3DS video card choices
44 messages in this thread
What are the "best high end" and "best buy" video cards to use with 3DS? I
am interesting in getting the best looking output as quickly as possible on
a 486/33 with 12 meg memory. Thanks for your help.
The highest end 24 bit card with decent speed is the Hercules Chrome.
1152x900x24 bit. No video out though. The best overall functionality-wise
is still the AT-Vista from truevision. Once you have it, you can do
anything from 24 bit preview to awesome video recording. You can get a
24-bit VGA for under $200 now. In fact, I just saw an ad for software in
Computer Graphics World that bundles a 24bit VGA and is only $299!
complete!
Roland:
The "best high end" hands down is the Truevision AT-Vista. Will do up to
1024x768x32 bit, covers 756×486 NTSC, as well as 512×486 NTSC, and a
handful of other resolutions, both interlaced and non-interlaced for TV.
It is a true broadcast-quality board, and exceptional for both output and
input (rotoscoping, etc.). Aside from (of course) VGA and the Vision 16, it
is the only board with built-in support in 3D Studio, and two different
modes, at that! (look at render/setup/configure)
"Best Buy" today – I'll vote for the Hercules Graphite. (See Ang's review
here in this forum.)
– all personal opinion, but that's what you wanted, right?! <g>
Greg Pyros
Greg-
I hate to keep throughing a clog in everybody's threads but, what is the
difference between the AT-Vista and the Targa+64.
Thanks Carl-
Carl:
Totally different boards! The AT-Vista is a higher-end product, although
the Targa+64 has its advantages, also.
The T+64 has double buffering for a 512x486x32 bit image (that's where it
gets its name, 512x486x64).
The Vista has a higher resolution, 1024x768x32, but no double buffer.
Vista is the only one with 756x486x32 NTSC resolution (in and out).
Vista is a higher quality board. (more expensive, too! – over double!)
Greg Pyros
>> what's the difference
Maybe more importantly is that the Targa+ series has on-board encoders and
decoders for S-video. In general it's a "single product" solution where you
will have to buy "down line" encoders/decoders and linear keyers with the
AT-Vista.
If you are going "industrial and professional" level video, the Targa+ (32
or 64) is the way to go. If "broadcast" is the direction, then the Vista
(but it will be a MUCH LARGER investment when the whole system is assembled)
Ang
Ang:
Absolute agreement on all points! (Easy since you were basically agreeing
with my posting… <g>)
Targa+ 32 or 64 –> Industrial or professional use
AT-Vista –> Broadcast use
I am reminded of the old adage – You get what you pay for!
Greg Pyros
>> basically what I posted
You know what they say about imitation … <g>
I thought the addition of the the status of the encoders/decoders and the
keyer was worth adding. If I remember your message, you didn't make that
distinction.
Ang
Greg,
I disagree with the AT-Vista for broadcast and the Targa+ being
pro/industrial and you getting what you pay for – sometimes you pay for
more than you need. The reason being is that many of us have agreed that
512x486x24bit with field rendering is the way to go and the targa+ has the
same quality RGB out as the AT-Vista when using a recordable laser-disk or
going to a high-quality transcoder for output to component vtr's. For this
reason it has lost much of it's appeal. It does have higher resolutions and
it's co-processor which is nice for paint packages, but even Ron Scott
isn't recommending it any more – he suggests putting your money into more
RAM for his application, HiresQFX 3.0 and buying a non-coprocessed dumb
frame-buffer. With direct to digital on Exabyte tapes to Abekas on the
horizon I think the Vista has had it's day.
Martin:
I disagree! (But what else is new!) Now remember, we're talking true
Broadcast Quality here…
______________________________________________________________________
TreuVision AT-Vista 4m
External alpha channel in and out for downstream keying.
4 megs VRAM, expandable with up to 10 more megs DRAM.
Resolutions from 512 x 400 to 1024 x 768, all at 32 bits.
Can address a 1024 x 1024 x 32 bit buffer with real-time pan & zoom.
Intelligent frame buffer using TI 34010 graphics processor.
______________________________________________________________________
TrueVision TARGA+
Internal alpha channel only.
2 megs VRAM max.
Resolution only up to 512 x 486 x 32 bits.
Can address a 512 x 1024 x 32 bit buffer.
Dumb frame buffer. (Must use host for all processing.)
Has encoder/decoder built in, but not considered broadcast quality.
