ATI used to be taking all the spankin' when 3Dfx was pimpin' the industry with their VooDoo-based chipset. They made the wrong turn by dropping 32-bit color support and only allowing STB to make their supposedly "next big thing" (the VooDoo 3) and and didn't make a U-turn quick enough before their name was dragged thru the mud (VooDoo 4 & 5 came out pretty late). When that happened, nVidia learned alot from their first failure (the Riva) and kicked the VooDoo in the shin with their first flagship product, the TNT2 (which did 32-bit colors).

ATI was still very much to themselves by making enough cash thru OEM product sales (to computer and laptop makers). Most of their sales were coming from laptop integrators at the time. Very few people who value 2D graphics (presentations, movies, etc) still hold on to their dear ATI Pro cards.

Alas, ATI realized that people want 3D, and if they can at least do it half-arsed, they can still sell products. In which they created the Rage and Rage Pro chipset. ATI began to do more research (and of course, now realizing that 3D acceleration ISN'T a feature anymore... it IS the video card itself) created the Rage 128 (very competitve to the TNT2, but still a bit late for the market) and now, the Radeon...the nuclear warhead that actually matches GeForce 2 (one of nVidia's "affordable" chipset).

Niether chipsets are a slouch when it comes to performance or visual quality. The only chipset besting either one (and carries a hefty $400+ pricetag) is nVidia's GeForce3.

Thanks in part of ATI's pricing, they are back in the game. Radeon-based cards are usually cheaper than nVidia's offerings of the same caliber. ATI is also adding lots of features nVidia has missed. Hardware assisted DVD playback and video smoothing (watching MPG/AVI in fullscreen/blown-up is cleaner than other cards) seem to be ATI's trademark combo, while other cards are missing one or both of these features.

Pros
The TV tuner has a very good quality picture, though you may have expected clear picture on a computer monitor screen. Don't blame the card for that! TV broadcasted pictures are low in resolution comprared to the SVGA screens on computers we all are used to. Example: Have you tried playing a game on both a monitor and a TV screen? The monitor is smaller, but it is usually cleaner and sharper than the TV. A better example: Try surfing the net on your TV... you can barely make out the text unless you lower the resolution to 640x480 (which is still a bit difficult to read, but bareable).

So "good quality" picture basically means "eh, that's normal".

Although I have no use with TIVO functionality (too much disc space for my taste! I know how to program my VCR, thanks!), some may feel that this is a good reason to get this card. Although easy to use once you get the hang of the software interface, it may be combersome to use if used often (I only played with this card in the store). Captured video from the tuner is acceptable... you would DEFINATELY rather watch your show on VHS on your TV rather than a digitially compressed video...esp for about 30 minutes. Uses for capturing TV? If you like a comercial and just want it in your collection. MPEG compression is iffy (some dropped frames), which would indicate that a high end PC (PIII 800 MHz?) would be required if you want to catch every frame without the capture card blinking it's eyes (missing frames, mind you).

Cons
The pros aren't as much as you would think. For this particular card, ATI's execution was completely off. Instead of competing with other card makers, they just competed with themselves!

For one thing, the video capture is analog, and during the conversion to digital, some quality is already lost. It gets worse once compression is used.

This card only comes with 32 MB of SDR RAM so it is NOT for the hardcore gamer. It still does 3D decently, but with a castrated memory size and speed, the other card you should consider if you want video capturing (but no need for a TV tuner) is ATI's own Radeon 64 MB DDR VIVO card. That particular card costs $170 if you can find them online, or $199 retail. Why is that a competition? Because that card is WAY faster and have more RAM and STILL DOES VIDEO CAPTURING (just minus the TV tuner) over the All-in-Wonder Radeon. Otherwise, the only other solution for people who want video capture and 3D performance is Asus's V8200 Deluxe (which houses a GeForce 3 with 64 MB DDR RAM and video inputs and outputs ... AND a connector for 3D glasses!). Here's the price list, and you can see for yourself, which is the better value:

ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon
32 MB SDR RAM
Video-in/Video-out
TV-Tuner
$299 (Retail)

ATI Radeon 64 MB DDR RAM VIVO
64 MB DDR RAM
Video-in/Video-out
$199 (Retail)

Asus V8200 Deluxe (GeForce3)
64 MB DDR RAM
Video-in/Video-out
$400

As you can see, the best price/performance & feature ratio is the Radeon 64 MB DDR VIVO.

Recomendation
How many of you really need a TV tuner? If you must, then this is the card for you. If you wanted the capturing feature, then there are other cards that does that without compromising 3D performance.

And for people who want to go ALL OUT for the BEST in 3D cards (I know people who wants the bleeding-edge technology) and still want to capture video, then the Asus V8200 Deluxe is your only choice.

If you want the "in-betweenie", then the best card for you is the ATI Radeon 64 MB DDR VIVO. (VIVO stands for Video In Video Out).

And as Phil Collins would say, "That's my story, and I'm sticking with it".

Recommended: No

Amount Paid (US$): 299