Rob Studdert mused: > > On 1 Feb 2005 at 18:16, John Francis wrote: > > > For $80 you can get a graphics card that supports multiple monitors at > > insane resolutions, has 128MB of on-board graphcs memory, and even TV. > > These types of specs still don't assure the card output will be excellent for > imaging. At high resolutions and refresh speeds DAC speed/linearity, analogue > tuning and board lay-outs do affect absolute resolution and perceived quality > screen (DVI interfaces excluded)
It's not just a matter of specs. As I said, these are commodity items nowadays. Most of the graphics cards use one of two chipsets; either nVidia or ATI. The DACs on those 'cheap' $80 cards are generally the same as those used on the $200 or $300 cards; perfectly capable of driving 1600 x 1200 or 1920 x whatever at 85Hz or faster, and quite often with a DVI output available for at least one of the monitors. By all means shop around amongst those cards to find the best one for colour fidelity, etc. Just don't assume that a $600 card will be any better than an $80 (or even $40) card; the PC graphics market is based on speed, speed, and speed, and that's what the extra cost buys you.