______________________________________________________________________
No matter what anyone says, there is NOTHING like Hi-Res QFX or TIPS in
1024 x 756 x 32 bit mode for creating large texture maps or touching up
images for print! Especially with the real-time zoom and pan!
Also, for still frames for video (titles, credits, details, etc.) you
will get appreciably (33%) more detail in 756 x 486 mode than in 512 x 486.
We use this quite a bit for dissolves when 'real' animation is not desired.
This resolution can also be made use of in other programs, remember, that
do not have field rendering optimized for 512 x 486 like 3D Studio. An
example is creating quick animations in Animator Pro and outputting them
with FliTape. If you can't have the colors, at least get the resolution for
detail and anti-aliasing! AutoCAD drawing screens, for another one that is
sometimes needed to go out to video.
Also, the ability to do video captures at 756 x 486 again gives you that
extra 33% detail. This can be useful for rotoscoping, or when utilizing
[>> Continued in next msg]
[>> Continued from previous msg]
only a portion of what you capture, which will still be at a higher
resolution.
We have both boards in use in our office, and there is a place for both.
All I'm saying is that the Vista would be my recommendation for someone who
has a need for the advanced features and doesn't mind the higher price to
get them. If budget is of higher importance, get the Targa+! That is why
they make both! <g>
Greg Pyros (always looking for a good discussion!)
Gregor,
Always looking for a good discussion, eh? You'll be lucky around here <g>.
I still think the AT-Vista has more features than most animators will need
– I still haven't used all the features on the targa+ and probably never
will. You are also disagreeing with Ron Scott when you disagree with me
regarding HiresQFX and he's got a lot more clout in this industry than me.
The AT-Vista will not speed up the use of 3.0 according to Scottie and he's
always looking for more power <g> – sure I like using the 1024x768x32bit
resolution as long as someone else payed for it – my clients, I mean. <g>
The biggest nail in the coffin is surely the digital revolution, with the
Exabyte to Abekas solution not far off. Poor freelancers like me can avoid
almost all of the expensive video hardware and concentrate on less
expensive computer hardware for previewing our images and flics.
Martin (hoping for the last word) Foster
Martian:
I still agree on your basic premise:
>
> The AT-Vista has more features than most animators will need!
>
That is because most animators are not doing the high-end broadcast graphics
that the AT-Vista is made for!
And your paraphrasing of Ron Scott is slightly off – what he is saying os
that your FIRST choice is to get more RAM, and to spend your money there.
After that, though, if you still want to increase your productivity, higher
resolution is ALWAYS better! I would much rather edit a 8k x 8k Targa on a
1024 x 768 x 32 bit device than one that will only do 512 x 486!
Greg (never giving up the chance for the last word) Pyros
Help me understand this. If video operates at 512×486, how can 756×486 be
of any help? Brent
Brent:
NTSC video does NOT operate at 512 x 486! That is the basic confusion!
As opposed to computer graphics, which operates in the digital domain, a TV
signal is analog!
The simple explanation is this: You still get 486 (plus or minus) lines
down the screen, (interlaced, of course) but your horizontal is where th
differences lie. Imagine your TV taking _whatever_ is fed into it
horizontally and stretching it to fit the screen! I know – it makes no
sense in the digital world we computer-types live in, but this was around
much longer than computers were!
Therefore, by putting 756 dots across the screen digitally, you are giving
the signal more information when it goes analog. Assuming you correct for
the proper aspect ratio, this will result in a much greater (33%) amount of
information on the TV set, which translates into a higher quality image!
3D Studio will happily output to this higher format, but it turns out that
the FIELD rendering mode is just as clear in 512 x 482 mode as 756 x 486 due
to some internal filtering in the program (accidental, I am told <g>) that
kicks in better at the lower resolution.
And remember, when something is moving, you can't tell! That is why I
commented in my previous posting that we do all animations in 512 x 486 but
all NTSC stills at 756 x 486.
Greg Pyros
whewwwww…… and i almost thought my two vista's where history. i knew i
liked them now i love them.
try 756x486x32 in fields mode….. not bad.<g>
sherwood
New WD board blows away Graphite for $100 less…
Doug,
>> New WD board blows graphite away
Please elaborate…
Ang
Alright, alright. Maybe not blows away, but is faster, according to their
tests. Price is supposedly lower too, but until it comes out, I cannot be
sure. But I was told that it was faster than ATI or Herc.
