"Next Gen" / DirectX 10 Graphics Cards?

[bilmo]

this is more what i was thinking about.x1300

oh btw i'm 22 and ye i know it takes time to learn anything but as per this digital recording lark, never say never. you never know you might build up a solid fanbase online. somebody in my country, sandi thom or something like that has just got a record deal. she got a fanbase by doing live broadcasts fro her house using the web.

<<this is more what i was thinking about.x1300>> not bad!! how bout this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102303


(btw, I guess that old pny really is a museum piece. so goes modern technology ay?)

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Not to interrupt the lovefest :roll: ...

PS something to read for the DX10 - O - philes;

http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/features/atid3d10/

Similar info, slightly better presentation;

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA0NSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

.

 

[bilmo]

Not to interrupt the lovefest :roll: ...


PS something to read for the DX10 - O - philes;

http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/features/atid3d10/

Similar info, slightly better presentation;

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA0NSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

.

<<Not to interrupt the lovefest>> well, just for grins I thought it would be fun to stop bashing one another for a spell. so far, so good.

sorry if I was insulting. I always stick up for the underdog, in this case, the poor shlep who started this thread.

stranger says you endorse the matrox graphics cards for non gaming usage. I can't find one for sale for less than 200 clams. maybe that's a good price. but the card I looked at for $200.00 had more bells and whistles than I'll ever use. it had all good reviews as well.

anyway, thanks for the links there

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

sorry if I was insulting. I always stick up for the underdog, in this case, the poor shlep who started this thread.[/quoe]

And I'm just grinding the n00bs to ensure this forum isn't flooded, it's all good things work themselves out orgaically.

stranger says you endorse the matrox graphics cards for non gaming usage.

For sure, 2D they are awesome, however.....

I can't find one for sale for less than 200 clams. maybe that's a good price. but the card I looked at for $200.00 had more bells and whistles than I'll ever use. it had all good reviews as well.

And that's the rub, they are expensive for people who may not need thebest 2D, or notice the difference much. I missed the Parhelia entry level card boat because when I bought for my editing rig I bought an R9000 (close to as good for my needs at a fraction of the cost) instead of the full $500 CDN Parhelia. Now with the P650 and P750 there are nice options, but they still aren't cheap. If you're absolutely 100% serious about your 2D quality, especially on CRT, I would recommend the P650 (in either AGP, PCI or PCIe form), but for most people the X1300 would be the best bet since it has nice DualLink-DVI (to drive the large LCDs), which is something only available on Matrox's more expensive cards.

Matrox also does multi monitor better than anyone else out there IMO, but even that advantage can be equalled or even trumped by 3rd party dedicated software like UltraMon which works on everyone's hardware. I'd say the best bet for Digital 2D right now is the X1300s (heck even 2 of them for 3-4 monitors using UltraMon), but for analogue 2D Matrox still has an edge, but CRTs are becoming scarce, and when they finally make white LED backlit LCDs cheaper and bigger, then you'll likely see an even further diminishing of CRTs even in the professional world, so I'd say Matrox needs to start thinking about a competitor for the X1300/X1600 on the digital 2D front if they want to keep their lead going into the future.

I love Matrox, but they are truely niche. 2D is their speciality, but even that area is slowly geeting eroded. I still love Matrox, but even as a fan boy, I would only buy a P650 if I was still planning on having an editing rig and a separate gaming rig, which I've stoppped doing now.

anyway, thanks for the links there

Well thought I'd inject some DX10 info back into the discussion.

 

[bilmo]

sorry if I was insulting. I always stick up for the underdog, in this case, the poor shlep who started this thread.[/quoe]

And I'm just grinding the n00bs to ensure this forum isn't flooded, it's all good things work themselves out orgaically.

stranger says you endorse the matrox graphics cards for non gaming usage.

For sure, 2D they are awesome, however.....

I can't find one for sale for less than 200 clams. maybe that's a good price. but the card I looked at for $200.00 had more bells and whistles than I'll ever use. it had all good reviews as well.

And that's the rub, they are expensive for people who may not need thebest 2D, or notice the difference much. I missed the Parhelia entry level card boat because when I bought for my editing rig I bought an R9000 (close to as good for my needs at a fraction of the cost) instead of the full $500 CDN Parhelia. Now with the P650 and P750 there are nice options, but they still aren't cheap. If you're absolutely 100% serious about your 2D quality, especially on CRT, I would recommend the P650 (in either AGP, PCI or PCIe form), but for most people the X1300 would be the best bet since it has nice DualLink-DVI (to drive the large LCDs), which is something only available on Matrox's more expensive cards.

Matrox also does multi monitor better than anyone else out there IMO, but even that advantage can be equalled or even trumped by 3rd party dedicated software like UltraMon which works on everyone's hardware. I'd say the best bet for Digital 2D right now is the X1300s (heck even 2 of them for 3-4 monitors using UltraMon), but for analogue 2D Matrox still has an edge, but CRTs are becoming scarce, and when they finally make white LED backlit LCDs cheaper and bigger, then you'll likely see an even further diminishing of CRTs even in the professional world, so I'd say Matrox needs to start thinking about a competitor for the X1300/X1600 on the digital 2D front if they want to keep their lead going into the future.

I love Matrox, but they are truely niche. 2D is their speciality, but even that area is slowly geeting eroded. I still love Matrox, but even as a fan boy, I would only buy a P650 if I was still planning on having an editing rig and a separate gaming rig, which I've stoppped doing now.

anyway, thanks for the links there

Well thought I'd inject some DX10 info back into the discussion.

<<<<If you're absolutely 100% serious about your 2D quality, especially on CRT>>> I am, and yes that's what I have at the moment.

<<I would recommend the P650 in either AGP, PCI or PCIe form>>>

((I would recommend the P650 in either AGP, PCI or PCIe form))

I will check that out

<<but for most people the X1300 would be the best bet since it has nice DualLink-DVI to drive the large LCDs which is something only available on Matrox's more expensive cards>>

I can't say for certain when or if (mostly when) I will buy and LCD monitor.
But planning in advance seems like a good idea.

also, I have never needed TWO monitors at once. BUT, seeing as how I myself am pretty much a n00b in the digital audio recording arena, 2 monitors or more may just be cool, or even necessary.

so.................. here, let's do a quick check of my eyesight. I wear coke bottle bottom reading glasses and get large print mystery novels from the library.

I have in my possesion an agp card by PNY..it's from 2002, pretty old.
But it really seemed to look good, or made the monitor look good....to ME anyway.

if you don't mind, what does that tell you about my graphics needs? I may be able to use the cheapest halfassed card out there and not know the damn difference.

this old salvaged card is a pny verto nvidia. I don't have the box, and there's no model number on the unit or the manual.

thanks for any feedback

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

<<<<If you're absolutely 100% serious about your 2D quality, especially on CRT>>> I am, and yes that's what I have at the moment.

While that's the case, your use for audio editing isn't as necessary fro colour fidelity as it would be if you were a photoshop or premiere pro-sumer. For 2D wavetable analysis, etc, I'd say that the X1300 is more than needed, even plain integrated would likely do you fine as you can expand and contract questinable sections and the colour fidelity and homogeneity isn't as much a factor.

I can't say for certain when or if (mostly when) I will buy and LCD monitor.
But planning in advance seems like a good idea.

Well if you plan on more than 1920x1200@ 52hz, then get the cheapesrt X1300 you can find, it'll do you for 1 big LCD and one VGA for quite some time for anything 2D.

I have in my possesion an agp card by PNY..it's from 2002, pretty old.
But it really seemed to look good, or made the monitor look good....to ME anyway.

And while the RAMDAC may be lower speed, and thus IQ, and the filtering on the PCB itself may not be as good, for the apps you use and likely due to your eyesight there is not going to be much difference, heck likely an integrated solution would be more than fine.

For me, my eyesight is extremely accute as is it's sensitivity and avility to notice subtle changes (I can't watch most rear pojected DLPs due to 2 types of rainbow effect, only front projected diffuesd DLP because I'm so sensitive to motion). Anywhoo for some people it matters for others it doesn't, just like some people are fine with 128Kbps MP3s and others need SACD or DVD-A quality to be truely satisfied. Are they overly sensitive, perhaps, but if you can tell the difference (which I can too, but still enjoy MP3s) it's just what you feel comfortable with (it's like the gaming on an LCD issue).

if you don't mind, what does that tell you about my graphics needs? I may be able to use the cheapest halfassed card out there and not know the damn difference.

Perhaps, and everyone's different, perhaps you don't notice the imperfect lines, but you do notice the colour variations so sometimes it's not that easy to determine. Also some people don't know what they're missing until they see something else, and then they go OMFG I never new it could look/sound/fell like that!

It's like people who move from analogue cable with some noise, to clear digital (cable/sat/adsl), and then from plain digital to HDTV. Most people think they're ok (baring huge issues) until they see what they could be experiencing. Without LPs would there have been much call for DVD-A or SACDs instead of just plain 16bit 44Khz CDs?

this old salvaged card is a pny verto nvidia. I don't have the box, and there's no model number on the unit or the manual.

And the main thing is if it works for you then keep it, especially for something that doesn't require visual fidelity as much as representational fidelity (you wanna se big differences in audio usually [to get the noise] and not single pixel or slight jitter issues).

thanks for any feedback

SeriouslyI'd only recommend Matrox 2D for people in photo or video editing, while it'll be great for audio editing too, I don't think it'd add anything to it for the additional dollars, and if you do go digital/dvi then the X1300 makes the most sense IMO.

 

[bluntside]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[bilmo]

<<<<If you're absolutely 100% serious about your 2D quality, especially on CRT>>> I am, and yes that's what I have at the moment.

While that's the case, your use for audio editing isn't as necessary fro colour fidelity as it would be if you were a photoshop or premiere pro-sumer. For 2D wavetable analysis, etc, I'd say that the X1300 is more than needed, even plain integrated would likely do you fine as you can expand and contract questinable sections and the colour fidelity and homogeneity isn't as much a factor.

I can't say for certain when or if (mostly when) I will buy and LCD monitor.
But planning in advance seems like a good idea.

Well if you plan on more than 1920x1200@ 52hz, then get the cheapesrt X1300 you can find, it'll do you for 1 big LCD and one VGA for quite some time for anything 2D.

I have in my possesion an agp card by PNY..it's from 2002, pretty old.
But it really seemed to look good, or made the monitor look good....to ME anyway.

And while the RAMDAC may be lower speed, and thus IQ, and the filtering on the PCB itself may not be as good, for the apps you use and likely due to your eyesight there is not going to be much difference, heck likely an integrated solution would be more than fine.

For me, my eyesight is extremely accute as is it's sensitivity and avility to notice subtle changes (I can't watch most rear pojected DLPs due to 2 types of rainbow effect, only front projected diffuesd DLP because I'm so sensitive to motion). Anywhoo for some people it matters for others it doesn't, just like some people are fine with 128Kbps MP3s and others need SACD or DVD-A quality to be truely satisfied. Are they overly sensitive, perhaps, but if you can tell the difference (which I can too, but still enjoy MP3s) it's just what you feel comfortable with (it's like the gaming on an LCD issue).

if you don't mind, what does that tell you about my graphics needs? I may be able to use the cheapest halfassed card out there and not know the damn difference.

Perhaps, and everyone's different, perhaps you don't notice the imperfect lines, but you do notice the colour variations so sometimes it's not that easy to determine. Also some people don't know what they're missing until they see something else, and then they go OMFG I never new it could look/sound/fell like that!

It's like people who move from analogue cable with some noise, to clear digital (cable/sat/adsl), and then from plain digital to HDTV. Most people think they're ok (baring huge issues) until they see what they could be experiencing. Without LPs would there have been much call for DVD-A or SACDs instead of just plain 16bit 44Khz CDs?

this old salvaged card is a pny verto nvidia. I don't have the box, and there's no model number on the unit or the manual.

And the main thing is if it works for you then keep it, especially for something that doesn't require visual fidelity as much as representational fidelity (you wanna se big differences in audio usually [to get the noise] and not single pixel or slight jitter issues).

thanks for any feedback

SeriouslyI'd only recommend Matrox 2D for people in photo or video editing, while it'll be great for audio editing too, I don't think it'd add anything to it for the additional dollars, and if you do go digital/dvi then the X1300 makes the most sense IMO.

thanks for all that. much appreciated. like you and I both have said and agree upon, halfway decent within reason is good for digital audio. I've putzed with some of the software, older stuff. cool edit pro for example, and the boat anchor xp1800 I was using with pc133 ram and this pny graphics card looked fine and worked fine, UP to a point.

the monitor and the graphics were peachy. I could only record 5 or 6 tracks of one song without tilting the cpu, and HD. just practicing really.

I don't think any of the newer software uses 3D. I can't imagine why it would need to. basically, I'm looking at a virtual tape deck, or mixing console and with the benefit of now being able to see the track as a wave. I have much to learn.

and not much choice. to go back in time and live in the analog world would not make me unhappy. it is simply cost prohibitive beyond f***ing belief.

you can buy 16 track decks that use tape as wide as a tire, IF you happen to have 50 G's laying around.

anyway, thanks. it was very helpful. before I go running out and buy 'anything' I need to consult my buddy who is in the recording business and who is bugging me to get into it. some of the stuff may use 3D now. even so, I have sufficient info to go either way

a quote from thou <<<For me, my eyesight is extremely accute as is it's sensitivity and avility to notice subtle changes >>>

yes. I can relate to that completely! I have a very good memory :lol: