7900GT or X1900XT

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

False,

Sorry? What's false? That still images can't demonstrate shimmering?

What is false, is that you are pretending that NV doesnt shimmer worse.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Under certain circumstances, NV shimmers much worse than ATi. That is a fact.

Agreed, nVidia's default driver settings shimmer far more than ATi. I am not disputing this at all.

Sure looked like it in your previous post I quoted. "yet you don't seem have any trouble believing nVidia shimmers more than ATi with AF. " See?

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Obviously you have not played with each card at 1920x1200 on a 24" WS LCD, or you wouldnt believe they are both the same.

I regularly game at 1920x1440 with 16xAA.

In any case I didn't say they were the same, that's simply a strawman argument you've concocted. I simply stated still images are useless for showing the problem like Joker was attempting to do with AA.

And you do know that the xS modes reduce texture shimmering, right?

And? That has nothing to do with it. I said, a 24" WS LCD too, not just the res. Shimmering is much more noticable on a big LCD. Again, look at HardOCP's evaluation where they talk about this for confirmation. I thought your monitors max res was 1600x1200... ? But that doesnt matter, as I said, the shimmering difference is much worse on a large LCD, than on a CRT.

I simply pointed out that shimmering is much worse on NV cards with certain hardware. Dont like it? Doesnt matter, its the truth.

Yes I know this. But as I said, its useless to me. It doesnt matter how good something looks, if its a slide show, or has massive slow downs.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

NV's 8x is virtually useless.

I totally disagree. Maybe in the past but not now as the G7x series is fast enough to use it in a lot of games, even in single card configurations. Also if you can run 8xAA you can generally run 16xAA as the performance hit between the two is surprisingly small.

Its your right to disagree. Another poster in this topic, agrees with me. I tried it when I had 2x7800GTX's, I also tried 8x and 16x SLI AA. 8x SLI AA was barely playable in a few games. And not any new games. 16xAA was not even close to being playable.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Yes it looks very nice, but getting playable frames in any sort of new game is not going to happen.

Vampire Bloodlines is a 2004 game it it runs well on just a regular 7800GT with 16xAA enabled. It also looks gorgeous.

"Runs well" is subjective. I do not like slow downs, stuttering, or anything like that. And it certainly would have slowed down too much for me. I tried 8x on several games when I had just one GTX, and it wasnt even close to playable in any games I was playing at the time. Again, what is playable is very subjective. I dont like pauses, stuttering, slide shows, or anything of that nature.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Its nice for very old games,

Yes, it is. The image quality of 16xAA has to be seen to be believed and a very large chunk of my gaming library is now being enjoyed at 16xAA.

That good. I dont play old games that often, if at all. I play them when they come out, and thats pretty much it. Aside from a few really good online FPS's, with good replay value. Which wouldnt run well enough, because you need all the speed you can get in those types of games.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

There is zero chance of me getting playable frames in virtually any game at 1920x1200.

The same applies to 6xAA (especially adaptive) unless you run Crossfire, at which point you can bring SLI into the picture.

Not hardly. 6xAA on ATi has a much, much smaller performance decrease than 8xAA on NV's cards. When I had just one XT, I ran 6x in almost everything. 8x in the same games, on the same PC, with SLI'd 7800GTX's was not playable to me. Not even close.

And I do run Crossfire, X1900's.

Originally posted by: BFG10K
The fact is on single cards ATi has no equal to nVidia's 8xAA and 16xAA and given how ATi fanboys always harp on about ATi's superior IQ they conveniently like to downplay nVidia's AA superiority.

Fact? Looks like ATi's AA looks better in these shots, although its just one game. The bridge is what makes the difference. All other edges look about the same to me. I doubt I would notice it much while playing.

I "down play it", because its useless to me. Ive seen shots comparing SLI AA to SuperAA, and have used both of them first hand. I cant tell any difference. Sure, SLI goes up to 16xAA, but I never say the difference to that and SuperAA's 14x while playing. Also, with CF, you can do, 2x, 4x, 6x, 8x, 10x, 12x, and 14x. With NV you go from 8x, to 16x, with nothing in between. You can fine tune your playable frames with the maximum AA much more on ATi's setup. Not to mention SLI AA takes a much, much larger hit than SuperAA. In fact, 14xAA on SuperAA is usually about as fast as NV's 8x SLI AA. So yeah, to me ATi does have the AA advantage. Not because I think it looks better (they are both pretty comprable, cept for NV's SS), its because I can apply more AA, while still getting playable frames. Throw that on top of better AF, and now a select few games with HDR+AA, yeah I think ATi has the IQ advantage.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

The 14xAA mode is crazy!

