: : : : ATI Radeon VE Review

ATI Radeon VE Review - PAGE 1

- Tuesday, August 28th, 2001 Like Share

Article Index

1.Introduction, Specs & General
2.Impressions, Benchmarks & Final Thoughts
Get updates when we publish new articles

Sort by date: ascending descending
0 thumbs!
Maximouse Aug 29, 01
How come the GF2 Ultra is SLOWER than a MX/MX400??
0 thumbs!
mathomas Aug 29, 01
What are system specs?
What drivers were used?

My Rage Fury in a Cel 450 got a higher 3DMark2001 score (540) and in a P3-733 gets 960!

Very hard time believing these results...
0 thumbs!
rgsaunders Aug 29, 01
A very superficial review. The very thing that most dual monitor users desire in a card is not reviewed, video quality. The vast majority of NVidia based cards follow the reference design with a resulting poor quality 2D display. Futhermore, a test of the dual op capabilities of an NVidia based card will reveal that they are the worst dual display card on the market in terms of capability. The best of the current crop of consumer dual display cards is the Matrox G400/450 series, the only one which permits independant refresh rates/display resolutions under W2K. The Radeon VE is quite capable under W9X but does not match the Matrox either for display quality or versatility. The Matrox card falls short on 3D speed but that is only of real importance to a gamer, not to people who use their computers for other things.
0 thumbs!
Lasher Aug 30, 01
I agree with RGSAUNDERS. I've been working on a project for my company in evaluating new display technologies (Flat Panels, DVI, multi-display). From a business perspective, 3D performance is a non-issue. If your employees are busy fragging, then you have bigger issues than not getting the best frame rates in Q3. I am actually currently evaluating the ATI VE, as well as the Matrox G550, an Nvidia MX card from IBM, and some higher end cards like Matrox's G200 MMS and the Appian AGX for dual and quad displays. The most important factor here is driver stability and features, 2D quality, and DVI support. ATI's Hydravision was actually purchased from Appian, who has been using it for their video cards for years now. From my experience, it is a bit klunky, but not nearly as bad as this review seems to indicate. Overall, this is a pretty shallow review... I wouldn't make a purchasing decision based on it.

0 thumbs!
theears Sep 3, 01
I agree the Matrox G400 and G450 while not gamers cards have better,much better 2D quality then the Nvidia cards.

I purchased a G400MAX when it came out and the quality in the desktop shocked me.And since I got two 21" SONY monitors the gap in visual quality has grown.

For office the G450 is a winner.ATI with the Radeon series gives very good 2D quality.The drivers are shaky.

TheEAR(s) Now theears
Sort by date: ascending descending
Add your comment:
Name *:  Members, please LOGIN
Email:  We use this to display your Gravatar.

Sign in with
Comment *: