Article over at Techreport, People surprised that 2d still an issue.

[Claymonkey]

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/7230

THey have an article up over at Tech Report about 2D image quality. Seems they are suprised that the Geforce6's that aren't reference can still have quality issues.

Still it looks like TR will be adding image quality in 2D back to their reviews.

[borat]

funny you should say that as i was under the impression that 2D quality was uniform these days, just bought a sapphire radeon 7000 to add to my system to allow me 3 screens at 1600x1200 and as soon as i plugged one screen into the analogue port on the sapphire at 1600x1200 85 Hz the image was very blurry compared to the parhelia image next to it, got round it by plugging my DVI LCD into the Radeon and the 2 CRT's into the parhelia, and having the 3rd analogue out from my parhelia into my LCD for sourround gaming.

Was very surprised at the deviation in image quality indeed.

[Claymonkey]

Yeah, but not only that but I still haven't found a video card that can do tv-out like my G400. I ended up buying an external convertor for that purpose.

On that note though, I plugged an old Matrox Mystique PCI into my Dell here at work to have a third display. I had to bring it in because all the pci cards I could scrounge up here couldn't handly 1280x1024. However, the GF4 TI4200 I have on the primary and secondary has better output with less fuzz on both the DVI and VGA on an LCD than the old Matrox... just goes to show how they have all improved.

Still... if Matrox made a new card that wasn't overpriced.. I'd buy it for my HTPC.

[The PIT]

As DVI come the norm this will get less and less of an issue.

Going back to the analogue. Output from my 9800 Sapphire pro was a lot better than my old 9700 Pro made by Gigabyte.

Matrox probably still have the best 2D out there which shows how far ahead they were a few years ago. Others are slowly catching up.

I wouldn't surprised in a few years time that the analogue quality will start to fall. As manufacters won't see it worth while spending money on high quality parts for an unused port.

[Claymonkey]

Agreed... but until you can get a flat panel for $100 most people won't get them. The vast majority HATES spending money on their computers. Always amazes me considering I remember my first computer costing my family $3K. Nevermind the fact that besides the TV what do people use the most in a household? The computer.

[agallag]

Yeah, but I already spend gobs of money on my computer. I just can't justify the money for an LCD, when a similar spec CRT costs about 1/3 as much (or less).

[The PIT]

Problem with CRT's it's very hard to get a good one. They vary so much between ones of the same batch. You go by reviews order one and then discover it's suffering from convergence in one corner.

[Greebe]

Originally posted by agallag
Yeah, but I already spend gobs of money on my computer. I just can't justify the money for an LCD, when a similar spec CRT costs about 1/3 as much (or less).

I'll second that

Originally posted by The PIT
Problem with CRT's it's very hard to get a good one. They vary so much between ones of the same batch. You go by reviews order one and then discover it's suffering from convergence in one corner.

Less than higher end very like you say, but above that they normally don't, even if it's been refurbished.

[schmosef]

Originally posted by Greebe
Less than higher end very like you say, but above that they normally don't, even if it's been refurbished.

Nep.

I've seen surprisingly huge inconsistencies in IQ from top end Sony and Samsung monitors many times. Viewsonic is the only brand that I can say has been reasonably consistent in IQ, but I've had to send quite a few for warrantee repair. I've sold one Cornerstone, to myself, and it's flawless.

[The PIT]

Sadly Cornerstone is a no go in this country. Too expensive unless things have changed.

[UtwigMU]

Well, there's also variance (dead pixels, back light problems) among LCD's to an extent.

[Greebe]

Originally posted by schmosef
Nep.

I've seen surprisingly huge inconsistencies in IQ from top end Sony and Samsung monitors many times. Viewsonic is the only brand that I can say has been reasonably consistent in IQ, but I've had to send quite a few for warrantee repair. I've sold one Cornerstone, to myself, and it's flawless.

I have two Cornerstone monitors, immacculate imaging. Sadly both died due to a design flaw/crappy flyback that Panasonic no longer makes.

If you search for GoSharks here you'll find a good friend of mine Jim Witkowski is (was?) the Chief Hardware engineer for Cornerstone. He sent me a replacement for free out of his lab

Ant was suppose to get some for review seeing that we are more geared toward high end imaging, but for some reason corporate bailed on that idea when all the dot com's went bust.

VERY pricey in England

[The PIT]

Originally posted by UtwigMU
Well, there's also variance (dead pixels, back light problems) among LCD's to an extent.

Not such a problem these days although companies should realise that one is unaccepable.

It's vary rare indead if I see any dead pixels on any modern equipment though.