 

[aiya24]

i'm in the same boat. decided to get the x1900xt and sell my evga 7900gt. getting it for a cheap price so thats why i'm getting it. ati has less issues when it comes to games imo plus their are always new drivers out every month to fix/improve performance and that to me shows they care enough to take the time for driver updates.

 

[BFG10K]

What is false, is that you are pretending that NV doesnt shimmer worse.

I am doing no such thing. Again that's simply a strawman you've made up.

Sure looked like it in your previous post I quoted. "yet you don't seem have any trouble believing nVidia shimmers more than ATi with AF. " See?

You might want to apply some comprehension to what you read. In particular try reading the quote I was actually responding to.

And? That has nothing to do with it.

Then why did you wave around your resolution like a flag? If you want to wave the resolution flag then I can outdo you.

I thought your monitors max res was 1600x1200... ?

Nope.

But that doesnt matter, as I said, the shimmering difference is much worse on a large LCD, than on a CRT.

You're right it doesn't matter because I never said anything about shimmering except to point out that still images can't show it.

Dont like it.

You tell me; you're the one putting words in my mouth and claiming I said things when I never did.

I tried it when I had 2x7800GTX's, I also tried 8x and 16x SLI AA. 8x SLI AA was barely playable in a few games

That depends on what games you try it in, just like it depends on the Crossfire modes. Do you run 14xAA in Tomb Raider with next gen content or Oblivion? How about Fear with soft shadows?

I tried 8x on several games when I had just one GTX, and it wasnt even close to playable in any games I was playing at the time.

In what games?

6xAA on ATi has a much, much smaller performance decrease than 8xAA on NV's cards.

That was never disputed.

When I had just one XT, I ran 6x in almost everything. 8x in the same games, on the same PC, with SLI'd 7800GTX's was not playable to me. Not even close.

But 8xAA offered better quality, especially in games with a lot of vegetation like Vietcong and Far Cry. Again it depends on what games you try it in. Did you try 14xAA in Fear with soft shadows?

Fact? Looks like ATi's AA looks better in these shots, although its just one game.

Ah, I see you're still using screenshots to "demonstrate" AA quality so again I'll ask if it's okay for me to use screenshots to "demonstrate" nVidia doesn't shimmer more than ATi?

And if you had read what I actually said then you'd see I was posting about single cards which then begs the question of why you linked to Crossfire AA screenshots for an IQ comparison.

I "down play it", because its useless to me. Ive seen shots comparing SLI AA to SuperAA, and have used both of them first hand.

You've shifted the goal-post again. First you were telling me about how good 6xAA is because it's fast and then you started talking about Crossfire AA modes for a quality comparison. You can't have it both ways whenever it suits you.

On single card configurations nVidia's xS modes offer higher image quality, especially in OpenGL where ATi cannot do SSAA. In something like Serious Sam TSE running 6xAA looks great until you run into a tree and see what a shimmering eye-sore it is because it uses alpha textures. And you can't do anything about it unless you upgrade your motherboard and drop in another Crossfire capable card.

So yeah, to me ATi does have the AA advantage

How so? 6xAA adaptive is inferior to 16xAA and 6xAA non-adaptive isn't even in the same league.

For single card configurations nVidia wins AA hands down. That means no screwing around with SLI or Crossfire so it's much more convenient, cost effective and reachable by more people.

 

[ElFenix]

jebus christ!

anyway, i'm going with the x1900xt

:beer:


edit: anyone know of a program that will use avivo to batch convert a whole lot of video files?

 

[sfv]

been with NVDA for my last 5 vid cards.. but just got the x1900xt and am very happy with it on my VS vx2025wm. i do plan on grabbing a pair of 7900xt to vmod when the price finally comes down..


