[KLUG Hardware] Holiday Video Card Guide ...

[Bryan J. Smith]

--=-c/b1udjRvK3kfC/NjcGd
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

For those that need gaming or professional graphics performance, I'm
sure you're hinting to your loved ones that you want a new video card
this season.  I'm not going to go into mega-details here, but I want to
"break down" some of your options out there.

I'm going to stick with video cards that at $50-250, which limits
choices to the ATI and nVidia series.  You can find cheaper solutions
based on S3/SiS cards, as well a more costly, professional-oriented (but
not as high performing for games nor OpenGL) from Matrox.

- Technology Time/Priceline

To start, let's look at the "technology" available chronologically:

$25-$100 nVidia NV10-based:  GeForce2 (all), GeForce4 MX
$25-$125 ATI R200-based:     ATI Radeon 7500, 8500, 9000
$75-$250 nVidia NV20-based:  GeForce3 (all), GeForce4 Ti
$150+    ATI R300-based:     ATI Radeon 9500, 9700
     [ nVidia NV30-based due February 2002 ]

The newer the technology, the faster and more features (e.g., better
image quality with reduced performance hit) the cards will be.

I only mention the NV30 because some may wish to "wait" for it, or the
prices to drop on NV20/R300 products after release.

- Hype to _avoid_:  AGPx8 and non-nVidia/ATI 128MB boards ...

AGPx8 offers virtually _nothing_ over AGPx4 except for compatibility
headaches in some cases.  Performance-wise, the AGPx8 bus is still 5-10x
slower than local memory, so more on-card memory is better than faster
AGP by an order of magnitude.  Nearly all mainboards sold today only
have AGPx4, since AGPx8 chipsets just came out.  In typical Intel
"disclosure," reverse engineering the AGPx8 spec has been a troublesome
one for AMD, ViA and others other than SiS (who is an official Intel
licensee).  So you'll be running your AGPx8 boards at AGPx4 anyway on
those boards (not that Intel chipsets with AGPx8 would be any faster).

Memory is another marketing gimick.  In many cases I would choose a $25
32MB GeForce2 GTS, and even a 64MB GeForce2 MX400, board over an 128MB
non-nVidia/ATI board!  Secondly, even on nVidia/ATI, 128MB is useless if
it is not used.  For pre-NV20/R200 boards, FSAA isn't going to be as
fast than newer boards, and they are not going to be able to obtain the
higher resolutions, so it _will_ probably go unused.  64MB should be
sufficient when you're going with a previous-gen, "low-end" card.  And
besides, the 128MB models should come down in price by the time you need
that much (in about 6 months).

- OS considerations:  nVidia for Linux

nVidia is going to give you the best OpenGL performance in Linux.  ATI
is supposedly going to release newer, faster drivers for Linux but, for
now, their Utah-GLX support efforts have been lackluster.  So in the
comparisons below, if we are talking Linux, _cut_ the ATI performance in
_half_.

- Low-end products (sub-$100)

There is really _no_reason_ to buy an NV10-15 GeForce2 anymore.  Between
the same design, but enhanced NV17/18 GeForce4 MX products, to the
low-end NV21 GeForce3 Ti, the GeForce2 is not a cost effective solution
anymore unless you find one really cheap.

nVidia GeForce4 MX440

First off, _avoid_ the GeForce4 MX420 which is really just an MX400 in
disguise.  Most vendors are _falsely_marketing_ these cards as beigh
with 128-bit DDR RAM when they are _only_ 128-bit SDR!  The memory is a
major bottleneck.  You need to go with an MX440 or 460 to get 128-bit
DDR, which makes a huge difference in performance (40%+).  The MX440 is
a solid choice if you just want performance and don't care about
anti-aliasing or advanced DirectX 8 / OpenGL feature support (which
means it can be much slower than the NV20/R200/R300-series on games that
require them).  128MB might not make much of a difference over 64MB on
these boards, as FSAA performance is not as good on the NV10 series.  If
you can get a MX440 for less than $50 after rebate, that may be the best
deal for months to come.  The MX460 is only about 10% faster than a
MX440, and should only be purchased if you can find it for only $10 more
than the MX440.

nVidia GeForce3 series

If you run a lot of DirectX/OpenGL and/or use FSAA for image quality,
the GeForce3 series has dropped under $100 now.  The GeForce3 Ti200 is a
sub-$70 card, and supports most of the technologies in new applications
-- _unlike_ the GeForce4 MX.  On older DirectX 7 applications or without
various image quality, the Ti200 can be a little slower than the
MX440/460 series because of the clock speeds, although it is usually
just as fast or slightly faster.  But there can be a huge difference on
newer titles, especially if image quality techniques are used.  Since
the 128MB versions or the Ti500 start at $100, you should be looking
more at the GeForce4 Ti4200 or even the ATI Radeon 8500/9000.

ATI Radeon 7500, 8500, 9000

In the same regard, the ATI R200 series offers something for everyone.=20
=46rom the original R200 to the 7500 and 8500 to the R250 9000, a DirectX
8 / OpenGL designed core can be had for under $50 (although beware of
_SDR_ 7500 products), or upto $100 with 128MB RAM.  Interesting enough,
the 8500LE can usually best a 9000 Pro in many benchmarks, almost always
edging out the GeForce4 MX460, the GeForce3 Ti200 and even the GeForce4
Ti4200, while it can had for under $70.  Image quality is where ATI has
"caught up" and even "surpased" nVidia in with newer drivers too.

- Mid-range ($100-175)

nVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 64/128MB

Unlike the MX420 v. MX440, which is a huge gap, the Ti4200 v. Ti4400 is
much smaller thanx to both using DDR SDRAM.  For Linux, this is a solid
choice.  Even the entry GeForce4 Ti4200 64MB always bests a GeForce3
Ti500, and can be had for just over $100 mail-order or after rebate at
stores.  For those that use FSAA by default, or games/applications that
allow you to set a very large polygon count for visuals/distance/quality
(e.g., Operation Flashpoint, UT2003, etc...), 128MB memory is more
desireable (despite the fact that the 128MB reference version's memory
is clocked 28MHz DDR, 56MHz effective, slower than the 64MB reference --
you can always "sync" it back usually without worry of overheating ;-).=20
128MB will usually run you close to $150.

ATI Radeon 9500/Pro

For those looking to "future proof" their purchase, ATI already offers
its R300 series today that leapfrogs nVidia's high-end NV20 series in
features (until the NV30 comes out in Feburary, possibly products not
available until March, of next year).  A more cost effective version of
the $300+ 9700 series, the 9500 64MB and 128MB series are offered
starting around $165+.  When image quality is a concern, the 9500 can
often best a costly GeForce4 Ti4600, especially with 128MB RAM.  On the
other flip, older titles will often see the 9500 lose to even the 64MB
Ti4200.

- Higher-end ($175-250)

nVidia GeForce4 Ti4400

The Ti4400, only offered in a 128MB version, was actually the "sweet
spot" in the GeForce4 Ti for the longest time.  While the Ti4600 was
$350+, the Ti4400 was hovering around $200, making the Ti4200 not very
appetizing when it first came out for not much cheaper.  Many ~$200
GeForce4 Ti4400 128MB cards also offered VIVO (video-in, video-out) as
standard, and I purchased such a board for ~$230 way back in May (for my
wife, who was still running with a 3dfx Voodoo 3500TV).  Since then the
Ti4200 has dropped in price, as has the Ti4600, making the Ti4400 more
"even" in the price/performance arena.  If you're an overclocker, the
Ti4400 has a much better PCB and thermal tolerance than the Ti4200, so
you should look there.  If you want the best nVidia has to offer, the
Ti4600, like the MX440 v. MX460, will give you about another 10% in
performance, but this often doesn't justify the extra $50+ for it.

- Comments on the "even higher" end ...

As far as the ATI Radeon 9700/Pro is concerned, with the nVidia NV30
less than 3 months away from product avaiability, spending $300+ is not
advised.  Unless, of course, you upgrade your video cards every 6-9
months and have the dough to spend.  Then only the "latest'n greatest"
will do.  The only "exception" to this might be the "All-in-Wonder 9700"
which features partial on-chip codec (_not_ decoding, _encoding_) for
video capture.  You might want to pay for that.

But then one might want to spend a few hundred more and go with a Matrox
professional-quality DV/MPEG-2 editing solution.  Or just use a Digital
camcorder that will also encode NTSC/S-Video in.  A lot more
powerful/flexible in each case.

- My viewpoint ...

Me?  Well, on my personal system, I upgrade when there is a special at
my local CompUSA right after Thanksgiving.  Last year I got a GeForce3
Ti200 64MB for $149 door ($99 after mail-in rebate) and this year I got
a GeForce4 Ti4200 128MB for $144 door ($89 after mail-in rebate).=20
Waiting in line for 2 hours before they opened might not be worth it to
some, but it was for me.=20

I don't like to spend more than $100 on a video card, because video card
performance doubles every 9 months accord to "nVidia's Law."  This is
twice as fast as CPUs which, according to "Moore's Law," double only
every 18 months -- and are even starting to "slow" to every 24 months
according to Intel's own "Moore" himself.

On my wife's system, I go "near latest'n greatest" video-in solution so
she can watch TV.  But I only upgrade her's every 18-24 months, instead
of 9-12 like mine.  I did this shortly after the 3dfx Voodoo 3500TV came
out (although it dropped from $249 to $179 within 3 months -- ouch!),
and then this past May with the MSI Ti4400 VIVO (which still hasn't
dropped more than $30 in price 6 months later -- a good move).

--=20
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. (BSECE)       Contact Info:  http://thebs.org
[ http://thebs.org/files/resume/BryanJonSmith_certifications.pdf ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
  The more government chooses for you, the less freedom you have.


--=-c/b1udjRvK3kfC/NjcGd
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQA984B8DjEszaVrzmQRAoyAAKCf5V0VrnsQ/Qg4OVtfjtEmTHBE8QCgw32Z
pEf2rWoUUIRILFpnmShCSsQ=
=1QBY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-c/b1udjRvK3kfC/NjcGd--