So what do you think of the Kyro ?

[CHHAS]

I'm still waiting for the final product to be reviewed, but so far it seems quite interesting.
Tile based rendering seems like the way to go.

[MK]

The Kyro II is one of the two alternatives I`m considering (second is ATI Radeon DDR) if Matrox is not going to deliver a new card this year.

Does anybody know how the image quality of the Kyro based cards is ?

MK

[This message has been edited by MK (edited 02 February 2001).]

[CHHAS]

The tests I've read pretty much agreed that the 2D and 3D quality was better than nVidia's, so that's a plus

[Himself]

My view on the Kyro is that the idea is great, the bang for buck is good, but at the end of the day, what's the support like? I don't see anybody behind the name that is going to deliver in terms of support and drivers as well as the more established companies.

[MK]

I`m doing a lot of 2D work for my studies, therefore I`m worried about picture quality in case my next card is not from Matrox.

Is the ATI Radeon compareable or equal to the G400 in terms of 2D quality in 1024 x 768 x 32 @ 100Hz ?

MK

(Already had BAD experiences with quality & NVidias chips, so I´m not going to get one of these)



------------------
EPoX BX7+100, Celeron II 566@850 MHz (8.5x100), 128 MB PC133, G400 16MB SH (Bios 1.3-22,PD 6.10), on board Highpoint U-ATA100 RAID controller, IBM DPTA 20,0GB U-ATA100, Iomega ZIP100, SB PCI128, Mitsumi CR-4801TE, Pioneer 36x slot-in, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 400, Plustek OpticPro 9636T, HP 930C, Win`98 SE

[The Rock]

MK:

The Radeon is VERY comparable in 2D quality to Matrox, according to friends of mine who have them. Matrox still rules at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200, but at 1024x768, you won't be disappointed with a Radeon. I'll know more when I find some sucker to buy my GeForce 2 and replace it with a Radeon.

Bart

[Topha]

never heard of the kyro. where can i get some information about it?

[Nuno]

Himself is right. Tile rendering is an excellent idea. But someone elso should be doing it apart from videologic/Imagination Tec, or whatever they are named this week.

Neon250 was their previous card (as the G200 was for Matrox) and their last driver for it is from sep 1999. How pathetic.

[Ali]

Matrox did have a tile based card once. Remember the m3D? It was Ok for its time (just after the Voodoo1), and was MUCH cheaper.

From memory it needed a big CPU to runnit well though (P133 or higher)

It was based on the NEC PowerVR1 chipset, which was the first version of the Kyro.

I had a friend who bought one of these (the m3D), and it was quite good. He bought it for $10 and got a $15 rebate. Wouldnt you love to be paid $5 to have a video card.

I have heard that the Kyro has issues with ladders in most games though. Because it does hidden surface removal, and most games put ladders over a background, the areas between the rungs is left black. Not sure if this will get fixed, but it sounds like a game patch would be needed rather than a driver update.

Ali

[MK]

The Rock - thanks for the info. If I would be sure about the 2D quality of the Kyro (with was repeatedly reported as excellent, even THG =( says it`s better that nVidias) and would be sure about the future driver support, I`m really tending towards a Kyro II (STG 5000).
It will be presented at GDC/CeBit featuring T&L, DDR, etc. ! It really has impressing specs and the price will be rather reasonable.

Topha - you can have a look at the Kyro at Sharkeyextreme. The link is: http://www.sharkeyextreme.com/hardwa...kyro_in-depth/

But first lets see what Matrox is going to present ... :-)

MK

[This message has been edited by MK (edited 05 February 2001).]

[Himself]

MK,

I have my desktop at 1600x1200x16 @75Hz right now with a Radeon on a 17" monitor. If I could somehow take a screenshot of it I could show you what it's like. I have seen the bad 2D of my friend's MX, black text on white looks like it was printed on wool or something, there is a cross pattern throughout, could be the monitor or could be video card, no idea. It reminds me of the TNT 1 I had for some reason. All I know is that I don't get that here, I didn't get that with the V3 the Radeon replaced either.

[MK]

Himself - I had the same experience with a TNT ! After 3 weeks I threw the crap out of my system and put the G200 back in, that was soon replaced by the G400.

Your informations are really useful ! This puts ATI Radeon in second position - after Matrox G[whatsoever]. :-))

MK

------------------
EPoX BX7+100, Celeron II 566@850 MHz (8.5x100), 128 MB PC133, G400 16MB SH (Bios 1.3-22,PD 6.10), on board Highpoint U-ATA100 RAID controller, IBM DPTA 20,0GB U-ATA100, Iomega ZIP100, SB PCI128, Mitsumi CR-4801TE, Pioneer 36x slot-in, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 400, Plustek OpticPro 9636T, HP 930C, Win`98 SE

[This message has been edited by MK (edited 06 February 2001).]

[Rags]

Now THAT is FUNNY!!!

Rags

[MK]

Rags - what do you mean ?

MK

[Greebe]

LOL Matt look what have you started this time!

Himself makes himself out to be the all knowing god of computer hardware and yet he runs 1600x1200 (16 bit LOL) on a 17" monitor!
Now that is funny!