ATI and VIVO

[Quark]

Okay, I want a new video card, but currently I'm very divided on my opinion. I've already looked at the Ti 4600s with Video In / Video Out and like the price point, but don't like the fact that they're not DX9.

Seen the FX reviews (5800, 5200, and 5600). The 5800 is too expensive and too loud to justify compared to others. The 5200 is too slow compared to the Geforce4 series. The 5600 seems about right, performance could be better, but I get DX9 and good FSAA, etc.

ATI was a company I thought I'd never buy from again, but I just might. Performance wise they're currently better, and their new mainstream line will all have DX9. My question is this: is it possible for me to get an ATI card with Video In (so I can hook up a TV/Playstation/etc to it) without buying the All-In-Wonder? I simply don't need all the features the All-In-Wonder has and don't want to pay for all that.

[Roland]

And ATI is crap.

I don't know how to answer your question, but I can tell you to avoid ATI. I speak from my own personal experience, so take it with a grain of salt. DatAsian has a nice ATI card, with which he is very happy. Except for the rotten driver support, anyway, despite it having improved over the years.

I'd stick with an nVIDIA at all costs, if I were you. Tack on the fact that they were the ones who bought out 3dfx (the first ones to bring video input / output to the mainstream market, IIRC), and you really can't go wrong with what you're looking for.

From what I've gathered just looking over the ATI cards, it's All-In-Wonder(-why I'm buying this), or nothing. I suppose you already suspected that, and I could be wrong, but that's how it looks after viewing the different cards.

Good luck to you in your purchase.

[channel1]

Amazing how folks get so split on video cards.

I can't really speak on the different cards anymore. Back when I was cranking out 400+ 'puters a year, I would budget at least $20,000 per year on evaluation of hardware, and checked everything that went into the mainstream systems for compatibility with a range of OS / Application / Components.

Except for the early ATI cards (1987-1992), ATI rarely had cards that were at the top of the heap for performance, especially with games. But, ATI always had decent compatibility. The first-release Rage drivers would have consistent "bugs", that would show up in certain apps. (mouse-turds in some CAD apps was a biggie). It would be easy to work around by dropping the acceleration, and they always would have it fixed in the next generation of the drivers.

Build quality of the ATI cards was always as good as it could get, and I don't recall having any ATI card fail. I have heard some bad things about component and build quality on other cards lately, however. Fan failure seems to be a big thing lately.

About the only advice I have anymore is to NOT get the top of the line card from anyone. This has pretty much held true for more than a decade. For games, if you have more money than brains, I guess you could go ahead and blow $400+ on a video card. If the system is going to a time is money application, like an engineering or design workstation, the top end card will pay for itself, too.

BUT, if money is an object, and top end performance isn't going to be making you money, you can get away with the second or even third from the top end card. Save yourself 200-300 bucks, get mature drivers, and be able to scrap the card after the current top-end cards get cheap in a year or so.

Of course, if what you're looking for is a status symbol to impress your chums, go ahead and get whatever has the best benchmarks. Myself, I never run benchmarks anymore. I'm too busy actually USING my 'puter.

-rcv-

[Kevin]

As you mentioned, ATI currently owns the performance crowns in the consumer markets. You also can pretty much only get video in on the All-In-Wonder cards so if you want an ATI and you want VIVO you pretty much get an All-In-Wonder.

ATI driver support is much better than even just a year ago (and it has been decent since the Radeon line came out, not super great, but decent), and continues to improve as well.

Personally I don't think DX9 compliance is a big deal now, and probably won't be for at least another year. I also agree that staying a generation or so back on video cards is usually a better use of your money. Unless there is some specific game/app that you know will be out soon that DX9 will make that much of a performance difference with get a cheaper card now, put the rest of the money in the bank (or some other short term investment), and get your DX9 compliant part a year later with that money you put away. Use the earnings you got on it to pay shipping or go to dinner.

Bleeding edge with computers is mostly pointless, even for gamers. Look at what you play now, and what you are likely to play in a year (most of what you will get in a year is already benchmarkable now) then get the cheapest card that can handle it and save the rest of the money for next years card (which is probably going to be whatever the hottest card out is right now since you will be about 2 products or 1 generation back, note that NVidia and ATI both try real hard for 6 month product cycles and generally release 2 products per generation).

In your case if you VIVO and will be using it a lot, get the card with the best VIVO features first (probably an All-In-Wonder, ATI has pretty much always been better at the TV stuff than NVidia) then look at the games you actually play and get the best performance you can afford there. If you don't play the newest FPS you can easily get by with a much lower end card right now.

[NiteFox]

Of course, if what you're looking for is a status symbol to impress your chums, go ahead and get whatever has the best benchmarks.  Myself, I never run benchmarks anymore.  I'm too busy actually USING my 'puter.

*Applauds* Been saying that for years. No one else has listened though.

Well said.

[Whiggles]

Roland, out of interest, which was the last ATI card you used? As far as I'm concerned there is nothing wrong with their two most recent generations. I bought a Radeon 8500 in late 2001 and was pleasantly surprised after hearing all sorts of horror stories about their drivers. I think I can remember one game that gave me problems (Grand Theft Auto 3, I think), and was directed quickly to ATI's support site, where they had compiled a patch. In late 2002, I upgraded to the Radeon 9700 Pro and was again very impressed.

From a gaming standpoint, ATI's anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering is significantly better than Nvidia's, and also performs significantly better.