image quality, seems to me like you didn't read the IRC log, heh.
    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
    Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester
    2x512MB Crucial Ballistix DDR400 @ 201MHz, 2-2-2-8
    PCIe XFX GeForce 6800GT
    WD 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
    WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB
    Lite-On DVD-RW SOHW-1633S
    ThermalRight XP-120

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    3,265
    I guess thats what he meant

    Other then that ist the components you use and filters that are built in, that make all the difference.

    And no, of course I havent read all of it, LOL

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    103
    Well please, my whole point here is the IRC log and wether I was generally right or wrong relying on exactly what he said, not what he might have meant, I think he was just insane anyway, so read and then give your opinion cuz right now you're commenting on whatever you think is in there, not what really is.
    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
    Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester
    2x512MB Crucial Ballistix DDR400 @ 201MHz, 2-2-2-8
    PCIe XFX GeForce 6800GT
    WD 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
    WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB
    Lite-On DVD-RW SOHW-1633S
    ThermalRight XP-120

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Plymouth, England
    Posts
    1,399
    OK, I can't believe I actually read all that, but it has given a useful insight into your character and how you treat other people's enquiries, to hassle FALCON for not reading every word and refraining from wading into your playround scrap is frankly hypocritical. You jumped all over that IRC guy and got your facts wrong in the process, don't go bringing your fight here for affirmation of your insecure opinions.

    From the angle of enquiry you were clearly misunderstanding the guy's question, especially when he started talking about movie quality, and the actual stated requirements of certain software to require a 3D card. Looking in from the outside, you looked more 'insane' to me. To help explain, T2 Extreme Edition is the latest and greatest incarnation of the classic Arnie film, in 1080p HDTV resolution, playable only in Windows Media Player 10, and some newer DVD players I think. This is an example of a 2D only application that requires some decent hardware to play smoothly and at its best. DVD hardware decoding is often done on the graphics card these days and the quality of that process will affect the resulting image. I don't know which cards are better than others but I know there are differences in filtering and interpolation to enhance the image. Like PixelPlus or DRC on Philips or Sony TVs. You wouldn't believe how bad many films look on different PCs, and people think they are watching 'DVD quality'.

    You asked to be told what you got wrong? Well, for starters, those 3D DVD menus are prerendered animations, not realtime 3D. My separates DVD player does not have a 3D chip to handle fancy menus LOL . The confusion in the discussion about T2 Extreme Edition requiring a 128MB 3D card is, I am guessing, more to do with the DVD decoding abilities required by the card, and they are usually only featured as part of 3D chipsets, of an age to be bundled with 128MB of memory. I don't think the actual amount of memory plays a part in the decoding, not really sure, but it has to be enough to cope with the desired screen resolution and colour depth, and have some left over for the card to do its thing.

    Also, 2D performance can be measured in different ways (not that he seemed to be asking about this aspect, but for the record). Some cards really are faster at 2D, and not just crisper in terms of image quality like FALCON was pointing out. I bought my old Gainward GF4 Ti4200 card over the cheaper competition because it could output 2048x1536 resolution at 85Hz refresh rate. Other cards could only manage 60Hz. That's the performance difference between enjoying a film and a headache.

    I never meant to post this long, so I'd be amazed if anyone else actually bothered to read your link AND all this, but as a small bit of advice, just because someone doesn't have a blistering games machine doesn't make them a noob who doesn't know their requirements, nor should it invite any disrespect even if they are. Computers are fun, and so is life when you chill out and enjoy the company of your fellow man.

    BB.
    If you've got your money for nothing, who cares if the chicks are free!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    6,505
    <Brutus`> And if you think I'm wrong about this, you're either a nutcase, or know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.
    i think we know who knows nothing about what they are talking about.

    someone on this forum (cant remember who) had an old GF2 i think it was and said it had the worst IQ ever (because of the filter) and i remember the difference between my GF 256DDR and my 9600XT, the 9600 looked soo much more sharp and clear.
    Shuttle System l Intel Core2Extreme l 8GB Ram l 64GB OCZ SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64
    IBM ThinkPad T60 l 2GHz Core2Duo l 4GB Ram l 60GB Kingston SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    3,265
    I agree with Bennyboys post

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,230
    Hmm... I'm wading through that insanity at the moment, and, frankly, it's just sad. Starting from the very beginning you jumped on someone who had a very valid question, and mis-represented it as meaning something totally different. (No, "best 2D" does _not_ even sound like "2D only".) Followed by a wisecrack like:

    [05:33:40] <Brutus`> What's with these assmunchers hanging around here at night? ;/
    [05:33:50] <Brutus`> Asking questions like "how do I install a keyboard" or "what's the best 2D video card"
    [05:33:50] <Brutus`> :/
    Sad to say, it wasn't he who was the assmunch there.

