C'mon!! Is what Anand says about the G400 true??

[Ant]

I've not read that review but if someone is saying the G400 does not have an OpenGL ICD under NT they are very wrong.

[Galvin]

I read the review I think what he is saying
is that the openGL icd for NT is so
bad that its not worth reviewing.

I know this from the G200 card that the
ICD is at least 50% slower in quakeII
running on NT instead of 98.

My theory is Matrox like creative labs
doesn't have enough experience in NT
driver coding because if they did we
wouldn't have slow ass ICD for NT, would
we

[N1ghtshade]

Slamming Anand's reviewing abilities is ridiculous. The site's work is well respected. It just serves to avoid the issues he's bringing up.

He says the rendering speed of the G400's is
quite slow in comparison with all the
major cards out right now. In one or two cases the g400 was even slower than the G200.

I am simply requesting those who currently use the G400 to comment on this, one way or the other.

[rickT]

anand does make mistakes.

[VonKruel]

It's important to separate the issues here.

Issue #1: How fast is the G400 itself? Benchmarks of Direct3D games show that it's very fast, especially with a fast processor at higher resolutions. I can't wait to get my hands on a K7 (a.k.a. "Athlon")...

Issue #2: How good is the OpenGL ICD? It works (under Win98 anyway), but it really needs to be optimized.

It is simply *wrong* to conclude from poor OpenGL game benchmarks that the G400 *hardware* is poor. It really says a lot more about the OpenGL ICD's performance than the G400's performance. I am hoping/expecting for the ICD to be optimized heavily in the next few months, but I can sure understand people who insist on strong OpenGL performance *now*.

------------------
"Anyone who is truly interested in self-improvement should not rule out becoming pure energy." -- unknown

[VonKruel]

Actually the good thing about high-profile reviewers like Anand slamming the G400 because of poor OpenGL perf. is that it helps light a fire under Matrox's ass to get the ICD optimized. There's a *lot* of room to optimize that ICD, and I really think we could see *big* gains once it's up to speed.

------------------
"Anyone who is truly interested in self-improvement should not rule out becoming pure energy." -- unknown

[Electric Amish]

That's the whole point. I thought that the OGL was much better now. Is it really still that bad? Everything I have seen around here (mostly Quake stuff) has shown it to be relatively respectable. IMO.

Paul

[Shane]

I respected Anand, until I started reading some of his "tech" reviews.

The guy, gets it wrong on occasion and sometimes misleads. He sometimes tends to incorrectly describe something seemingly in the pursuit of making the issue easier to understand. His explanation of RAS/CAS comes to mind.

I still respect him for his attitude, but I read his site with a grain of salt.

BFN.

[Ant]

The Windows NT G400 ICD is currently a poor peformer, I've not had much chance to test it myself as Matrox have only just allowed me to have NT 4 drivers for the G400 (gee I wonder why). It does seem the Windows 9x and NT ICDs are coming in from different angles, the 9x ICD primarily servicing games first and foremost while the NT version is going for application support. The poor NT performance doesn't reflect the hardware but just the fact that it currently is a poor driver, it will get a lot better eventually but it's obvious that the major development effort has gone into the Windows 9x ICD thus far.

[N1ghtshade]

Thanks Ant, (G400 user) for the honest opinion, and everyone else for the commentary.

still a lot of questions for customers then.

How many will there be?

When will the supply come close to the demand?

How many months, will I have to wait for
a quality GL ICD?

Weird way to launch a flagship product!!?!

[Electric Amish]

C'mon!! Is what Anand says about the G400 true??


According to him, the G200 outdoes the G400 in the 3D Studio Max tests. Is this correct?

Link: www.anandtech.com/html/review_display.cfm?document=999&pagenum=12

Also, he says:

The Voodoo3 and the G400 were immediately tossed out of the NT tests for a very obvious reason, neither card features a publically available OpenGL ICD in a final or near final form.

I thought that the G400 was in alot better shape than he portrays, in regards to the OpenGL stuff and NT. Didn't it ship with an NT OGL ICD?

Link: www.anandtech.com/html/review_display.cfm?document=999&pagenum=14

I know there are people here that use the G400 in NT. Is this true? or does he just have old drivers?

Ant? what say you?

Just curious. I thought Anand was better at his reviews, but from what I've heard around here, this makes me a bit suspicious. I trust you guys first.

[Elie]

I dont think Anand knows what he's talking about, The driver situation the type of PC hardware ICD revision all play a significant role to enhance performance therfore I will not give him credit for anything he says especially his Fast Track review... how stupid can he get.

Regards,
Elie

[tylau]

So does the Voodoo3 OpenGL driver, it does not work in any thing besides Q3test, it is not likely it will come out in full operational ICD form in any near term. Too bad on this 3dfx.

--
2/3 is larger than 1/3, from my 1st grade mathematics.