quadro2

[WaR-ped]

Has anyone tried out a quadro2 card? How is the visual quality? Obviously it will be less than perfect, but i heard that the quality is improved over the standard Geforce2 cards. any thoughts?

[Novdid]

Not worth the extra money.

[WaR-ped]

wow.. thats a lot of opinions there. if i were to go quadro2, id probably pick up a gf2 and mod it. but i just wanted to see anyone had tried a real quadro2 out.

[bacon]

Yeah i've used Q2s(Elsa Gloria III) in the past there ok. Visual quality is about the same as an GF2 although I hear Elsa has better filters on i'm not sure.
You can always mod them as well but the only reason i can think of to this is to use 3D Studio Max with the Max Extreme drivers. If your really curious though get an MX and mod that.

[rubank]

I´ve had 2 G200:s, 1 G400, 2 Asus7100 GF2MX:s, and currently run a Radeon 32DDR
so I think I can make a fair comparison.

There has been absolutely nothing wrong with the visual quality of the MX:s I´ve had, but they might require you to change the colour temperature on your monitor to give their best. Don´t people know that monitors can be adjusted? After reading a lot of comments on the MX:s visual output I wonder.

I also did the Quadro mod to both my MX:s, and that doesn´t change anything unless you, as bacon pointed out, run certain apps. With or without that mod the OpenGL performance, features and compatiblity is without competition. And the general compatibility regardless of API is the best I´ve encountered.

As for the Radeon I bought a week ago, I´m really not impressed. Visual output is topnotch, but there is no easy way to get the resolution you want, e.g. 1280x960, or the refresh rate you desire. This is childsplay both with Matrox and nVidia cards.
I´ve tried all registry mods I can think of without luck, the Radeon just won´t give me 1280x960. OK, I haven´t done any monitor.inf editing yet, that might do the trick, but you shouldn´t have to, should you? And the Radeon have problems running MB Truck Racing with 24Bit textures, it´s choking as if it has problems with the AGP texturing protocol. This was no item with the G400 or the MX:s.
The out-of-the-box HSF is just a joke, and very poorly fitted, so I had to put some real cooling on it.

So WaR-ped, I think you can safely try the GF2 out. Just set it up properly with the monitor, and if you don´t like it there shouldn´t be any problem getting rid of it on the second hand market.

rubank

P.S

At work we have a lot of HP Vectras, with G200SD, and they don´t look good at all on the 17" HP crt:s at 10x7. We also have some Vectras with Intel 815 (onchip graphics) and they look clearly better. Pls note, these are pure office machines, not for CAD or game development

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]

[William Gates III]

[Rags]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by rubank:
I´ve had 2 G200:s, 1 G400, 2 Asus7100 GF2MX:s, and currently run a Radeon 32DDR
so I think I can make a fair comparison.

There has been absolutely nothing wrong with the visual quality of the MX:s I´ve had, but they might require you to change the colour temperature on your monitor to give their best. Don´t people know that monitors can be adjusted? After reading a lot of comments on the MX:s visual output I wonder.

I also did the Quadro mod to both my MX:s, and that doesn´t change anything unless you, as bacon pointed out, run certain apps. With or without that mod the OpenGL performance, features and compatiblity is without competition. And the general compatibility regardless of API is the best I´ve encountered.

As for the Radeon I bought a week ago, I´m really not impressed. Visual output is topnotch, but there is no easy way to get the resolution you want, e.g. 1280x960, or the refresh rate you desire. This is childsplay both with Matrox and nVidia cards.
I´ve tried all registry mods I can think of without luck, the Radeon just won´t give me 1280x960. OK, I haven´t done any monitor.inf editing yet, that might do the trick, but you shouldn´t have to, should you? And the Radeon have problems running MB Truck Racing with 24Bit textures, it´s choking as if it has problems with the AGP texturing protocol. This was no item with the G400 or the MX:s.
The out-of-the-box HSF is just a joke, and very poorly fitted, so I had to put some real cooling on it.

So WaR-ped, I think you can safely try the GF2 out. Just set it up properly with the monitor, and if you don´t like it there shouldn´t be any problem getting rid of it on the second hand market.

rubank

P.S

At work we have a lot of HP Vectras, with G200SD, and they don´t look good at all on the 17" HP crt:s at 10x7. We also have some Vectras with Intel 815 (onchip graphics) and they look clearly better. Pls note, these are pure office machines, not for CAD or game development

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]</font>

I have used just about every brand of MX and several different brands of GeForce 2's, and am currently using an Asus V7700. All of them had bad output on my monitors (all 5 of them), no matter what the settings were at. I just think that some people honestly don't know the difference because their eyes are that numb to the differences. Some will not care, I do.

Rags

[az]

Interestingly, at www.tecchannel.de The V7700 Deluxe 64 MB had the best output quality, second was Radeon 64 MB DDR, with the G450 being third...

