What about Matrox, eh?

[chuckieland]

remember when 3dfx is late with voodoo 5 which supose to complete with geforce256
but it was later and end up complete with geforce II instead.
if 3dfx is on time they would still rock, since voodoo5 would kill geforce256, but due to the delay, it is complete against geforce II and that end up in bad for 3dfx and finally close down.
now Matrox is late with G800, and when it does release it will be up against NV20.
i see the history repeat it self.
next thing u know is nvidia buying the duel head technique from matrox when it close down.

 

[BurntKooshie]

Taz4158 - This is a little off topic, but would it be a bother to you to ask if you'd mind running some sort of Distributed Computing project on your network(s) for Team AnandTech? We could use a hand in all projects....

 

[Taz4158]

<< Taz4158 - This is a little off topic, but would it be a bother to you to ask if you'd mind running some sort of Distributed Computing project on your network(s) for Team AnandTech? We could use a hand in all projects.... >>


I realize this and would love to help but it's just not an option I can afford to do.

 

[Modus]

Taz4158,

<<I still spec Matrox for my networks. 600 plus machines. There is a LARGE corporate demand still for Matrox.>>

Despite all rational sense A $30 ATi Rage Pro will have just as good 2D quality at resolutions up to 1600x1200.

Modus

 

[Sir Fredrick]

Depends what they're doing with those machines...

 

[WetWilly]

A $30 ATi Rage Pro will have just as good 2D quality at resolutions up to 1600x1200

Not quite, and definitely not when you can get a Matrox G450 16MB SDR DualHead card for ~$70.

 

[Modus]

Sure it will. Have you seen them side by side? Beneath 1600x1200 (which requires a bloody 21&quot; monitor if you don't want to squint at the text) the ATi will be almost indistinguishable from the Matrox. And since it's less than half the cost, it's a no-brainer. Plus 99% of corporate users will never use Dual Head.

Modus

 

[chuckieland]

if you in graphic editing business such as caterlog editing
you prob would have multi-monitor

 

[Aquaman]

Also for members of financial institutions will use multi-monitor setups. I guess that's why Matrox is producing a G200 MMS pci card (MMS= Multi-Monitor Series) that will allow up to 4 monitors on one PCI card. They also say that you can run up to 16 monitors at once (I guess 4 of these cards).

Cheers,
Aquaman

 

[ahfung]

&quot;Not quite, and definitely not when you can get a Matrox G450 16MB SDR DualHead card for ~$70&quot;

Does it really exist? 64bit 16MB SDR, must be dirt cheap!

 

[spec8472]

Fellow matrox-user here...

As far as i see it, Matrox isnt looking to the 3D Gamers Market for the moment, its a field where you can invest millions of dollars, and not get a dime in return if you dont happen to be able to constantly ace the scene...
Just take a look at 3dfx for example: their whole business was aimed at 3d peformance only, sure they were the first group to bring out a real 3d accelerator (Voodoo1), but they got beaten to the gun over and over again since after the voodoo2.

3dfx's, Nvidia's and ATI's 2d peformance and definition, despite what almost all the gamers are saying, is absolutely shocking (relatively) compared to Matrox.
Sure, in normal Windows it may look fine, but when your running dual 21&quot; monitors: 2d peformance and definition is critical.
Who uses dual 21&quot; monitors? well just for example: CAD/CAM desigers, Graphics Artists, etc. There are dozens of areas where having excellent 2d on multiple monitors is required.
A Geforce2 Twinview cannot compete.

Matrox cards rarely have driver problems on almost any mainstream OS, even recent distributions of Linux come bundled with Matrox drivers.

I'm sure matrox will keep on in the nieche market that they have carved out for themselves, like someone above said, there is still a huge corporate demand for these cards.

The only reason i'd even considering purchasing a non-matrox card for a new system, is because it would be to play new 3d games, or because of cost.

Matrox is the King of the 2d market. Nvidia and the like are more interested in the gamers market. This picture is not likely to change any time soon.

 

[WetWilly]

A $30 ATi Rage Pro will have just as good 2D quality at resolutions up to 1600x1200
...
Not quite, and definitely not when you can get a Matrox G450 16MB SDR DualHead card for ~$70.
...
Sure it will. Have you seen them side by side?