-NV fanboi

 

[ElFenix]

this fan seems to be getting more annoying by the moment.

vf900 here i come. next paycheck is friday

 

[aldamon]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
this fan seems to be getting more annoying by the moment.

vf900 here i come. next paycheck is friday

I don't think the VF900 is a good choice for the X1900 series:

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=452425

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: aldamon

Originally posted by: ElFenix
this fan seems to be getting more annoying by the moment.

vf900 here i come. next paycheck is friday

I don't think the VF900 is a good choice for the X1900 series:

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=452425

seems there are conflicting reports for this thing

wonder how those thermalright heat sinks are?

or maybe i should lap the stock cooler?

 

[framerateuk]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
7900GT because of single slot cooling, quietness, high OCing, and better drivers (IMO).

Better drivers....

Ive got to be honest, ive had less trouble with the recent ATI drivers than i had with my nvidia drivers.

It seems to me that NV need to rush out a new driver every time a game comes out, to fix some performance issue, yet, so far, since ive had my x1900, every game ive tried has worked fine with the 6.3's. Of course i did install the HDR+AA patch for Oblivion but that wasnt to fix a driver issue but to add an extra feature.

And no im not an ATI fanboy, ive bought graphics cards from both companies in the past (ive owned more nVidias than ATI's), im just calling this as i see it

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
this fan seems to be getting more annoying by the moment.

vf900 here i come. next paycheck is friday

Save yourself the trouble and get the cheaper Accelero x2. I got an Accelero after I wasted $50 on a vf900 only to find out it doesnt cool the x1900's so well.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: ElFenix
this fan seems to be getting more annoying by the moment.

vf900 here i come. next paycheck is friday

Save yourself the trouble and get the cheaper Accelero x2. I got an Accelero after I wasted $50 on a vf900 only to find out it doesnt cool the x1900's so well.

maybe i'll do that, and to solve the exhaust bit move the card to the top slot on my a8r-mvp. just put an 80 mm fan exhausting air through the slots.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

What is false, is that you are pretending that NV doesnt shimmer worse.

I am doing no such thing. Again that's simply a strawman you've made up.

Sure looked like it in your previous post I quoted. "yet you don't seem have any trouble believing nVidia shimmers more than ATi with AF. " See?

You might want to apply some comprehension to what you read. In particular try reading the quote I was actually responding to.

And? That has nothing to do with it.

Then why did you wave around your resolution like a flag? If you want to wave the resolution flag then I can outdo you.

I thought your monitors max res was 1600x1200... ?

Nope.

But that doesnt matter, as I said, the shimmering difference is much worse on a large LCD, than on a CRT.

You're right it doesn't matter because I never said anything about shimmering except to point out that still images can't show it.

Dont like it.

You tell me; you're the one putting words in my mouth and claiming I said things when I never did.

I tried it when I had 2x7800GTX's, I also tried 8x and 16x SLI AA. 8x SLI AA was barely playable in a few games

That depends on what games you try it in, just like it depends on the Crossfire modes. Do you run 14xAA in Tomb Raider with next gen content or Oblivion? How about Fear with soft shadows?

I tried 8x on several games when I had just one GTX, and it wasnt even close to playable in any games I was playing at the time.

In what games?

6xAA on ATi has a much, much smaller performance decrease than 8xAA on NV's cards.

That was never disputed.

When I had just one XT, I ran 6x in almost everything. 8x in the same games, on the same PC, with SLI'd 7800GTX's was not playable to me. Not even close.

But 8xAA offered better quality, especially in games with a lot of vegetation like Vietcong and Far Cry. Again it depends on what games you try it in. Did you try 14xAA in Fear with soft shadows?

Fact? Looks like ATi's AA looks better in these shots, although its just one game.

Ah, I see you're still using screenshots to "demonstrate" AA quality so again I'll ask if it's okay for me to use screenshots to "demonstrate" nVidia doesn't shimmer more than ATi?

And if you had read what I actually said then you'd see I was posting about single cards which then begs the question of why you linked to Crossfire AA screenshots for an IQ comparison.

I "down play it", because its useless to me. Ive seen shots comparing SLI AA to SuperAA, and have used both of them first hand.

