Video Card for Video editing, replacement question

Discussion in 'ATI Video Cards' started by Ziggs, Jul 23, 2007.

  1. Ziggs

    Ziggs Guest

    Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    to time).

    Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.

    So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    an additional wait time for editing videos.

    TIA
     
    Ziggs, Jul 23, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ziggs wrote:
    > Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    > have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    > two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    > to time).
    >
    > Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    > because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >
    > So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    > DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    > what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    > a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    > an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >
    > TIA


    Are you sure that the video card is failing and not overheating? Also
    have you checked to be sure that the power supply is not failing?
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jul 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ziggs

    Ziggs Guest

    I guess it could be overheating, but how would I resolve that? The
    fan is spinning and the heat within the computer is within an
    acceptable range.

    I'm sure it's the video card since I placed it into my wife's computer
    as a test. After about an hour, it developed the same fuzzy lines for
    the other computer. Also, I'm using her video card in my computer and
    I don't have any problems with it.



    On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:30:08 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"
    <> wrote:

    >Ziggs wrote:
    >> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    >> have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    >> two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    >> to time).
    >>
    >> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    >> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >>
    >> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    >> DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    >> what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    >> a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    >> an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >>
    >> TIA

    >
    >Are you sure that the video card is failing and not overheating? Also
    >have you checked to be sure that the power supply is not failing?
     
    Ziggs, Jul 23, 2007
    #3
  4. <Ziggs> wrote in message news:...
    >
    >
    > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:30:08 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Ziggs wrote:
    > >> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    > >> have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    > >> two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    > >> to time).
    > >>
    > >> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    > >> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    > >>
    > >> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    > >> DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    > >> what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    > >> a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    > >> an additional wait time for editing videos.
    > >>
    > >> TIA

    > >
    > >Are you sure that the video card is failing and not overheating? Also
    > >have you checked to be sure that the power supply is not failing?

    >
    > I guess it could be overheating, but how would I resolve that? The
    > fan is spinning and the heat within the computer is within an
    > acceptable range.
    >
    > I'm sure it's the video card since I placed it into my wife's computer
    > as a test. After about an hour, it developed the same fuzzy lines for
    > the other computer. Also, I'm using her video card in my computer and
    > I don't have any problems with it.
    >


    Sounds like the heatsink is no longer making good contact with the chip.
    Cleaning and applying new thermal compound may help.

    Capture info:
    http://www.digitalfaq.com/dvdguides/capture/intro.htm
     
    Captain Midnight, Jul 24, 2007
    #4
  5. Ziggs

    Mike Ray Guest

    Ziggs wrote:
    > Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    > have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    > two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    > to time).
    >
    > Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    > because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >
    > So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    > DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    > what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    > a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    > an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >
    > TIA

    I use Pinnacle (both v9.4 and v10.7)and have an ATI X700pro pci-e card.
    This seems to work fine and I think the x700 should be in the $50 - $75
    USD range.
    see http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131307R

    My system is a Pavilion 1130n:
    AMD Athlon 64 3500+
    one Gig ram
    X700 pro pci-e
     
    Mike Ray, Jul 24, 2007
    #5
  6. Ziggs

    Mike Ray Guest

    Mike Ray wrote:
    > Ziggs wrote:
    >
    >> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    >> have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    >> two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    >> to time).
    >>
    >> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    >> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >>
    >> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    >> DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    >> what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    >> a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    >> an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >>
    >> TIA

    >
    > I use Pinnacle (both v9.4 and v10.7)and have an ATI X700pro pci-e card.
    > This seems to work fine and I think the x700 should be in the $50 - $75
    > USD range.
    > see http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131307R
    >
    > My system is a Pavilion 1130n:
    > AMD Athlon 64 3500+
    > one Gig ram
    > X700 pro pci-e



    Here is a benchmark for both the X700 and 9800. It seems they are pretty
    close.
    -mike
     
    Mike Ray, Jul 24, 2007
    #6
  7. Ziggs

    Mike Ray Guest

    Mike Ray wrote:
    > Mike Ray wrote:
    >
    >> Ziggs wrote:
    >>
    >>> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    >>> have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    >>> two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    >>> to time).
    >>>
    >>> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    >>> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >>>
    >>> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    >>> DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    >>> what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    >>> a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    >>> an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >>>
    >>> TIA

    >>
    >>
    >> I use Pinnacle (both v9.4 and v10.7)and have an ATI X700pro pci-e
    >> card. This seems to work fine and I think the x700 should be in the
    >> $50 - $75 USD range.
    >> see http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131307R
    >>
    >> My system is a Pavilion 1130n:
    >> AMD Athlon 64 3500+
    >> one Gig ram
    >> X700 pro pci-e

    >
    >
    >
    > Here is a benchmark for both the X700 and 9800. It seems they are pretty
    > close.
    > -mike


    Oh yea the link:
    http://reviews.pimprig.com/video_cards/sapphire_hybrid_x700_pro_videocard.php?page=3
     
    Mike Ray, Jul 24, 2007
    #7
  8. Ziggs

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Mike Ray" <> wrote in message
    news:f850qk$n6u$...
    > Mike Ray wrote:
    >> Mike Ray wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ziggs wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago. I
    >>>> have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried it in
    >>>> two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model from time
    >>>> to time).
    >>>>
    >>>> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    >>>> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >>>>
    >>>> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips for
    >>>> DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need? If so,
    >>>> what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste money on
    >>>> a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't want to add
    >>>> an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >>>>
    >>>> TIA
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I use Pinnacle (both v9.4 and v10.7)and have an ATI X700pro pci-e card.
    >>> This seems to work fine and I think the x700 should be in the $50 - $75
    >>> USD range.
    >>> see http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131307R
    >>>
    >>> My system is a Pavilion 1130n:
    >>> AMD Athlon 64 3500+
    >>> one Gig ram
    >>> X700 pro pci-e

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Here is a benchmark for both the X700 and 9800. It seems they are pretty
    >> close.
    >> -mike

    >
    > Oh yea the link:
    > http://reviews.pimprig.com/video_cards/sapphire_hybrid_x700_pro_videocard.php?page=3


    Some of this depends on what kind of "Video Editing" you are talking
    about. Most editing will not need 3D accelerations. A good 400+
    ramdac would be the main feature I would use to pick a card for that
    purpose, ( I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical, but it
    can
    still be a real indication of how well the card was designed.)

    There are other features to consider if you want to work with HD or
    compress SD using highly complex AVC/H.264 or VC-1. For that
    kind of work, the new Avivo and PureVideo features can make a real
    difference.

    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151671,00.asp

    Presents the $100-150 ATI cards that include the newest features.
    While they support DX10 and newer shaders, I would not recommend
    them for gaming. Their video accelerations look impressive though.

    ( I find it odd that the HD 2900XT still has the older version of
    Avivo. )

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 24, 2007
    #8
  9. * Ken Maltby:

    > Some of this depends on what kind of "Video Editing" you are talking
    > about. Most editing will not need 3D accelerations. A good 400+
    > ramdac would be the main feature I would use to pick a card for that
    > purpose,


    That's only relevant if you want to use a CRT (or a very low-end TFT
    display without DVI).

    >( I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical,


    The RAMDAC simply isn't used for digital connection.

    > but it
    > can
    > still be a real indication of how well the card was designed.)


    Since the RAMDAC is integrated into the GPUs for almost a decade now
    this is just nonsense.

    Benjamin
     
    Benjamin Gawert, Jul 24, 2007
    #9
  10. Ziggs

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Benjamin Gawert" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >* Ken Maltby:
    >
    >> Some of this depends on what kind of "Video Editing" you are talking
    >> about. Most editing will not need 3D accelerations. A good 400+
    >> ramdac would be the main feature I would use to pick a card for that
    >> purpose,

    >
    > That's only relevant if you want to use a CRT (or a very low-end TFT
    > display without DVI).
    >
    >>( I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical,

    >
    > The RAMDAC simply isn't used for digital connection.
    >
    >> but it can
    >> still be a real indication of how well the card was designed.)

    >
    > Since the RAMDAC is integrated into the GPUs for almost a decade now this
    > is just nonsense.
    >
    > Benjamin


    Did you enter this thread just to snipe at me? You should know
    that current cards ( and for sure older ones) support Analog VGA
    as well as Digital output modes. For instance the ATI HD 2600XT
    lists as one of its features: "Two integrated 400 Mhz 30-bit
    RAMDACs". They also have SD and HD analog output support
    with an "Integrated AMD Xilleon HDTV encoder".

    But my point was that a card with a 400+ RAMDAC (integrated
    within the GPU or not), would be all that you need look for, to
    select a video card for editing video. A cheap card with a good
    RAMDAC will do the job, all the 3D gaming accelerations are of
    no special benefit for most video editing. The use of a 400Mhz or
    above RAMDAC marks a true quality point for such cards.

    Go back to trying to get people to use Intel VM Motherboards
    with "Integrated GFX" , and stop trying to confuse things.

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 25, 2007
    #10
  11. * Ken Maltby:

    >>> Some of this depends on what kind of "Video Editing" you are talking
    >>> about. Most editing will not need 3D accelerations. A good 400+
    >>> ramdac would be the main feature I would use to pick a card for that
    >>> purpose,

    >> That's only relevant if you want to use a CRT (or a very low-end TFT
    >> display without DVI).
    >>
    >>> ( I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical,

    >> The RAMDAC simply isn't used for digital connection.
    >>
    >>> but it can
    >>> still be a real indication of how well the card was designed.)

    >> Since the RAMDAC is integrated into the GPUs for almost a decade now this
    >> is just nonsense.
    >>
    >> Benjamin

    >
    > Did you enter this thread just to snipe at me?


    No, but you wrote nonsense and I took freedom to correct it. Is that a
    problem for you?

    > You should know
    > that current cards ( and for sure older ones) support Analog VGA
    > as well as Digital output modes. For instance the ATI HD 2600XT
    > lists as one of its features: "Two integrated 400 Mhz 30-bit
    > RAMDACs".


    Exactly, "integrated" (means: built into the GPU).

    > They also have SD and HD analog output support
    > with an "Integrated AMD Xilleon HDTV encoder".


    That has nothing to do with the RAMDAC.

    > But my point was that a card with a 400+ RAMDAC (integrated
    > within the GPU or not), would be all that you need look for, to
    > select a video card for editing video.


    You should sometimes read what you write. You wrote:

    "I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical, but it can
    still be a real indication of how well the card was designed."

    This is utterly BS because *all* modern gfx cards have the RAMDAC built
    in the GPU so the RAMDAC says *nothing* about "how well the card was
    designed". Besides that you completely ignore that ATI/AMD and Nvidia
    are designing reference designs which are used by the majority of board
    maker.

    > A cheap card with a good
    > RAMDAC will do the job, all the 3D gaming accelerations are of
    > no special benefit for most video editing. The use of a 400Mhz or
    > above RAMDAC marks a true quality point for such cards.


    That's BS, too. The 400MHz says *nothing* about the quality. It is the
    measure of the signal bandwith and tells someone who knows that stuff
    what resolution/refresh rate limits the RAMDAC can output.

    The signal *quality* however is only dependent on the output filters
    which are required for EMI compliance and on most current cards are
    cheap types which limit the bandwidth and causes signal degradation.

    > Go back to trying to get people to use Intel VM Motherboards
    > with "Integrated GFX" , and stop trying to confuse things.


    I'd recommened you get the basics first instead of showing everyone that
    you have no clue about this stuff.

    Benjamin
     
    Benjamin Gawert, Jul 26, 2007
    #11
  12. Ziggs

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Benjamin Gawert" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >* Ken Maltby:
    >
    >>>> Some of this depends on what kind of "Video Editing" you are talking
    >>>> about. Most editing will not need 3D accelerations. A good 400+
    >>>> ramdac would be the main feature I would use to pick a card for that
    >>>> purpose,
    >>> That's only relevant if you want to use a CRT (or a very low-end TFT
    >>> display without DVI).
    >>>
    >>>> ( I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical,
    >>> The RAMDAC simply isn't used for digital connection.
    >>>
    >>>> but it can
    >>>> still be a real indication of how well the card was designed.)
    >>> Since the RAMDAC is integrated into the GPUs for almost a decade now
    >>> this is just nonsense.
    >>>
    >>> Benjamin

    >>
    >> Did you enter this thread just to snipe at me?

    >
    > No, but you wrote nonsense and I took freedom to correct it. Is that a
    > problem for you?
    >
    >> You should know
    >> that current cards ( and for sure older ones) support Analog VGA
    >> as well as Digital output modes. For instance the ATI HD 2600XT
    >> lists as one of its features: "Two integrated 400 Mhz 30-bit
    >> RAMDACs".

    >
    > Exactly, "integrated" (means: built into the GPU).
    >
    >> They also have SD and HD analog output support
    >> with an "Integrated AMD Xilleon HDTV encoder".

    >
    > That has nothing to do with the RAMDAC.
    >
    >> But my point was that a card with a 400+ RAMDAC (integrated
    >> within the GPU or not), would be all that you need look for, to
    >> select a video card for editing video.

    >
    > You should sometimes read what you write. You wrote:
    >
    > "I know, with digital, the "Dac" part isn't as critical, but it can
    > still be a real indication of how well the card was designed."
    >
    > This is utterly BS because *all* modern gfx cards have the RAMDAC built in
    > the GPU so the RAMDAC says *nothing* about "how well the card was
    > designed". Besides that you completely ignore that ATI/AMD and Nvidia are
    > designing reference designs which are used by the majority of board maker.
    >
    >> A cheap card with a good
    >> RAMDAC will do the job, all the 3D gaming accelerations are of
    >> no special benefit for most video editing. The use of a 400Mhz or
    >> above RAMDAC marks a true quality point for such cards.

    >
    > That's BS, too. The 400MHz says *nothing* about the quality. It is the
    > measure of the signal bandwith and tells someone who knows that stuff what
    > resolution/refresh rate limits the RAMDAC can output.
    >
    > The signal *quality* however is only dependent on the output filters which
    > are required for EMI compliance and on most current cards are cheap types
    > which limit the bandwidth and causes signal degradation.
    >
    >> Go back to trying to get people to use Intel VM Motherboards
    >> with "Integrated GFX" , and stop trying to confuse things.

    >
    > I'd recommened you get the basics first instead of showing everyone that
    > you have no clue about this stuff.
    >
    > Benjamin



    You seem incapable of reading my posts, and comprehending
    what is being said. It might help if you read complete sentences
    and paragraphs. Placing your own interpretation on my posts may
    make you feel good, but is no help in the process of communication.

    Again, a manufacture's use of a design that includes a RAMDAC
    400Mhz or over shows that, the card was built to a high quality, in
    the areas that relate to video editing. The RAMDAC's contribution
    to that quality is more than you appear to allow, but it is only one
    part of the design. My point, again, was that if a card has this area
    of the design addressed, it need not include the more expensive 3D
    acceleration features that are added to GPU and Video Card
    designs (for gaming), to be an excellent card for Video Editing.
    This makes it a good screening factor during the process of
    selecting a video card for video editing, The subject of this
    thread.

    An inexpensive card can be lacking 3D gaming accelerations
    but still be very good for Video Editing, if it is designed to the
    quality that would include a 400Mhz or better RAMDAC.

    You appear not to have any interest in the subject of this thread,
    and I have no plans to hijack the thread to get into a technical
    debate to correct your misunderstandings of the issues involved.
    Now hack away at my sentences and paragraphs, I'm done with
    you.

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 26, 2007
    #12
  13. * Ken Maltby:

    > You seem incapable of reading my posts, and comprehending
    > what is being said. It might help if you read complete sentences
    > and paragraphs. Placing your own interpretation on my posts may
    > make you feel good, but is no help in the process of communication.
    >
    > Again, a manufacture's use of a design that includes a RAMDAC
    > 400Mhz or over shows that, the card was built to a high quality, in
    > the areas that relate to video editing. The RAMDAC's contribution
    > to that quality is more than you appear to allow, but it is only one
    > part of the design. My point, again, was that if a card has this area
    > of the design addressed, it need not include the more expensive 3D
    > acceleration features that are added to GPU and Video Card
    > designs (for gaming), to be an excellent card for Video Editing.
    > This makes it a good screening factor during the process of
    > selecting a video card for video editing, The subject of this
    > thread.


    And all this is still utterly BS.

    First, the RAMDAC bandwidth only limits the available resolutions and
    refresh rates for the VGA port and the analoge part of the DVI-I port.
    It says exactly *zero* about the signal quality. The parts that mainly
    influence signal quality (which affects image quality) are the output
    filters and that's it. The signal quality of a 300MHz RAMDAC is as good
    as the signal quality of a 450MHz RAMDAC, period.

    Second, as RAMDACs are integrated into the GPU for almost a decade now,
    the bandwidth of the RAMDAC tells you *nothing* about "how well a card
    was designer [for video editing]", period. A manufacturer orders a
    certain type of GPU, there is no choice for RAMDAC bandwith. Low end
    GPUs often come with 300MHz RAMDACs while midrange and highend GPUs come
    with 400+MHz RAMDACs.