Yes I have. My comment still stands. For that matter, I've got a Xpert 128 and an old 4MB Matrox Mystique with the 170MHz RAMDAC that predates the ATI by at least two years. On a good monitor (NEC FD Trinitron) at 1024x768 I can clearly tell the two apart, and the Matrox is better.

Beneath 1600x1200 (which requires a bloody 21&quot; monitor if you don't want to squint at the text) the ATi will be almost indistinguishable from the Matrox.

Last time I checked, &quot;almost indistinguishable&quot; or &quot;almost as good as&quot; is not equal to &quot;just as good as.&quot; And if I'm paying for a good 19&quot; or 21&quot; monitor, what's $40 to have the BEST display available? BTW, some of us with good monitors, video cards and eyesight can use 1600x1200 on a 19&quot; monitor with no problems at all. Perhaps if you use a Matrox at 1600x1200 you won't have to squint as much

And since it's less than half the cost, it's a no-brainer. Plus 99% of corporate users will never use Dual Head.

The ATI's also got half the memory. I've heard that &quot;never use DualHead&quot; argument before repeatedly. Until people use it and find that they don't want to live without it. One &quot;straight 2D&quot; corporate user example? Accounting department users who need to run terminal emulation windows while they run apps. Move terminal emulation over to the second monitor where you can see it all the time without having to resize everything on your main monitor. All it takes is a <$100 15&quot; monitor for people, and places usually have those monitors lying around in heaps after upgrades, so the extra monitor is free. Most users I've worked with run more than one app at a time, and once they've seen DualHead in action they don't want to go back. Isn't it kind of curious that OEMs like HP, Compaq and IBM are using Matrox DualHead cards in their corporate boxes and not saving $40 per box with ATI Rages?

 

[WetWilly]

ahfung

&quot;Not quite, and definitely not when you can get a Matrox G450 16MB SDR DualHead card for ~$70&quot;
...
Does it really exist? 64bit 16MB SDR, must be dirt cheap!

Check at Price Watch. OEM 16MB SDR G450 was down to $71 last time I checked, and it's been dropping. A week or two ago it was $79. It's a real bargain if you're not a heavy 3D user. Plus it's got integrated TV-out and DVDMax, where you can display your DVDs full screen to either a second monitor or to the TV-out. Only thing the OEM cards may not have is the TV-out cable (costs ~$10 from Matrox) or the Matrox DVD software (costs ~$7 from Matrox).

 

[NCC74656]

I'm still using my Marvel G200-TV for video capture and editing. This card still beat most of the newer card with video capture capability.

 

[Taz4158]

[/i] >>



<< Despite all rational sense A $30 ATi Rage Pro will have just as good 2D quality at resolutions up to 1600x1200. >>


Frankly it won't. That along with the fact we need DH and I have to protect my budget and there are no stability issues leads me back to Matrox.

 

[iamthebear]

I worked at the head office of one of the biggest banks in Canada. We purchased over 30,000 PC's and I can tell you with certainty that businesses do not give a rats @ss about 3d gaming. All of the PC's we had all had Trident chips in them - why would need anything else? Matrox &amp; ATI both do extremely well in these markets and Nvidia will have an extremely difficult time getting into a market that is this resereved. Business wants a trouble free product, with a proven track record. Anyone who thinks that Nvidia is going to quickly steal these markets does not know the history. 3D benchmarks mean squat in the business world.

 

[Cretin]

I would use 1600x1200 on a 17&quot; Viewsonic and V3 (friend has this, that's why I can say this). And yes I definitely think the Matrox cards are far superior in 2d quality, which is great, since 3d gaming isn't all that important.

Think about it, you hear about all these people with their bad-ass machines getting 200fps, well what's the point? Why not have much better 2d quality, a ton more options and stuff, and suffer a few frames/second in your games? And I am sure the game quality is just as good with the Matrox card too.

Ahh, Matrox - great company. The Matrox buildings aren't far from where I live (well, I dunno if they are the Matrox buildings, but they are some!).



Cretin