>> as was told … I heard… the literature says …
Doug,
Ahha.. so you haven't actually seen this card yet? Vaporware is hard to
compete against <g>. I'm real interested in hearing any new information
regarding the card (as I'm sure everyone else is). Please keep us informed.
Ang
Well, it isn't vaporware, but it isn't due out for a few weeks. They have
announced it though or I wouldn't be talking about it…
>> out in a few weeks
Doug,
Are you on a list for a beta?
Ang
Yes. I will be getting a board…
Doug:
PLEASE! According to who's tests (I'll cite ANY benchmark you want)… On
top of that, it isn't shipping, it doesn't have a price, and WD has NEVER
been known to write quality Windows drivers. Hercules, on the other hand,
has finally learned how to build quality Windows software (okay, it did
take us a while… <g>).
Do you work for W.D.? Otherwise, why jump in the thread with
unsubstantiated, obviously biased data?
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
Are you kidding, Hercules is one of my favorite companies!!! (See my
messages regarding Chrome) But I was told by my source that this card was
faster. Don't get offended, get interested! Is the new Herc faster than the
ATI? I am interested, not BIASED. I also trust my sources, one of which is
Andy Fischer at Hercules, so I never consider my reports unsubstantiated.
ALthough you are right, since I have not seen the board or run the tests
myself, I should be less enthustiastic (g)
Doug:
As far as Windows graphics cards are concerned, the new Hercules Graphite
is one of the best.
Evan
How bout some details about the Graphite? Brent
Brent:
The Graphite Card is a 1MB VRAM Windows Acclerator based on the IIT AGX014
chip. It has a retail price of $399, but goes for around $300 on the
street. It is very fast — about 40% faster than the ATI Graphics Ultra
Pro and 25% faster than S3 928-based boards. It also delivers 80Hz
vertical refresh at 1024×768 and 90Hz at 800×600 and 640×480. 8-, 16- and
24-bit color is supported by the Windows and Autodesk drivers. Graphite is
also fully compliant with VESA VBE and VXE standards.
We supply Windows 3.1, AutoCAD R.10, 11 & 12, AutoShade, and 3D Studio
drivers. (The Autodesk drivers are OEM versions of Vibrant Graphics
DL-Express).
If you have any other questions, please let me know. Thanks for your
interest.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
Jim, at what resolutions can the graphite operate in 24 bit in windows?
Brent
Jim:
Does the Graphite support 3D Studio high resolution flic playback
internally?
Greg Pyros
Jim,
The card sounds great, but is there any chance of a 2 meg version
in the near future. I really need 800x600x24 bit and 1024x768x16 bit (Oh
yeah, AND low cost – under $500) I'm about to buy an ATI ultra plus. Do
you have anything to say to change my mind? <g> (I hope you do, actually!)
Thanx,
David
Evan:
Thanks for the plug!
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
Doug:
Okay, I'll lighten up <G>! Actually, it's unlikely that your going to find
a faster card than Graphite, short of a Weitek P9000 local bus
implementation with 2MB VRAM. And even then they aren't exactly going to
"blow " the Graphite away. The only way you'll find a board in the same
price range with the performance of Graphite is if you find someone who's
building an IIT AGX014 or AGX015 card.
There isn't any way that I can see for someone to build a VRAM based that
retails for less than about 300 to 350 bucks unless they use really cheap
components. So to get under Graphite by $100, it must be DRAM-based and
there's no way a DRAM board is going to deliver the speed and refresh rates
of Graphite.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
C'mon Jim, that's what they all say… "…no one can build it cheaper…"
We will see when it comes out. As for your previous message, I urge you to
consider that ATI said the EXACT same thing when their card came out. Maybe
WD has a chip you don't know about yet? Then again, maybe not. All I am
saying is watch out for message that allude to 'this is the best and that's
all there is'. If that were EVER true, where would the computer industry be
today?? I am ordering a Graphite this week anyway since I can't wait for WD
and even if it is slightly cheaper, I can get that much advantage by having
it immediately. Is it shipping?
Doug:
Glad to see I was able to convert you to the Graphite cause <G>! I'm
pretty confident about VRAM-based cards getting in at $299.00 retail —
VRAM is running in the $60 to $70 per meg range right now. Figure a 2.5x
markup to the customer and you get to $150 just for the VRAM portion. What
about PCB, DAC, processor, clocks, resistors, caps, bracket, etc.? I guess
you could sell one for $299 and try to make it up in volume, but I've seen
a lot of companies disappear that way.