You've shifted the goal-post again. First you were telling me about how good 6xAA is because it's fast and then you started talking about Crossfire AA modes for a quality comparison. You can't have it both ways whenever it suits you.

On single card configurations nVidia's xS modes offer higher image quality, especially in OpenGL where ATi cannot do SSAA. In something like Serious Sam TSE running 6xAA looks great until you run into a tree and see what a shimmering eye-sore it is because it uses alpha textures. And you can't do anything about it unless you upgrade your motherboard and drop in another Crossfire capable card.

So yeah, to me ATi does have the AA advantage

How so? 6xAA adaptive is inferior to 16xAA and 6xAA non-adaptive isn't even in the same league.

For single card configurations nVidia wins AA hands down. That means no screwing around with SLI or Crossfire so it's much more convenient, cost effective and reachable by more people.

Wow, you are pretty clueless at time, and obviously just like to argue. I dont want to take the time for a huge quote tree.

1. I brought up the resolution, with the mention of a WS LCD. Obviously you dont understand, or do not want to accept that NV shimmers much more than ATi in this setting. Again, refer to HardOCP about this.
2. NV's 8xAA is FAR from playable in any sort of new game to me. Making it very useless. Use it in Farcry at 1920x1200? Heh, I can use pictures of the game and flip them like an old movie faster than the frames I would get.
3. I didnt shift anything. I said 8xAA for NV was useless for me, because its far too slow to use. 6xAA for ATi is playable for me. I dont know why you cant accept this. 6xAA is MUCH MUCH faster than NV's 8xAA. No they are not the same quality, but that doesnt matter since one is playable to me, and the other isnt.
4. Thats what a quick google search of the monitor in your sig says its limited to. 19", 1600x1200. Im sorry you have such old hardware, dont be upset that others do not.
5. Im done responding to this. Take an hour and make another quote tree if you'd like, I wont be reading it. You like to argue, and drag others into a long drawn out quote fight. I wont be a part anymore, or in the future.

 

[SniperWulf]

next game up is oblivion.

Keep the X1900

 

[Topplayer]

like Oblivion says Nvidia is the way its ment to be played...........NVIDIA FTW

 

[A5]

Originally posted by: Topplayer
like Oblivion says Nvidia is the way its ment to be played...........NVIDIA FTW

Except that it loses in every high-end test

 

[5150Joker]

I'll repost what I wrote in another thread:

Fact is to get the 7900 GT up to par with a higher end part (assuming they don't kill it in the process) one has to do the following:

1. Buy a conductive pen for $13 + $5.50 shipping and/or tax
2. Multimeter for $20 + $5.50 shipping and/or tax
3. Aftermarket cooler for another $30 + $6 shippiing + tax (if inside CA)


So lets total that up:

1. $319 + $4.65 shipping for an eVGA 7900 GT = $323.65
2. $20 for a multimeter + $5.50 shipping = $25.50
3. $13 + $5.50 for shipping = $18.50
4. Aftermarket cooler for $36

Total cost to volt mod a 7900 GT (while killing it's warranty in the process): $403.65 + voided warranty

vs.

Price of an X1800XT at Newegg: $259 + $4.89 shipping=$263.89

or

Price of an X1900XT at Newegg: $419 + $5.09 shipping=$424.09


So one can choose to buy a 7900 GT, order all the junk above to volt mod it and kill your warranty for $403.65 or buy an X1800XT that costs $263.89 shipped which amounts to a whopping 53% difference in price between them and you still get to keep the warranty on your X1800XT. Or for approximately $20 more than a volt modded 7900 GT you can go with an X1900XT that will give you the same performance as a volt modded 7900 GT and you don't have to spend a dime extra on mods or aftermarket coolers AND you keep your warranty. This is all ignoring the fact that ATi cards have HQ AF, HDR+AA and more stable drivers in addition to their lower prices. Seems to me the 7900 GT simply is not worth getting.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

I have you all beat

I am the dominant God of all things video. All of you bow before your Master of Fact and Opinion whose Opinions are Facts for the black of white is the grey of white and black!

I have 7900GTX EVGA superclocked at $599.99 each in SLI at 720core and 1822mem. I am a loser because I bought the cards before the mod trick on the 7900gt became apparent and I already had a SLI board :roll:
I own $25,000 in ATI stock (bought at $10.50) but own only Nvidia cards!

