Graphic card meltdown part II at 'nvidia'TomsHG

[ButSpk]

I thought I was a "high-end gamer" or "hard core gamer". I am 59 years old and have been playing computer games since commodore 64 days. i do not play first person shooters like quake. I prefer roleplaying and strategy myself. I buy state of the art computer equipment, such as the g400 max, quality of video and color are important to me not fps. To classify "high-end gamers" only using fps as a criteria is a very big mistake.

[wiggo]

I didn't mean to insinuate that all high-end (there goes that term again ) gamers are avid Q3 players, but the industry as a whole does look towards the latest id products as a benchmark - no-one can deny that (can they?). And so, the latest graphics cards will be tested for their ability to run Q3 well (the test as well as the finished game).
Since the Q2 engine has been widely used in other, very successful games such as Half Life, it is reasonable to assume that the same will be said of the Q3 engine in a years time.

The G400 is a very good card, and I am pleased with my decision to purchase one instead of a TNT2, and I congratulate Matrox on the new features that they have introduced to the graphics-card market. But a graphics card will always be judged on the most widely used features, and at the moment that means DirectX (which I am pleased to say the G400 excells in) and OpenGL (which is well on the way to being sorted out).

I personally am not a great Quake fan, as I do prefer more cerebral games. But dipping a toe in the water never hurt anyone

[This message has been edited by wiggo (edited 09-08-1999).]

[Zypher]

I stopped going to the anointed one's site a good while ago. Hes done so many questionable things (rage128 'heat', q3a 'benchmarks' are two I can pull off the top of my head right now) that put his credibility into a very bad light.

That, and he's a fricking nazi. Anyone ever read his 'personal' comments he pulls out occasionally? I did, a few times was enough.

This is from the same person who used to always tell someone to check out TH for good tech stuff. Not anymore, when was the last time something like the oc databases got updated? I'll bet it STILL has the same form from the end of 97.

Lemmings will continue to fall off cliffs, but break from the pack, find your info elsewhere.

[DK]

What about people that buy video cards for better graphics, tomshardware seems to drool on the fastest worst looking cards on the market. I never played any of the quakes, dooms etc.. I guess i'm not a high end user?
yea right! Some people like to play other games. Using it as a platform for benchmarking is 1 thing but to say it is the only thing to rate a card with is crazy.
Tom is Tom, read what he says and then read someone more reliable, then make judgement.
He is right sometimes tho.

Just my 2 cents.

Picking a fight with Kruzin? You gotta be nuts! hehe

Derek

[Eyleron]

Kruzin, when you say things like "totally biased" and that Tom makes it sound like OPEN/GL (Quake) performance is the only factor in buying a video card, that's way off base. He states several times that he's looking at other factors such as DVD playing and color tools and such features. He did praise the DX speed. He could have even tested the card on Softimage and Maya!

[Kruzin]

Where in this article is there any mention of DVD, color, features or anything. It's just a bunch of game benchmarks. That quote at the top of the page is the entire conclusion for the G400. One mention of good D3D performance, several tired complaints about OGL speeds, and nothing about any of the criteria you listed.

Are you sure you're looking at the right article?

[Whisper]

According to Toms Hardware Guide, I gather the following

In D3D the Matrox G400Max is almost good if not better than the TNT2 Ultra at most resolutions/colour depths.

In OpenGL the Matrox G400Max doesn't does not even come close to matching a TNT2 Ultra.

Now forgive me for stating the obvious, but Toms Hardware site is a hardware review site, correct? Some people may rely on this site for making purchasing decisions, and some of these people making these purchasing decisions, may, for whatever reason, value framerates in OpenGL above all else.

Would it not be unconscienable of Toms Hardware site to not point the weakness of the G400Max in OpenGL, when compared to other Video Cards in the same catagory?

Would Toms Hardware site be doing it's job if it did not point this fact out?

Is there anybody here that denys that Toms Hardware site makes a valid point about the Matrox G400's lack of frame rate performance in OpenGL, when compared to Video Cards in the same catagory?

How many angry E-mails and posts to Toms Hardware sites BBS, if Toms Hareware site did not point out the Matrox G400's lack of frame rate performance in OpenGL, when compared to Video Cards in the same catagory?

My final question is this, if you were reviewing those Video Cards, exactly what would you have to say about the Matrox G400's lack of OpenGL performance, or would you just lie? I know it's a tough choice, so I leave the decision in your hands.

Cheers

[Whisper]

I forgot to add.

I think Tom and Toms Hardware site defines "High End Gamer" as somebody who values frame rates above all else.
This is just my opinion, but I gather that this is the main goal of all the overclocking of CPU's and Video Cards that seems to take place. If you don't value FPS, then why do you need the fastest CPU and/or the fastest Video Card you can get?

Cheers

[RoGuE]

Tom might be biased, but he didn't write that review

------------------
aka Chris H

Abit BE6, Celeron 300A@450MHz, 128MB PC100 RAM, G400 32MB DH, SBLive! Value, IBM 22GB ATA/66 HDD, and so on...

[Whisper]

That is why I used "Toms Hardware Site" throughout my post.

[dave m]

This is just my personal thought, which I'd like to share for general discussion...

ie I may be wrong...

Did Matrox ever try to just produce the Perfect Gamers Only Card?. No.

IMHO, They produce fantastic 2D/3D graphics cards, of superb visual quality, for PC users which usually work well with the "current" crop of games.

OK They have problems pushing the limits on Quake 5.xxx, but if you're that dedicated a games player, sure kickass, go buy the card of the minute that gives the highest fps for the game you want to play. There'll be a better game on the shelves before I finish this post, well maybe not :-).

Matrox produce some damn good cards, that's why I've been buying them for nearly 10 years. Games come and go, I still have to look at my monitor everyday, but then again I'm a boring old fart, I'm still happy with my G200...

Uh Oh,

Dave

[Godin]

I read Kruzin and other users touting the great features of the G400 and why that makes it a better card. I read over and over that FPS does not make a superior card. And I would agree... except that if a card has better color depth, the ability to use 2 monitors, excellent looking textures and zillions of other features, but does not run ALL the software I use, then it is not the better card.
I think the point here is not that the G400 sucks, but if a hard core gamer plays flight sims, strategy and Q3 the G400 will not be his card. His flight sims may appear on 2 monitors (if it isn't a slide show on them) but what good is that if quake 3 does not run acceptably. Gamers that play a wide range of games may find that performance acceptable, but most won't. And most will opt for the TNT2 which will give them excellent color and stellar frame rates. why settle for lower frame rates to attatch a 2nd monitor... I am not willing to make that sacrifice yet...

In case you havent noticed Kruzin, Matrox sales are not at the top... that means Most hardcore gamers don't use Matrox products. (I believe 3dfx and Nvidia hold far more than 50% of the marked collectively)

[Rags]

Godin,
I am sorry to hear that you think that Q3 is totally unplayable on the G400. I think the G400 is VERY playable even at high resolution. The fact is it doesn't peak out the frame rates like the other cards in OpenGL, but it does give a playable frame rate with top notch video quality. Hell, even my G200 does fine with Q3, albeit at lower resolutions.

Rags



------------------
P3 450@560, BH6, 128MB PC100, Delta CD ROM, Mill.G200/G400, 8.4G WD, 8.4G seagate, SB16 (temp.), Yamaha Burner, Zip, Sportster 56K int., Storm Scanner.

[Joel]

Well I play alot of games, both D3D and OpenGL, and I find the G400 more than adequate, even at resolution of 1024x768x32bit. But then again I'm one of those people who also does more with their computers than just play games, and for me visual quality is the number one factor for chosing a video card.

Joel

[Eyleron]

I was talking about the other features of the cards which come in "Part 3"....like in the quote,
"The last part will now be the hardware/software accessories section. I think everyone will be happier this way since I will now have more time to review the variety of featured hardware/software accessories that all these cards have. I
will try to cover a few added topics in part 3 that you, the readers, have brought to my attention."