The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Rob,
Don't sell the 9500GT so short, it's the better card by far over the 7600GT. There's light years of difference between a 7600GT and a good 9500GT with GDDR3 memory! LOL!! For one, it's more than twice as fast! I should know as I went from a very good XFX 7600GT w/256 MB GDDR2 to the 9500GT w/512MB GDDR3. You indicated you weren't considering games in your other post, so I thought the 9500GT for the price, a good fit! I knew Sam would of course, advocate an Ati card, but it's over $100 more. Unless you want the prestige of higher 3DMarks, or plan on taking up gaming, what's the point? If you have an 8800 already, then use it!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Agreed. Unless you plan on heavy gaming, even something like a 9500GT will serve you well. It's faster than a 7600GT by a long shot and will play lots of newer games at acceptable settings should you choose to do so.

Though that 8800GTS would be your best bet if you have it laying around. Would play lots of games at higher settings and is super overkill for anything but gaming.

 

Good point Russ, I often wondered why my movies look like crap on my monitor, and the link you gave the prices were right as I'm also not a gamer, and I'm talking about my HP not the one I built last year which does have a gig board as this one I know is not a gig board, it's a MSI board, AMD. When I get the rest of this PC info I will get back to you so you can recommend a good card.

 

I will get more info creak, and I understand what you mean mostly, my monitor is a 19 in. viewsonic va1912wb, I love it, my text and everything else is crystal clear, my my dvd movies is always grainy, hell for all I know maybe the monitor is not capable to get these great looking views on monitors like these guys talk about, but for the kind of prices Russ gave I would be willing to give it a shot if it helped, and even if it didn't it would be no great loss.

Either way as soon as I find out more about my HP Pavilion Media Center TV m7330n Desktop PC I'll post.

 

Your right creaky, it's what I have, and my monitor is a 1440x900, like I said everything is crytal clear even those little vidoe's I get from different sites, but stick in a movie and it's to grainy.

I've been happy with this PC over the years even though I will never buy another store bought PC, working inside this sucker is a little bit of a nightmare, because of that inside slot for external HDD hardly any room inside, just sticking in extra ram was a pain.

But still probably would not hurt to try a type of card maybe Russ or somebody else might suggest, here are the spec's for this PC, THANKS CREAK.

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...ang=en&query=Pavilion m7330n &product=1818272

 

I lol'ed. No, read the post again.

A 9500GT is a better card than the 7600GT, though quite frankly I'm still very disappointed with how expensive they are, considering how much better an HD4650 is (and cheaper).

 

Russ the reason i said that when i clicked the link you linked to it wasnt for a 9500gt card it was this and the link is still the same right now,

GIGABYTE GV-NX72G512E2 GeForce 7200GS 256MB 64-bit GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card - Retail

that is whats linked in your above post.

 

Yeah it's to a 7200GS, a deactivated one at that.

 

Originally posted by creaky:

Creaky,
The newer motherboards all seem to come with HD graphics of some kind these days, at least the ones with on board Video. While the older ones will play DVDs, The picture quality is no where near that of the HD Graphics. I have a 1080p of Batman Begins, Converted to DVD, and it will play on any computer (not in 1080p), but you need the HD Graphics to really appreciate the video quality. Even screen captures take on a completely different look, much more like Photos than the normal quality you get doing them. I modified this screen capture into a Windows Desktop for my boss, and made it to look less like a photograph and more like a fine Oil Painting. If you get closer to take a better look, the detail get's less, just like an oil painting. I could never have done this without the obvious quality graphics and 16 million colors the HD video actually provides. I think it's quite good!



The original was shot at around sunset, as you can see by the long shadows. If you also notice the shadows on each side of the long pond are not the same length. It's because the land and the sidewalks are banked away from the pond on each side. It's supposed to keep ground water out of the ponds, and help keep people not paying attention, from wandering into them! That's why the different length shadows, as the right side should be longer and the left side shorter because of the banking. Even the original I started with has exceptional picture quality for a screen capture. It has none of the typical washed out colors you're used to seeing when you try to capture a picture from a movie!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

I don't exactly see what you're trying to prove here, a 1080p movie converted to standard def looks bad? I'm hardly surprised...
I also don't see how capturing a screenshot from a movie gives washed-out colour...

 

Sam,
While I agree that a 1080p movie converted to DVD looks bad on many computers, with HD graphics, it looks very close to the original 1080p, and much better than a commercial DVD! I know, I've compared them!

I can fully understand why you don't understand the washed out colour. You've almost always had high quality video, and that's the difference. Other people like me who had basic video get crap for screen captures, that you really can't do anything with in PhotoShop. Throw a cheap GForce 5200 with 128MB memory in one of your machines, and you will see the difference immediately! LOL!!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Actually Russ, so have I, and there are several forums I am a member of where that would probably get you a warning presuming you were a troll. I'm quite frankly amazed that you can compare an SD encode to the full 1080p. On a 20" monitor I can see how you might think they're not so bad, but on anything bigger (which let's face it, is likely given that I would say the majority watch movies on big TVs not small PC monitors) the difference is night and day. On my own 20" monitor I can clearly tell the difference between SD and HD up to about 20-30 feet away.
When I compared my X1600 to the X1900 which was a 256MB vs 512MB difference I never really saw the difference, but that was a while ago. Suffice to say, despite the lack of an 'HD' tag which is actually meaningless, the X1900XT in my fileserver is more than up to the job of doing high-def right.

 

Sam,
I have no idea what you mean about getting a warning or being presumed a troll! Why would I get a warning, and what the hell is a troll?

As far as seeing the difference on a 20" monitor, Mine does not have a TN panel, and that makes all the difference in the world as to the quality it can deliver. There is no discernible difference between 720p and 1080p. You yourself told me that you had to have a 36" or larger screen to be able to see the difference. The DVDRB/CCE output I use to create the DVD is very close to the same quality as the 1080p and the 720p, and looks much better than a commercial DVD!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Internet troll:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

 

Well looky who made AD Addict

 

Well, suffice to say, I get a lot of HD video files, and round there you'd be amazed how quality-sceptical some people are. A lot of people scoff at the concept of even 720p stuff. A troll is someone who comes to forums to only be a nuisance and post garbage. Posting that there was almost no difference between SD and HD anywhere like that would make them think you were trolling.
I don't see how a TN panel makes a difference. My 20" is TN and I can still tell the difference clearly. I would have thought a higher quality panel type would make it easier to see differences, not more difficult. My 30" is S-IPS, and if I stand further away to compensate, it's still ridiculously obvious.
What I meant about 36" was that at normal viewing difference, there is very little discernible difference between 720p and 1080p. For 480p to not be noticeable, you'd have to be a long long way back to not spot the difference - as far back as you would sit from a 50" TV with maybe a 24" or 26".
Congrats on the aDA Omega

 

Hot damn Russ, I didn't know you were a Internet Troll, lol.