I am the winner of the thread!

 

[inveterate]

Hey guys,, How come noo one said ,, Fook Oblivion, like it's really not that great. Kinda boring imo. I personally like Rpgs but theres very little in Oblivion that entices me. The Art is just Fugly. I'm more towards the stuff put out by the Jap side for good rpgs.
Graphics is a big deal, but HDR is mheee.. It is likely that Nvidia will offer a solution in the future for HDR + AA. and V mod is defff worth it. and how would the company know u did it.
Unless they put it under some microscope or intense chemical tests.

I'd go for the 7900GT and volt mod. use it for a year,, it breaks get new one, volt mod again.

 

[inveterate]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
I'll repost what I wrote in another thread:

Fact is to get the 7900 GT up to par with a higher end part (assuming they don't kill it in the process) one has to do the following:

1. Buy a conductive pen for $13 + $5.50 shipping and/or tax
2. Multimeter for $20 + $5.50 shipping and/or tax
3. Aftermarket cooler for another $30 + $6 shippiing + tax (if inside CA)


So lets total that up:

1. $319 + $4.65 shipping for an eVGA 7900 GT = $323.65
2. $20 for a multimeter + $5.50 shipping = $25.50
3. $13 + $5.50 for shipping = $18.50
4. Aftermarket cooler for $36

Total cost to volt mod a 7900 GT (while killing it's warranty in the process): $403.65 + voided warranty

vs.

Price of an X1800XT at Newegg: $259 + $4.89 shipping=$263.89

or

Price of an X1900XT at Newegg: $419 + $5.09 shipping=$424.09


So one can choose to buy a 7900 GT, order all the junk above to volt mod it and kill your warranty for $403.65 or buy an X1800XT that costs $263.89 shipped which amounts to a whopping 53% difference in price between them and you still get to keep the warranty on your X1800XT. Or for approximately $20 more than a volt modded 7900 GT you can go with an X1900XT that will give you the same performance as a volt modded 7900 GT and you don't have to spend a dime extra on mods or aftermarket coolers AND you keep your warranty. This is all ignoring the fact that ATi cards have HQ AF, HDR+AA and more stable drivers in addition to their lower prices. Seems to me the 7900 GT simply is not worth getting.

DUDE<, first off,, no void of warrenty. Second u don't HAVE to get a vf700,, 3rd 7900gt at gtx speeds outperforms NO MATTER WHAT, four, multimeters are not 20 bux, total is about 360
With warrenty intact, that is 360 bux for 7900GTX, and it will definitly Pwn any X1900 price to performance.
If it breaks, call evga, alcohol the card,, and boom u get new one. Do it again.
If u think this is dirty,, Fook u. cuz that's capitalism, have u ever noticed Tax loopholes u all do the same thing and call it somethign else. Did u know most top finacial execs don't pay tax cuz they have armies to find the loopholes for them, and writes everything as buisness expenses. Fook u alll.. ahhhhhhhhhh

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Originally posted by: inveterate
If it breaks, call evga, alcohol the card,, and boom u get new one. Do it again.
If u think this is dirty,, Fook u. cuz that's capitalism, have u ever noticed Tax loopholes u all do the same thing and call it somethign else. Did u know most top finacial execs don't pay tax cuz they have armies to find the loopholes for them, and writes everything as buisness expenses. Fook u alll.. ahhhhhhhhhh

You're gonna get flamed for this. But it does void the warranty as even software volt mods void the warranty.

 

[pacho108]

Originally posted by: inveterate
Hey guys,, How come noo one said ,, Fook Oblivion, like it's really not that great. Kinda boring imo. I personally like Rpgs but theres very little in Oblivion that entices me. The Art is just Fugly. I'm more towards the stuff put out by the Jap side for good rpgs.
Graphics is a big deal, but HDR is mheee.. It is likely that Nvidia will offer a solution in the future for HDR + AA. and V mod is defff worth it. and how would the company know u did it.
Unless they put it under some microscope or intense chemical tests.

I'd go for the 7900GT and volt mod. use it for a year,, it breaks get new one, volt mod again.

best fanboy ever

 

[BFG10K]

Obviously you dont understand, or do not want to accept that NV shimmers much more than ATi in this setting. Again, refer to HardOCP about this.

