Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi All,
 
I'm thinking of upgrading my video card (an ancient GeForce 1 DDR)
to a Radeon 9700 Pro.  If anyone out there is running one of these
cards with a CRT, at resolutions of 1280x1024 or 1600x1200, how
do you like the 2D image quality?  Any problems?
 
Thanks!
James

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Looks good here.
But none can match even Matrox G400 2D quality
 
=bob=
 
"James T." <me@privacy.net> wrote in message  
news:3abfeqF67ik3iU1@individual.net...
> Hi All,
>
> I'm thinking of upgrading my video card (an ancient GeForce 1 DDR)
> to a Radeon 9700 Pro.  If anyone out there is running one of these
> cards with a CRT, at resolutions of 1280x1024 or 1600x1200, how
> do you like the 2D image quality?  Any problems?
>
> Thanks!
> James
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:59:17 +1100, "[BnH]" <b18[at]ii[dot]net> wrote:
 
>Looks good here.
>But none can match even Matrox G400 2D quality
>
>=bob=
 
I changed fron the G400 to an ATI Radeon when I got a monitor with
digital input. The ATI using DVI connection is better than the G400
using analog.
>
>"James T." <me@privacy.net> wrote in message  
>news:3abfeqF67ik3iU1@individual.net...
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I'm thinking of upgrading my video card (an ancient GeForce 1 DDR)
>> to a Radeon 9700 Pro.  If anyone out there is running one of these
>> cards with a CRT, at resolutions of 1280x1024 or 1600x1200, how
>> do you like the 2D image quality?  Any problems?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> James
>>
>>  
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

errm if you are comparing with DVI out .. that's another ball game.
 

 
=bob=
 
"Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message  
news:6q61415rt47ejejmg0irug568kalvvoour@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:59:17 +1100, "[BnH]" <b18[at]ii[dot]net> wrote:
>
>>Looks good here.
>>But none can match even Matrox G400 2D quality
>>
>>=bob=
>
> I changed fron the G400 to an ATI Radeon when I got a monitor with
> digital input. The ATI using DVI connection is better than the G400
> using analog.
>>
>>"James T." <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>news:3abfeqF67ik3iU1@individual.net...
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of upgrading my video card (an ancient GeForce 1 DDR)
>>> to a Radeon 9700 Pro.  If anyone out there is running one of these
>>> cards with a CRT, at resolutions of 1280x1024 or 1600x1200, how
>>> do you like the 2D image quality?  Any problems?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Yes, I'm asking specifically about the CRT/analog output of the
9700 Pro.  Not interested in digital monitors at this point.
 
Thanks.
 
"[BnH]" <b18[at]ii[dot]net> wrote in message news:4240a473$0$10165$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> errm if you are comparing with DVI out .. that's another ball game.
>
>
>
> =bob=
>
> "Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:6q61415rt47ejejmg0irug568kalvvoour@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:59:17 +1100, "[BnH]" <b18[at]ii[dot]net> wrote:
> >
> >>Looks good here.
> >>But none can match even Matrox G400 2D quality
> >>
> >>=bob=
> >
> > I changed fron the G400 to an ATI Radeon when I got a monitor with
> > digital input. The ATI using DVI connection is better than the G400
> > using analog.
> >>
> >>"James T." <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> >>news:3abfeqF67ik3iU1@individual.net...
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> I'm thinking of upgrading my video card (an ancient GeForce 1 DDR)
> >>> to a Radeon 9700 Pro.  If anyone out there is running one of these
> >>> cards with a CRT, at resolutions of 1280x1024 or 1600x1200, how
> >>> do you like the 2D image quality?  Any problems?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> James
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>