Did you read the rest of the thread you quoted? This guy is clearly
in the minority. Plus, he's a total newbie at that forum (38 posts).
Also, as far as online forums go, I find the Ars Technica regulars
tend to be the most credible. Do a search of their forums for "2D
performance" sorted by date and you'll find tons of threads
addressing this issue.
For instance, here's a quote from the moderator of the Ars Technica
AV forum:
2D performance itself these days is a complete non issue.
http://tinyurl.com/jtfge
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://secretsociety.typepad.com
Brooklyn, NY
On 09 Aug 2006, at 6:48 AM, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- Darcy James Argue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tyler,
Check out this recent Ars thread on picking a video
card for a Vista
text box:
I can quote forum users as well!
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=200695
"I have read this sort of thread so many times over
the years, and its always the same the testers say 'it
matters not any card will do' and those of us who use
high screen resolutions, work with images or video
know that it does make a difference.
The lowest screen res I work with is 1600 x 1200 @ 85
Hz and often much higher and I get told because I
don't play games that I don't need a card with any
power, but how the screen is rendered and how fast is
important to me, in the main I use a canopus cards H/W
and Edius, but I don't stretch (or need) that at home
but it would be nice for testers to understand that
not every one spends all day bashing buttons on their
keyboards and that 2D performance can be important.
If there was no difference then I could use the
onboard that comes with my Nvidia chipset but the
render quality and speed is so much slower than even a
9250 radon that I use in my PVR. This is why mag test
are a help but in the end you have to do your own
testing to really find out the truth."
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