Please stop spreading lies and try to comprehend arguments before you respond to them otherwise you look pretty foolish trying to argue points that were never under dispute to begin with.

Again I never claimed nVidia doesn't shimmer more than ATi, I simply stated screenshots are useless for showing the issue.

2. NV's 8xAA is FAR from playable in any sort of new game to me.

The same could be said for 6xAA unless you run Crossfire. Do you run 6xAA with soft shadows on Fear on a single card? How about Tomb Raider with next gen content?

The point is that you can find examples of either AA level being playable or being unplayable. It's true that 6xAA is faster than 8xAA and 16xAA but your problem is that you reject my examples where it's playable and only insist your examples of 6xAA being playable are valid.

Use it in Farcry at 1920x1200?

7900GTX SLI could probably manage it.

3. I didnt shift anything. I said 8xAA for NV was useless for me, because its far too slow to use. 6xAA for ATi is playable for me.

Then why did you link 14xAA screenshots for IQ comparisons?

6xAA is MUCH MUCH faster than NV's 8xAA.

No sh!t Sherlock, but this was never under dispute. What was stated is that ATi has no equal to 8xAA or 16xAA in single card configurations.

No they are not the same quality, but that doesnt matter since one is playable to me, and the other isnt.

It is playable, just not in your specific examples that you listed. But then 6xAA isn't playable in Fear with soft shadows either on single cards.

4. Thats what a quick google search of the monitor in your sig says its limited to. 19", 1600x1200.

Except it isn't so you can continue to use Google while I continue to game at 1920x1440 on said monitor. But if you think you're going to post clueless misinformation then be prepared to get shot down.

5. Im done responding to this. Take an hour and make another quote tree if you'd like, I wont be reading it. You like to argue, and drag others into a long drawn out quote fight. I wont be a part anymore, or in the future.

Wow, way to take the high road. Next time don't post lies, misinformation and strawman arguments and there might not be an argument to begin with.

 

[Shamrock]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
ATi has better IQ overall to me. Many reviews have stated as such, I dont know why its so hard to believe.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

There is virtually no discernable difference between the majority of the screenshots they posted!

Likewise the same applies to AF shimmering yet you don't seem have any trouble believing nVidia shimmers more than ATi with AF.

I think you're well aware of the fact that moving aliasing can't be captured with still images which is why AF and AA screenshots are totally useless for motion.

And again you appear to be forgetting that ATi cannot do SSAA under OpenGL unless you run a Crossfire setup.

Even 6xAA adaptive is generally no match for nVidia's 16xAA in terms of image quality because unlike 16xAA, 6xAA adaptive only applies SSAA to alpha textures but doesn't AA any other textures.

False, do I need to quote HardOCP about it? Under certain circumstances, NV shimmers much worse than ATi. That is a fact. Obviously you have not played with each card at 1920x1200 on a 24" WS LCD, or you wouldnt believe they are both the same.

NV's 8x is virtually useless. Yes it looks very nice, but getting playable frames in any sort of new game is not going to happen. Unless you like a slide show. Its nice for very old games, and thats about it. There is zero chance of me getting playable frames in virtually any game at 1920x1200.

Does every game mean the only game you mean is Oblivion?

I have rFactor. released Q3 of 2005 (it's a racing game)
A64 3200+ eVGA 7900GT OC (500/1500) nV Forceware 84.43
my results are: 1920 x 1440 Level 4 AA (that's 8x, 16x AF)

max FPS: 141
min FPS: 113.
w/ full field, 96fps min fps
96fps is a slideshow, woohoo! If I overclock it (stock cooling, no volt mod!) I can get 157 max and 138min!

Originally posted by: Ackmed
And? That has nothing to do with it. I said, a 24" WS LCD too, not just the res. Shimmering is much more noticable on a big LCD. Again, look at HardOCP's evaluation where they talk about this for confirmation. I thought your monitors max res was 1600x1200... ? But that doesnt matter, as I said, the shimmering difference is much worse on a large LCD, than on a CRT.

why is that? sounds more like a monitor issue, if it's more noticable on an LCD than a CRT.