True, WD could have some unbelievably HOT accelerator that NO ONE has heard
of yet, but it isn't too likely…the Valley is a pretty small place, and
word tends to get around. I haven't even heard a rumor of anything _that_
good coming out of WD. Still, I won't deny the possibility.
Of course, everbody is claiming that their board is the fastest, the best,
the greatest, the whatever — I've just looked at the Mach32 and 928 deeply
enough to know that the AGX is a better, faster chip. The AGX, Mach32 and
928 chips are all second or third generation chips. WD hasn't built this
level of accelerator before, and it usually take at least one run at it
before you do it well.
Yes, Graphite is shipping — and has been since 9 December! You can find
it through a number of mail order houses and small retailers. In fact, a
couple of people on CIS have been advertising it through forum messages.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
What about yesterday's message from someone claiming all kinds of problems
with the Graphics in Windows. Is that resolved? BTW, I am not necessarily
converted. I get all the cards. It is part of my business. (g)
>> .. from Doug .. is the card faster than ATI
I understand that the graphite has a published Winmark of 33M, but in
my "day to day" operations with the card in Windows .. I don't see
any increase over the ATI Ultra+2/MB it replaced. I am (was for the
ATI) running the graphite in 1024-256color. If anything it seems a
"tad" slower in AMIPro especially during scrolling to the top and
bottom of the page. On the other hand … the damm thing works and
doesn't leave garbage all over my screen like the ATI did. The
driver is so simple … no parameters to realy play with. Any tests
been done with AMIPro?
Ang:
The Graphite card shows up about 40% faster than the ATI in benchmarks like
Winmarks, Wintach, WitStones, Speedmarks, etc. Depending on the actual
operations used, the ATI might actually be a little bit faster. Of course,
in those areas we will be working very, very hard to change that <G>!
I'm glad you noticed the driver stability…we've put a TON of work into
them and it's always nice to know the work is appreciated. We just
released a new driver set that fixes the few problems we've had reported.
It should be on our BBS Monday. Oh yeah, it also includes the CAD drivers!
As far as I know, we haven't actually done any testing in AMI Pro, but I'll
ask around to see if anyone has done it and just not told me.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
Is this new Graphite card you've mentioned a VESA local bus version? (I'm
using a new Gateway 4DX2-66V.)
If so, does it include a VESA feature connector to pass through to a
VGA-to-NTSC convertor like Magni's VGA Producer Pro?
Thanks for any info you can provide.
Gratefully,
Lee DeYoung
2718 Parkside Drive
Jenison, MI 49428
(616)669-1138
(616)459-3830 (fax)
Lee:
No, we've been talking about the ISA version of Graphite. A VL Bus version
is expected around the end of February or so (it's in the labs being tested
right now). Amazingly, the ISA-bus version of Graphite, running in the
same Gateway PC you have, will outperform the ATI VL Bus card that cames
with the PC!
Yes, Graphite does have a VGA feature connector. It supports all of the
VGA and SuperVGA modes, but it can't output the "accelerator" modes.
Basically, this means you can use the VGA Producer Pro in VGA/SVGA modes
only (which is what the VPP was designed for anyway).
Thanks for your interest. If you have any other questions, please let me
know.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
>> driver will be on BBS soon
Jim,
I don't want to speak for Jeff Pike and the other Sysops on the forum, but
I wouldn't think they would mind if you uploaded you driver updates to the
"hardware" lib of this forum so that at least we ADesk/Hercules users don't
have to make a "special trip". It's just "so damned convienent" to download
from CIS.
Ang
Angelo –
I'm sure the Jim won't mind placing them on the BBS, CI$ WANTS all the
LARGE files as possible<g>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$….
Jack Bayt – Vibrant
Ang:
We are working on getting our own forum on CIS, look for one in about 6
weeks (in one of the Graphics Vendor forums). In the meantime, I'll post a
message to the Sysop's and see how they feel about my placing drivers on
their forum. It would probably be best to post them under the ADI forum
though…
Thanks for the input.
Jim Carlton
Hercules Computer Technology
Jim,
If you wish to post the latest and greatest of your drivers for the Herc
cards here and in ACAD, go right ahead. I'm sure that the members of the
forums that are using your products will appreciate it and so would
Autodesk.
After all…..that's what this whole works is all about……<grin>.