Video card with best 2D

[PCHPlayer]

I currently have a Voodoo 3 2000 PCI. I am looking to replace it with a AGP card since I recently upgraded to a motherboard with an AGP slot. I play the occasional game (Half-life, Star Trek Elite force...), but I also do software development so 2D quality at high resolutions (1600x1200) is also very important. My old Matrox Millenium II was very good, the current voodoo is also acceptable. Is ATI the way to go? Do the GeForce cards have good 2D? Does the latest Matrox have acceptable game performance given my current rig?

Thanks in advance.

 

[bjc112]

the New leadtek Ti 500... has best 2d out right now... My gainward Geforce 3 has great 2d up to 1280... looks good overlclocks well, Ati's 7500 and 8500 also are having good 2d as of right now.. its pretty much up for grabs

 

[Rand]

Matrox is easily the king of high res 2D, and if you don't need any more 3D power then what your current card can offer you then they are clearly the best choice.
The 3dfx V3/4/5 and any ATi Radeon card is also extremely good, but by no means comparable to Matrox in higher res. I'd give 3dfx the slight edge between the two but their pretty close.

nVidia is pretty much reknowned for their poor 2D visual quality, but there are a few manufacturers of nVidia boards that manage pretty decent 2D.
Gainward and Elsa I would put pretty much on par with ATi. LeadTek and VisionTek are also reasonably good, and slightly below ATi in quality.


Overall, if your content with V3/TNT2 level gaming performance then Matrox is the clear choice, IMHO they make anyone else look pale in terms of high res 2D.
If you need better 3D then that, then ATi Radeon 7500/8500 is probably your best choice.
I would pretty much stay away from nVidia if you need extremely good 2D at 1600x1200 unless you go with Elsa or Gainward in which case it should be acceptable.

 

[cockeyed]

I had a Voodoo3, Voodoo4 and Radeon LE, all of which had very good 2D quality. I now have a Visiontek GeForce3 Ti200 and I would rate the 2D of it, a little better than any of the others. I run at 1152x864, but have also tested 1600x1200 and the 2D was still very sharp.

 

[DARRIN]

My Asus 8200 Deluxe Geforce3 has great 2D.

 

[tlemmon]

I have been running this gauntlet for a while now. The Matrox cards are great for 2d, but have no 3d features. Next best would be the Radeon 8500. I loved the 2d of this card, but its lackluster driver support drove me to take it back (way too many compatibility probs). I tried 4 different GF3 cards: Hercules, Visiontek, Asus, Asus ti500. None of these had decent 2d performance. The Asus was the worst of them all (on both cards)!!

I have a Leadtek TDH on order. From what I hear Leadtek started making their GF3's with better filtering components, starting with their TDH model (TDH, then ti500 TD). I should have it in a few days if you would like to PM me, I will get back to you on what I think of it.

Its not the quality of the nVidia chip, just the quality that the board manufacturer puts into it.



-t

 

[Clevor]

Hate to burst your bubble guys, but I tried a Leadtek Ti 500 TD. The 2D is nowhere near as good as a Matrox G550, much less a G400 MAX. There is still slight text ghosting at all resolutions. The Ti 500 cards are probably a bit better than the Geforce2 cards, maybe even the Geforce3 cards (haven't seen one personally) but not better than even something like a Radeon.

I was told the Leadtek card reviewed by Firing Squad had special RF filters in it. Face it, if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

If you want great 2D and 3D, you might possibly find that in the next Matrox 3d card, which is due out next year.

 

[cockeyed]

I've been following the GeForce3 2D quality discussion for a while. I find it interesting that many people, icluding myself, claim that the 2D on the GeForce3 is excellent while other people say it is poor. I've seen the VT GeForce3 Ti200 on my monitor (NEC PP950) and a friends (KDS AV-195T); in both cases the 2D is excellent, even at 1600x1200. I don't see any of the problems that some others are seeing. I'am starting to think that the particular monitor being used or the vidocard/monitor combo might have something to do with the poor 2D some users are seeing. In my case, a Radeon LE had just ok 2D on my system but the GeForce 3 is excellent. Strange!

 

[tlemmon]

I just received my Leadtek TDH Geforce3. Everything looks great to me. At 1280x1024 @ 75hz it looks good. At that same res, using 85hz as a refresh, everything still looks good to me! If you were to get a GF3 I would recommend getting a Leadtek GF3 TDH. I dont know about the ti500, but Firingsquad rated it pretty good. Return to Castle Wolfenstein looks pretty darn good now compared to my voodoo3 that I was using. The color saturation in 2d was ok, then I turned the color vibrance setting to 1 and things looks much better. I think ditching the Radeon 8500 was a smart move for me.

-t

 

[tlemmon]

BTW... Newegg has them for $265.00 w/ free shipping!

www.newegg.com


-t

 

[HappyGamer2]

I have a voodoo5 and a radeon 32 mb ddr card, the 2d at high res is good on both cards and very close in quality. I notice the 2d quality improved with the radeons drivers compared to what it was a year ago when then I decided the v5 was better. now it's so close that I can't tell the difference.
which card is better for gaming? it close, it depends on the game and the game settings. I would call it a draw, with the v5 being better in some games(mainly older ones) and the radeon being better in some of the new ones. the radeons drivers are much improved but still not perfect. it's hard to believe those year old V5 drivers are still better in some ways. true the radeon has better features for new games, but it seems to lack load power. in some opengl games the V5 will out performe the radeon at 1280x1024x32.
do I recomend the V5? No ..................................