Video card for photo work

CaffeineMeCaffeineMe Cedar Rapids, IA
edited August 2003 in Hardware
I'm upgrading my wife's PC, and want to provide her with a decent video card for photo editing. This PC will also act as her primary PC for internet, email, finance, etc. Very little, if any gaming will be done on it (small kids games not withstanding).

Will a GeForce2 do the trick, ($25), or should I look at a different solution?

Comments

  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited August 2003
    photo editing is more cpu and memory-intensive than graphics intensive. I'd recommend an ATi card simply because they have image quality far better than nVidia's.
  • CaffeineMeCaffeineMe Cedar Rapids, IA
    edited August 2003
    Which ATI? Would a 7000 suffice? We're not talking high end photo editing here...family snapshots for her scrapbooking mostly. As always, cheap is the preferred answer!

    System will be an Athlon XP 2200, 512 MB RAM, W2K/XP. And yes, it will fold (if the Zalman HSF is all it's cracked up to be, it'll fold 24x7).
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited August 2003
    A 7000 would be sufficient, but my personal recommendation would be an 8500, not because it's needed, but because if you can find one, it shouldn't be all that much more expensive and is significantly faster, should you ever need it. The 7000 is the original Radeon, so it's not jaw-droppingly fast by any stretch of the imagination, but it probably will do just fine
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    For strictly home photo editing, any cheap gf2-level or higher card will be fine. as long as it has at least 32mb of ram and is AGP, you're all set.
  • EnverexEnverex Worcester, UK Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    Geeky1 said
    photo editing is more cpu and memory-intensive than graphics intensive. I'd recommend an ATi card simply because they have image quality far better than nVidia's.

    That only applies to old cards (GF2's and earlier) as now they are all pretty much the same.

    So basically, get a R7000 or newer.

    NS
  • a2jfreaka2jfreak Houston, TX Member
    edited August 2003
    AnandTech and [H]ardOCP did some image quality comparisons.

    Seems to me like the results were that the GeForce4 was still inferior to the quality of the Radeon cards, but that the GeForce FX is slightly superior.
    NightShade737 said
    Geeky1 said
    photo editing is more cpu and memory-intensive than graphics intensive. I'd recommend an ATi card simply because they have image quality far better than nVidia's.

    That only applies to old cards (GF2's and earlier) as now they are all pretty much the same.

    So basically, get a R7000 or newer.

    NS
  • edcentricedcentric near Milwaukee, Wisconsin Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    No games? Why not a Matrox card.
    There are still some 550's around, and now 650's.
    The price is right and 2d image is great.
  • Mt_GoatMt_Goat Head Cheezy Knob Pflugerville (north of Austin) Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    Heck I just sent a couple of machines out the door to folks who had those same things in mind and I installed ECS cards/ SIS 315-32mb that only cost $24. They look just as good as anything else for that level of useage.
Sign In or Register to comment.