Matrox, 3DLabs But When???

[Arkanis]

I'm trying to decide if I should upgrade to a Gainward 4400 Geforce. Why that card in particular?? well, I don't want to upset current card owners, but on all other Geforce TI4 brands the DVI output reaches a maximum of 1280x1024. Now see, it just may be me...but if I am going to spend 250$ for a video card, I want it to be a bit future proof. LCD screens are the future, and even a 19inch costs less than a 1000$ dollars now...granted it's not 1600x1200 enabled, but give it a year and that kind of specification will drop below this price point, and have that forward-feed technology. What really pisses me off is that there are some older geforce 3 and 2 cards that can support 1600x1200, and it looked like the companies in their infinite wisdom thought there was going to be a regression of technology...I don't know why since for the last couple centuries that hasn't been the trend, but I am looking at that Gainward Golden Sample,

Then again, I'm also wondering if I should wait for the other cards coming out from Matrox, 3DLabs, Nvidia, and Ati...but the question is when. Does some kind soul know around which months they should come out? I have a Geforce GTS-V right now (it was a great value), but with the new games coming out, do you think I would be waiting a disproportionate amount of time to my enjoyment factor?

By the way...I have an old Savage 3 card. According to Nvidia or it's card manufacturers (whichever is to thank), I won't sell it for less than 150$. If the trends be right, I'm sure you're all drooling over it right now.

 

[chuck232]

Well I won't comment about the LCDs since I'm still gonna stick to CRTs for my next computer. LCD are very nice, but I just don't think they are worth the extra money...

About the video cards, They should all be out by this autumn. P10 and Parhelia used to sound really good, but now the new specs of NV30 and R300 seem to make them on par, maybe even better. There are some features the P10 and Parhelia have that the NV30/R300 don't, but also vice-versa... I'm just gonna wait until some concrete benchmarks are out and then I'll decide.

My firewall tastes like burning.

 

[flamethrower205]

IMO, they are well worth the money- the less eye fatigue they cause me alone justifies the price. I've used a flat CRT (15") for years, and after a few hours, I can definetly feel it on my eyes- there is pressure in them, they hurt, and a mild headache occurs (85Hz refresh rate- granted that's below the optimal value of 120Hz). When I switched to a 17" LCD, all these problems went away, even after sitting in front of it for a whole day. I returned it though b/c of a few issues w/ response time, and went back to the CRT. Right now as I type I feel my eyes beginning to hurt.

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened he's all over the place

 

[chuck232]

AAhhhh, yes. I know what you mean. After sitting in front of my comp for a couple hours, posting, my eyes also get kinda sore. I've never used a LCD before, so I really have nothing to compare with. I still think the the Sony Trinitrons are great monitors though.

My firewall tastes like burning.

 

[flamethrower205]

I remember a few years ago I sat in front of a CRT @ 60Hz refresh for about 16 hours straight. I got the worst migraine I have ever gotten. hehe. I think when FFD, OCB, and all the other good stuff comes out in the near future, you should rethink, plus one can get ridiculous dell discounts for LCD's.

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened he's all over the place

 

[Flyboy]

I have the same problems. And for the same reasons I've been considering purchasing an LCD. I just gasp at the price tag. But, the health of my eyeballs means a lot to me, so I may go ahead witht the purchase. The thing is...for gaming I still want to use my 19"CRT, so I need a video card that supports both (and is easily switched via software...).

My eyes hurt and I also get headaches- especially when I'm browsing the web or posting here. I bought a $130.00 filter (3M HF350XXL) and it helped tremendously.

 

[Flyboy]

They are nice monitors. I have a 19" Sony Trinitron, but it KILLS my eyes. My Hitachi monitor, though not near as impressive in picture quality, doesn't have this effect on my eyes.

I think an LCD is the ultimate way to take care of your eyes if you can afford it. A word of caution on buying filters though. They are very fragile. Mine tipped over and landed flat on my desk....produced a diagonal crack down the lens. DOOL! (there goes $130)

 

[flamethrower205]

I suggest u wait a few more months (till end of this year) and then get a top of the line LCD, and use it for work and gaming, as it'll be fine for both.

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened he's all over the place

 

[cakecake]

Sorry for my LCD bashing, I'll refrain next time

 

[flamethrower205]

How much research have u done on LCD's? I don't mean to offend or anything, but the things you say aren't exactly true. Firstly, an LCD cannot refresh. LCD works by manipulating liquid crystals that block light, and then pass through colors filters. These are each controlled be a separate transistor, and they do not refresh. A CRT must illuminate/ excite every phosphor, one by one, and this is why it refreshes. An LCD has response time which is how long the liquid crystals take to shift. It is typically given in time white to black, and back to white. Many now have 25ms response time, which, if it were strictly white to black, and back to white, would display 40FPS SHARPLY- that doesn't mean it can't do more, but higher than that and it becomes blurrier. Now, the issue is that when going to an intermediary, such as grey 50, a lesser voltage is applied, and it can take longer time to respond. This is where FFD comes in, as it applies max voltage, but stops it part way to attain the intermediary shade. I played games for hours on an LCD w/ 40ms response time w/o headache- back when u played, the screens probably had 80ms+ response time, and I would only wonder if you didn't get dizzy/ got a headache. Now though, that isn't an issue. In teh very near future, LCD's w/ even faster response times and the implementation of FFD (so w/ FFD, the given response time is worst case scenario) will come out, and tests show that actually the LCD then looks just as good!
As for LCD sizes.....have u looked around? You can buy LCD's that are 24" and support 1920 x 1440 resolution (ex: Samsung 240T). 19" is prefectly good for 1600x1200, since it's large enough (remember, when u buy say a 15" CRT, you are only getting about 13.4" viewable, whereas on LCD, it's all viewable). You don't need to be a graphics designer to use 1280x1024, maybe u like the extra desktop space.
The 19" he was referring to could be the VG191, which has a 25ms response time, and if you check teh flat panels section is a very popular 19 incher (for those who buy that size). The VX900 which is the nextgen after VG191 can be bought for $956 from Newegg.com for example.
I don't understand how DVI is a ripoff, considering a DVI only LCD would actually cost less b/c it doesn't need the analog converter! With DVI there's isn't a conversion, and this means the image stays the same as it came out of the vid card- as crisp and clear as possible; it isn't deteriorated due to conversion. It's not a matter of how good the cable is why DVI is used.


My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened he's all over the place

 

[Flyboy]

Sounds expensive! Yeah, now that I have a job I may just do that. Thanks for the advice!

What about you? Are you going to get an LCD?

 

[Flyboy]

Sounds expensive! Yeah, now that I have a job I may just do that. Thanks for the advice!

What about you? Are you going to get an LCD?

 

[Flyboy]

Sounds expensive! Yeah, now that I have a job I may just do that. Thanks for the advice!

What about you? Are you going to get an LCD?

 

[cakecake]

You're right, I actually haven't done much research. I guess the only advice I could give would be to do what I suggested in the previous post I just edited, and that is to wait. I think you misunderstood me when I asked "why use LCD's at all?" in the last sentence, I meant "why use them right now?" Why not wait for technology to improve so they can display 60 fps sharp and most importantly the prices will go down. I'll admit, I'm a price freak. But he never asked about price, so it doesn't really matter.

I must admit LCD's are nice. It would be neat to have one but they're still just too expensive for me.

 

[flamethrower205]

Oh yes, then I totally agree with you. One should definetly wait. I actually bought a TFT7020 a few months ago (Compaq claimed it had a 25ms response time) and when I got it, it was actually 40ms, and have returned it. I could have then bought a 170T that was one of the best and has 25ms response time, but decided to wait for FFD, etc.
Flyboy: FFD won't add to the price because it is only a modification of the controller chip for the LCD. I definetly will be getting an LCD in due time (19" hopefully).

My frog asked me for a straw...dunno what happened he's all over the place