    Let's wade further down:

    >[05:36:48] <Brutus`> Look, any card you'd get in a store these days does 2D exactly the same, 3D power is the reason why one is more expensive than the other.
    Plain old false.

    A) 2D capabilities like de-interlacing and other movie decoding goodies are pretty much different for every vendor

    B) Image quality itself on an analog screen (i.e., _signal_ quality) varies by orders of magnitude.

    I don't know if I was the one Martin was talking about, but yeah, I too had an old GF3 TI 200 which had _awful_ image quality. It had very visible ripples going up and down the screen at any resolution or refresh rate.

    And there actually was someone, I forgot the URL, which used an oscilloscope to measure signal quality. The best was Matrox, as said. ATI was _almost_ as good across the board. For NVidia it was a mixed bag, with the cheapest cards being often piss-poor and the highest end ones being usually on par with ATI.

    But in short, yes, there _is_ a difference between something displayed on the cheapest GF2 MX and a 6800 Ultra. Doubly so for movies. (See point A above.)

    [05:53:30] <Brutus`> bjblahs, DVD = 3D.
    [05:53:37] <Brutus`> That is, the DVD interface.
    As was said before, plain old false.

    _However_ MPEG decoding (e.g., DVD) can use a degree of _2D_ hardware assistance. Most modern cards offer various degrees on it, ranging from just handling the scaling part, to handling the whole decoding in hardware. (Some of the latest NVidia cards.) Additionally, you might get other goodies, such as various degrees of hardware de-interlacing. (ATI advertises that all over, for example.)

    Hmm...

    Dunno, can't even say I'm appalled or anything. I'm used to trolling, both on the web and on IRC. I've even done it myself before.

    But... why?

    I mean, why bring it here? So you've trolled one IRC channel, acted like a prick to someone with a valid question, and talked out of the *** about stuff you have _no_ clue about. Happens.

    But why on Earth would you then come here and harrass someone into reading that stupidity? "Hey, look, I can be a prick! I have a log of it too! Read it all, goddammit!" Uh, ok. Reminds me of school for some reason.

    Sad.
    Last edited by Moraelin v2.0; February 1st, 2005 at 02:16 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Location
    Grand Haven, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    11,332
    Originally posted by Martin_89
    i think we know who knows nothing about what they are talking about.

    someone on this forum (cant remember who) had an old GF2 i think it was and said it had the worst IQ ever (because of the filter) and i remember the difference between my GF 256DDR and my 9600XT, the 9600 looked soo much more sharp and clear.
    That was me!!! My Inno3D Tonado GeForce2 GTS was just horrible. My Voodoo3 2000 AGP spanked it around pretty bad. It was so bad that in 3D the 16 bit rendering on the Voodoo3 almost looked better than the 32 bit rendering on the GeForce2 GTS. Having to run in 32 bit to get that level of image quality almost negated what speed benifit there was. It made me very dissapointed overall in getting the card. Luckily it was only $90 and sinse 3DFX is not around any more, getting drivers for the GTS is much easier.

    The 2D image quality on the Voodoo3 was much better too sinse it could do 32 bit in 2D so it passed the GTS pretty easy. I got almost as bad of image qulity on an AOpen GeForce4 MX 440 DDR and the performance was MUCH worse than the GTS. I had to dump this card. My Radeon 9600, 9700Pro, and x700 all have great 2D and 3D image quality and my Geforce4 Ti4200 was VERY close behind those. I was very happy with it. Really the only thing I did not like about it was the TV out. It was quite a bit worse than my Radeon 9700Pro AIW.

    As for WMV-HD... I actually picked up 3 IMAX movies that come in a 2 disk set of DVD and WMV-HD and my system (look in sig) only runs about 45% load and plays it flawlessly. I hope if the HD-DVD players use WMV-HD, they will also be able to play these. The Correl Reef Adventure is just great looking. I should see if these will play in my P4 2.2Ghz laptop with a GeForce4 MX 420-Go with 32MB and 512MB DDR...

    As for the whole argument... I general do not look at arguments on other message boards either and did not read any of it. I don't see the point unless I was going to post there... which I would not. Also I see too many things like this that turn out to just be SPAM.