    Third, as the majority of card makers use reference designs by ATI/AMD
    and Nvidia the difference between gfx cards of different board makers
    are usually limited to GPU/memory clock rate, cooling (different heat
    sinks/fans), different analog otput filters, different memory modules,
    different PCB colours, the goodies (i.e. games, adapters, software) that
    come with the card and finally the price.

    > An inexpensive card can be lacking 3D gaming accelerations
    > but still be very good for Video Editing, if it is designed to the
    > quality that would include a 400Mhz or better RAMDAC.


    And this also is just plain BS. Maybe you first should learn what a
    RAMDAC does:

    (old but still valid):
    <http://grafi.ii.pw.edu.pl/gbm/matrox/ramdac.html>

    As to the subject (video editing): the RAMDACs have absolutely *nothing*
    to do with video editing. RAMDACs are a part of the GPU to drive
    analogue monitors and nothing more. All other functions (like overlay
    planes which is used also by video applications) are part of the GPU
    itself and have also *nothing* to do with the RAMDACs. Even worse, when
    video editing is done with two digital monitors (which is usually the
    case today) the RAMDACs do exactly *nothing*.

    > You appear not to have any interest in the subject of this thread,
    > and I have no plans to hijack the thread to get into a technical
    > debate to correct your misunderstandings of the issues involved.


    I'm indeed very interested in the subject. And the reason for me
    answering to this thread is not to attack you (I don't give a shit who
    you are) but simply because you try to sell your bullshit here. This
    group is here for helping each other, and spreading your nonsense
    doesn't help the original poster one bit. The BS is of the same quality
    as what DaveW usually spreads around, the only difference is that your
    posts are longer.

    > Now hack away at my sentences and paragraphs, I'm done with
    > you.


    Yeah, whatever. Please get at least some basic knowledge before
    answering any questions. Telling stories when you don't know shit
    doesn't help anyone.

    Benjamin
     
    Benjamin Gawert, Jul 30, 2007
    #13
  14. Ziggs

    J. Clarke Guest

    > I guess it could be overheating, but how would I resolve that? The
    > fan is spinning and the heat within the computer is within an
    > acceptable range.
    >
    > I'm sure it's the video card since I placed it into my wife's computer
    > as a test. After about an hour,


    If it's after an hour then it's likely a problem with the heat sink.
    Pull it off, clean it. blow all the dust off it, add some fresh heat
    sink compound, and replace it and see if the problem goes away. If it
    doesn't, you've lost the two and a half bucks or so that a tube of heat
    sink compound costs, if it does then you've saved the price of a new
    board.

    > it developed the same fuzzy lines for
    > the other computer. Also, I'm using her video card in my computer and
    > I don't have any problems with it.
    >
    >
    >
    > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:30:08 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Ziggs wrote:
    >>> Currently, I have a 3GIG system that I put together 1.5 years ago.
    >>> I have a ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128 AGP card, but it's failing (tried
    >>> it in two computers and fuzzy lines start to appear on the model
    >>> from time to time).
    >>>
    >>> Anyway, I want to buy the cheapest replacement video card for now
    >>> because I'll get a new computer within 6 months or so.
    >>>
    >>> So, my main processing needs is when I use Pinnacle to edit clips
    >>> for DVD's. So, can I get away with a cheaper card for this need?
    >>> If so, what card would you recommend? I really don't want to waste
    >>> money on a video card that I'll only need for 6 months, but I don't
    >>> want to add an additional wait time for editing videos.
    >>>
    >>> TIA

    >>
    >> Are you sure that the video card is failing and not overheating?
    >> Also have you checked to be sure that the power supply is not
    >> failing?


    --
    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Jul 31, 2007
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Lewis Campbell

    Help with video card replacement, please.

    Lewis Campbell, Oct 29, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    170
    Lewis Campbell
    Oct 29, 2003
  2. Lost In Space/Woodchuck

    video card replacement suggestions

    Lost In Space/Woodchuck, Dec 4, 2006, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    164
    Barry Watzman
    Dec 5, 2006
  3. meridean
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    182
    Bob Knowlden
    Jan 14, 2007
  4. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    302
  5. mcp6453

    Replacement Video Card

    mcp6453, Nov 23, 2007, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    222
    mcp6453
    Nov 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page