AZ

[Rags]

I don't know what's up with that, but since I cannot understand the language there, I can't really comment. I know that my G450 has better output than my V7700, and my G400 Max has the best output between them all.

The Radeon is pretty sharp, it's about par with the 450.

Rags

[az]

OK...

The G450 has a signal amplitude of 561 mV (where 700 would be perfect), the signal took 2.55 ns to raise and 3.14 ns to fall (shorter would be better here, of course). here is a graph of it's output signal. Looks like a sine, while optimal would be a rectangle-like shape.

The Radeon has a signal amplitude of 624 mV, signal raise time (don't know the proper english term for it, sorry) is 2.10 ns and falling time 4.27 ns.
It's graph shows a slightly asymmetric signal, yet it comes closer to a rectangle than the G450.

The V7700 has an amplitude of 611 mV, positioning it between both other cards, but it's signal raises in only 1.80 ns and falls in 1.96 ns, and the graph shows that it's signal is closest to a rectangle from all tested cards.

Well, I guess Tecchannel just got a bad sample of the G450, since every Matrox card that I've seen tested in c't has an amplitude of exactly 700 mV.

Any comments on this?

AZ

[Wombat]

Hey rubank,
What kind of MB do you use? What chipset does it run?

[rubank]

Wombat,

at present I have an ASUS CUSL2-C (Intel 815EP) running a PIII750@133 = 1000mhz, vcore 1.80, 3.3v@3.5

Until recently I had an ABIT BF-6 (Intel BX) running a PIII600E@140 = 840mhz, vcore 1.75, 3.3v@3.5

I always o/c, my G200:s ran at 125 mhz core, I don´t remember the mem speed, (150?).
My G400 ran at 200/200.
My MX:s ran at 225/225 (!)
My Radeon is running core at 214 and mem at 189 (I now they´re supposed to be equal but this works fine). All of them with remounted sink + fan, of course. That goes for the CPU:s too.

Rags,
you don´t have to waiste space by quoting me in bold to disagree. I knew you would.
We will never agree.

On a sidenote: with Matrox and nVidia it´s very easy to change drivers by simply in DOS replacing the driver files in the system dir. with another version (this of course won´t change the PD version, but that never posed any problems for me. I seldom used that "utility" anyway, waiste of mem).
With Ati it´s another story, it seems. These drivers are bloatware. An incredible amount of files and I haven´t got the hang of them, yet. A lot seems to be different language files. Not good.

rubank

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]

[WaR-ped]

well, the whole reason i would mod the g2 would be for "special apps" as has been said. I want something that doesn CAD pretty well, but can handle games and doesnt cost more than my computer. my max absoletey dies in Pro E.

[Rags]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by rubank:

...........
Rags,
you don´t have to waiste space by quoting me in bold to disagree. I knew you would.
We will never agree.....

rubank

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 09 May 2001).]</font>

Rubank, I don't care what you think about my posting. I will post whenever and however I choose. And I chose to hit the easy quote button above your post. I know we won't agree, you are an apologist for nVidia's OEM's, and I am not biased. I use all kinds of cards, I don't care which brand it is or who makes the chip, I just need it to have crisp text at high resolutions, stable drivers, and functional hot keys. To an nVidiot, I know it would sound foreign to not need the best FPS, or to be able to see a need for clear text at high resolutions, but believe me there are many others like me. Don't try to discount me and the many others who need a GOOD display and have found the nVidia solutions to be very much sub par, and don't be an ass by saying we don't know how to adjust our monitors (but that'd be too much to ask).

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">[i]Originally posted by rubank:
On a sidenote: with Matrox and nVidia it´s very easy to change drivers by simply in DOS replacing the driver files in the system dir. with another version (this of course won´t change the PD version, but that never posed any problems for me. I seldom used that "utility" anyway, waiste of mem).</font>

You may be able to change out the drivers that way, but by not having PD available many features that I find necessary are no longer available.

Rags

[rubank]

Rags.

You´re obsviously pissed, and call me names.
Are Radeon users nvidiots now?

Whatever have I done to invoke this reaction? I haven´t called you anything, haven´t used foul language and have certainly not discounted you or anyone else who wants/needs good visual quality. I do to.

I haven´t pointed you out, I didn´t say that you can´t adjust your monitor. It was a general assumtion, like the general assumtion that people more than often don´t read the manuals on whatever equipment they buy. That doesn´t mean that I accuse you of not reading yours.

I have just stated that we don´t, and will obviously not, agree. I beleive that your latest post is evidence to that effect.

And who are you to claim supreme justice on a subjective matter? The only trial for objective measurements that I´ve seen comes from "tecchannel.de" (and I´ve submitted my take on their method in another topic some time ago), and their findings don´t support your view.

He is an unpleasant character who has a problem with the fact that some people will desagree.

rubank

[This message has been edited by rubank (edited 10 May 2001).]