Non-Gaming Cards

Video cards for non-gamers

Professional video cards are made for high-end workstations. X-bit Labs reviews a couple of them, indicating that they are for digital content creation, 3D modeling or CAD applications. While many people would like those capabilities in a home or small business computer, X-bit labs says that professional video cards cost several thousand dollars. Since those prices push them out of the realm of consumer products, we won't cover them further in this report.

We researched video cards for use with Adobe Photoshop, the leading high-end image-editing program, and found that even a budget gaming card is probably more than you need. More video RAM should provide faster screen re-draws.

Video cards in this class start at about $30. These budget cards are generally old technology. Clock speeds are as low as 240 MHz, and most of the cheapest cards have 128 MB of RAM. Experts say the entry-level graphics cards are all you need for business applications like Microsoft Office, and your computer will run faster with a basic video card than with integrated video. It will be a little more reliable, too.

For a bit more money, you can get a video card that is uncompromised for any purpose but action games. The major competitors are both new. The ATI Radeon HD 2400 Pro (*Est. $60) brings AMD into the current generation with support for high definition video and DirectX 10. It has a 525 MHz clock speed and 256 MB of RAM. The Nvidia GeForce 8400 GS (*Est. $50) was released in June 2007. Its core version has a 450 MHz clock speed and 256 MB of RAM.

Victor Wu of Bjorn3d.com reviews the ATI Radeon HD 2400 Pro based VisionTek 2400 Pro and says that it "is really not designed for any gamers out there, unless you only play Tetris or Solitaire on your computer or play games at low resolution. What it would be good [for] is for viewing HD content." He adds that the video card runs cool and quiet.

Driver Heaven.net conducts a roundup review comparing the new entry-level Nvidia and ATI video cards. The ATI contender performed best in most tests, especially HD video playback, but noise was a major problem. Instead, Driver Heaven.net selects the XFX GeForce 8400 GS (*Est. $60) as the best all-around of the tested graphics cards. Its 3D performance was unmatched. Driver Heaven says, "It was the only card in this roundup that didn't force us into choosing between high 3D performance and silent operation." Note, however, that some versions of this video card include fan cooling, and reports say those are considerably louder. Other options include increased memory (512 MB).

Madshrimps.com compared seven GeForce 8400 GS video cards, benchmarking them against the ATI HD2400XT (*est. $70). Geoffrey Van Landeghem says, "To our surprise the 8400 GS managed to regularly perform on par with, sometimes even beat the 2400XT and so leaving the lower clocked HD2400 Pro behind in dust." The XFX GeForce 8400 GS produced the best results in this test, too.

The GeForce 8400 GS lacks the PureVideo HD technology found in Nvidia's more upscale video cards, and the company's comparison chart shows that the GeForce 8400 GS is only "good" for HD DVD or Blu-ray playback, but it's "excellent" for regular DVD movie playback, as well as photos, office applications and web surfing. Nvidia claims the 8400 GS is 3.8 times faster than integrated video for gaming. In contrast, the top 8800 series is seven times faster than the 8400 GS, and the 8600 series is three-and-a-half times faster.

An entry-level video card is sufficient for running Windows Vista. All versions of Vista except for Home Basic use the Aero interface, which includes visual effects. Rob Williams of Techgage Networks tested the Sapphire Radeon X1050 (now discontinued) and Sapphire Radeon X1550 (*Est. $70) and reports that both video cards handle Vista's Aero effects very well. He specifically recommends the cheaper card for people "who are wanting a basic card but don't want to suffer with an on-board solution."