    And I did mean for my post to be this long! I know I do not have the most posts on this board (but I'm up there after something like 7 years), but I probably have the most words typed!!! (and a lot of smily faces... which fits my avitar just fine )
    Last edited by Todd a; February 1st, 2005 at 03:13 PM.
    AMD Phenom II x4 945 3Ghz | ASUS M4A77TD | 2X WD 1TB SATA 2 hard drive | 2x2GB Corsair XMS3 | nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS | ATI TV Wonder Theater Pro 550 | Antec P-160 case | Antec 650w Earth Watts | LG Blu-ray Super Drive | LG DVD RW | Windows 7 Pro

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    103
    Well, first of all thank you guys for providing the information I was asking for and I see that I indeed was wrong, which is why I came here to figure out wether or not I was wrong.

    Now, a few background notes, first of all it was like 5 AM (timestamps in that log are morning) and I was still without sleep, so my "jumping" at the person was atleast semi-warranted at the time, second, the keyboard thing was because the prior night several people joined at the same time asking questions like "how do I install a keyboard" and some other incredibly dumb ones, and afterwards (like, 20 seconds later) flooding the channel with pointless messages, those got banned quickly and at first I assumed he was one of them back again.

    Third, even though he might have been trying to ask a valid question, or meant something that was completely well-founded, what got through were unclear questions with no real explanation on what he wanted, atleast for the first part of the conversation.

    Well, regardless, thank you for your answers.

    EDIT: Oh, and another thing, as for brining my fights in here for affirmation of my insecure opinions, I brought this in here to either confirm that I am correct or not, because towards the end of the IRC conversation I was honestly not certain, and second I brought this here because I assumed that this is a topic rarely spoken of, because frankly this is the first time I've seen anyone worried about image quality as far as video cards go, atleast, in the past few years.
    Last edited by Brutus.IL; February 2nd, 2005 at 12:16 PM.
    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
    Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester
    2x512MB Crucial Ballistix DDR400 @ 201MHz, 2-2-2-8
    PCIe XFX GeForce 6800GT
    WD 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
    WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB
    Lite-On DVD-RW SOHW-1633S
    ThermalRight XP-120

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    6,505
    Originally posted by Todd a
    That was me!!! My Inno3D Tonado GeForce2 GTS was just horrible.
    Yup it was you todd now that i think back.
    Shuttle System l Intel Core2Extreme l 8GB Ram l 64GB OCZ SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64
    IBM ThinkPad T60 l 2GHz Core2Duo l 4GB Ram l 60GB Kingston SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Location
    Grand Haven, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    11,332
    Originally posted by Brutus.IL
    I brought this here because I assumed that this is a topic rarely spoken of, because frankly this is the first time I've seen anyone worried about image quality as far as video cards go, atleast, in the past few years.
    Actually we talk alot about image quality. Speed is not everything, especially when almost all cards over $100 will run most of todays games pretty well. Image quality becomes much more important to differentiate between the cards. Luckily most cards now a days have pretty good image quality and descent DVD playback and TV out. Staring at a monitor all day long in 2D about 80% of the time makes you think about image quality and refresh rate quite a bit.
    AMD Phenom II x4 945 3Ghz | ASUS M4A77TD | 2X WD 1TB SATA 2 hard drive | 2x2GB Corsair XMS3 | nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS | ATI TV Wonder Theater Pro 550 | Antec P-160 case | Antec 650w Earth Watts | LG Blu-ray Super Drive | LG DVD RW | Windows 7 Pro

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    103
    Isn't refresh rate usually more of an issue for monitors than it is for video cards when dealing with CRT monitors? I mean, most CRTs can only do 75hz at 1152x864 and 60hz at 1280x960 (or it's 5:4 version, 1280x1024), atleast most of under 150$ 17 inch ones, as far as I know.

    As for image quality, I really can't tell the difference (or I've only looked at good cards), when speaking of lines going across an image or something like that, that's not poor image quality, that's no image quality, you might as well plug your finger in to the ISA/PCI slot (since I'm pretty sure AGP cards don't do that, except when defective).
    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
    Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester
    2x512MB Crucial Ballistix DDR400 @ 201MHz, 2-2-2-8
    PCIe XFX GeForce 6800GT
    WD 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
    WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB
    Lite-On DVD-RW SOHW-1633S
    ThermalRight XP-120

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    6,505
    Originally posted by Brutus.IL
    ISA/PCI slot (since I'm pretty sure AGP cards don't do that, except when defective).
    its nothing to do with the slot its connected on, his GF2 GTS would have been AGP
    Shuttle System l Intel Core2Extreme l 8GB Ram l 64GB OCZ SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64
    IBM ThinkPad T60 l 2GHz Core2Duo l 4GB Ram l 60GB Kingston SSD l Windows 7 Ultimate X64

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •