Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

2D vs 3D Performance in Today's Video Cards?

Posted by Cliff on from the two-steps-forward... dept.

CliffH asks: "Has anyone else noticed a serious decline in 2D quality versus 3D quality in video cards? I routinely work on older systems right beside newer systems on the same monitor (Dell P1110) and it becomes blaringly obvious to me that 2D quality is starting to take a backseat to 3D quality. For example, my main system is a dual-boot Shuttle XPC SS51G with an added GeForce2MX 400 card in for the times I do want to play some games. A little, nasty, ready to be thrown away system I have on my bench at the moment is a K62-500 with my favorite card of all time, a Matrox Millenium II 4MB job in it. The 2D quality between the two is just shocking. Where the Matrox is nice, crisp, extremely easy to read at 1280x1024, the GeForce2 is kind of blurry, not as well defined, and the colors aren't as vibrant. I would be skeptical if this were the only newer card I have seen with the results, but it has gone through the GeForce line (last one I tested was an MSI branded 5900 Ultra) and a small handful of ATI Radeons with similar results. So, the question stands. Am I going nuts or has there been a definate tradeoff between 2D and 3D quality in recent years?"

3 of 71 comments (clear)

  1. Matrox is an outlier by the+quick+brown+fox · · Score: 5, Interesting
    No, Matrox was just always way out in front in terms of 2D image quality. That was their chief advantage for a while, after everyone else surpassed them in performance.

    I have the impression that within the last 12 or 18 months, 2D image quality has become a priority (maybe a prerequisite) among enthusiasts again. In any case, I recently got an nVidia FX 5200 card (I think the vendor is eVGA) and the quality is superb on my 19" Sony Trinitron--better than the Matrox G400 I used to use.

  2. DVI by zsazsa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're not crazy. If you buy a Matrox Parhelia, it'll look a lot better on a CRT than a GeForce. GeForce boards' analog sections are made to lower quality specifications than Matroxes, hence the cheaper price. If you want crisp 2D on a CRT, you're going to have to pay, just like how you paid for your old Matrox -- I'm sure it wasn't cheap when it was new.

    If you want crispness with GeForces (or Radeons), go DVI with an LCD monitor. Since it's all digital, there'll be no degradation.

  3. OP: Your answer. by Glonoinha · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually you are running into a (not so quite) well known issue with the GeForce cards that has been addressed here :

    How to fix a fuzzy GeForce card

    Get out your soldering iron and you can get a crystal clear display on your GF2 while voiding the warranty and pissing off the FCC at the same time.

    --
    Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer