nVidia vs. ATI

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 07:43:49PM -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
> The one place where Matrox historically has been hopeless is support for
> high-speed dynamic 3D graphics.  That is, games.  It's never been a
> priority of theirs and they're no longer competitive at all there.
> 
> But for clear, *sharp*, high-resolution text or not-too-dynamic graphics,
> their cards blow the doors off everything else.  I can't say I'm up on
> the latest hardware, but last time I looked, nVidia and ATI ran a very
> poor second there.

I would think anything using DVI-D would have the same graphics on any
video card given it is digital to the screen.  Any image quality
problems would then be a result of the video card.

For the analog output, yes Matrox has a reputation for very good stable
output.  Of course for me, that isn't enough to give up everything else
I might want to use a video card for given I think the 2D output of the
nvidia cards is perfectly fine even at 1940x1440 at 75Hz.  Never had a
problem with the ATIs I have bought, although I have seen bad output on
some lower end models years ago.  It's a shame about the software
though... :)

Lennart Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml