3rd party TV Tuner for a G400

[Smiff]

See if you can reply in under 10 words.

[Ant]

The 6 month life of a card is driven by some companies producing "throw away" cards every 6 months and by peer pressure particularly on the Net. I have a 4 year old card that I use on a daily basis, what does that make me? Oh it's a card called a Matrox Millennium by the way

[paulcs]

It's a professional signature. Typically, I just use my first name and email address as a signature, at home and even at work, if I'm emailing colleagues or people I know well. When engaged in a formal correspondence, its name, title, company, email address. It connotes a professional distance, and I guess we're not used to that here.

I bought a Rainbow Runner G-Series last year, and I've had some issues with it. First, bad conflicts with my Turtle Beach Xtreme soundcard drivers, DirectX, and Video Tools (and maybe the Microsoft Intellimouse drivers), which were miraculously cured with PowerDesk 5.X and the 1.50 beta version of Video Tools.

Then, of course, I can't resist new drivers, many of them incompatible with Video Tools, so my Rainbow Runner generally sits dormant in my computer. I intend to try Video Tools ver. 1.51 tonight or tomorrow with PD 5.30. If I have a problem with Video Tools, off it goes, because there's no way I'm going back to PD 5.25.

I have an ATI TV-Wonder by the way. It requires an IRQ, which is problematic, but it always impressed me as being more stable than the Rainbow Runner. I don't think it's compatible with the G400, and, of course, it was manufactured by the Great Satan, so I don't get much use out of it either.

If you want a bit of a chuckle, and maybe an unpleasant reminder of the OpenGL debacle, look here, and keep in mind that the TV-Wonder has been out for at least seven months and maybe longer:
http://www.rageunderground.com/ubb/F...ML/000104.html

That's right. ATI finally released a fully functional software package in October. I bought my TV-Wonder in March along with a Rage Fury. Needless to say, ATI printed statements to the contrary, they were not compatible at the time. But then again, the Fury wasn't compatible with Windows at the time, so I shouldn't have been surprized.

I came running back to Matrox, tail between my legs, the minute the G400 was released.

I've seen a fair bit of debate about how many frames per second the eye and brain can assimulate, and I'm suspicious of the 30 fps figure. I do know that first person shooters feel different at 50 fps and 80 fps. Tim alluded to this: the framerate you get when you benchmark with Quake2 is an average.

As most online shooter fans on this forum know, your framerates drop dramatically during moments of intense activity. It's why so many online players lower their resolutions and color depths before entering a game.

Those extra frames per second really count in those situations, and certainly, the Max is no slouch in this department. It's the reason the Max is in such demand and one of the reasons it is so hard to get.

Paul Sedita
Long-winded Blowhard
paulcs@flashcom.net

[sabertooth007]

To the various individuals who complained.

Reason for signature: No I am not bragging or trying to sound important. What I am doing is standing behind my comments. Instead of using odd usernames or screen personas, I am letting you exactly who I am and what I do. When I read a post, if a person signs with what I do, then I know how to value or rely on their comments. I am not saying that I can be relied on just because of what my title is, but you know some of my background. I have nothing to hide. I also let you know who I am so you can understand where the comments or ideas are coming from. If I was from 3dfx or a regional sales manger for them, I bet you would want to know that so you would know my comments might be slightly biased. To me this is being professional.

Length of Responses - sure I can keep it short, but if I am going to respond, I want to do it right. I can truncate my sentences, but then it sounds and looks bad. I also try to provide as much background and information on why I make a statement, once again so you have the whole picture.

Marketing Hype - I am not saying Nvidia influences me, but if you look around, name any card that actually can play all games (I mean all) with no problem six months after they are released with all features turned on. I can maybe count one or two cards and I am sorry Matrox isn't one of them. If I was to name a card with the best VQ in six months, Matrox is always there. As stated before, that is about the time a product actually is announced and not when it arrives in the market. Remember the G400 was announced early this year not long after the Marvel G200 was released, and only mid way into the year did some products appear, the G400 Marvel is just now being released, so it seems like a year, but that is because that is how long they take it to get it to market. In addition, unless I was way off base, I don't remember the G400 series being released at the same time of any other new video cards, they are staggered, so once again, by the time the G400 for example hits the market, there is a new chipset from another company that takes it up one notch.

Nvidia problems - I am not going to get into a fight over which is better, but you can't tell me that Matrox drivers are that much better. Of course Nvidia takes times to get a good set of drivers out. Matrox use to deliver drivers on a frequent basis, now they trickle out, with as many bugs as they solved, take a look at 5.3. Great they solved many bugs, but look at all the new problems they create. Also if I am not wrong, Matrox has been promising ICD drivers with all their products, and their best effort has yielded, what, a driver good for 4 titles. I am sorry to say that doesn't make Matrox any more solid. Matrox can't even get their own equipment to work with their drivers. If you doubt me, I ask you please to check out the Desktop Video Forum or read the text file, and you will see that the drivers won't work with their own DVD module or player. So I would not say that Matrox is any better at having perfection and instead like all are continuing to improve their cards.


Paul, in regards to the 30fps, that is 0-30fps, anything beyond the 30fps is not seen by the human eye, this did not mean 30fps between results. So between the 1st and 30th frame you will see a difference, but between the 50th and 80th (using your example) that is correct you probably won't notice any difference as you are above the 30fps base. Hoped this clarified the issue.

Tim Barnes
President
Barnes and Associates
Matrox Solutions Provider

[Rags]

Tim,

I don't remember the G400 series being released at the same time of any other new video cards, they are staggered, so once again, by the time the G400 for example hits the market, there is a new chipset from another company that takes it up one notch.

If you are saying that people need the best thing out are going to get a new card every 6 months due to what you said here, you really should get off of the crack. Basically by this definition, then the lifecycle of the video card is really about 3months. Because, about every three months, a mfr releases a new video card...BUT this does not mean that the card released is any better. We are really talking about chipset "generations" when we are talking about a product life cycle. This means that when a new generation of cards that contains a SIGNIFICANT amount of improvements/changes, we have a new life cycle. I DO NOT consider the TNT moving to the TNT2 anything more than a ramp up of card speed, all the TNT2 is is a higher clocked TNT with more agressive memory timings. We will see the same thing with the GeSpot, we will see in 6months, the card that was really meant to change the world, by this time, the other mfrs already have an answer and are on a par with what nVidia is doing, so there goes that 6 month lifecycle you were just talking about. Think about it for a minute, it will eventually sink in.

Matrox can't even get their own equipment to work with their drivers. If you doubt me, I ask you please to check out the Desktop Video Forum or read the text file, and you will see that the drivers won't work with their own DVD module or player. So I would not say that Matrox is any better at having perfection and instead like all are continuing to improve their cards.

First of all the DVD module and it's player are products of ZORAN, not Matrox. The problem with the incompatibility is the fact that Zoran has not bothered to make a patch for the Module and player to be compatible with PD5.x. Yeah, go on and blame Matrox, but what can they do about it??? Are they supposed to support everything out there that hooks to their cards with drivers??? If you think so, just take a trip over to creative's website or Diamond's check the revision date for their drivers for their TNT solutions...That's right, April...FREAKING APRIL. Hell, at least G200 owners have the choice of dropping the module and installing new drivers that improve performance and offer more compatibility for applications, or stick with PD 4.x and keep the module/player.

If I was from 3dfx or a regional sales manger for them, I bet you would want to know that so you would know my comments might be slightly biased.

Personally, I could care less where you work or who you are. If I were interested, I would do what most people would do in the event your "signature" were missing, I would CHECK YOUR PROFILE>>>THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR.

Have a great night.

Rags

[Livius]

Hi again!

1. Those of you guys who are calling people arses just because they are a bit more formal (and, admittedly, more… “elaborate”) that what you’re accustomed to are showing an incredible exercise in bad taste.

2. Tim – contrary to what you might believe writing short messages is often an advantage. Concision is important especially when you write online.

3. Although I have to admit that Matrox followers are generally more interesting people than nVidia followers (and have better forums, that’s for sure), you cannot take from nVidia what properly belongs to nVidia. Ever since I had my first G200 card I also had a TNT for my second system and then a TNT2 (in the meantime I sold my second system, but that’s another story). First, although the TNT is by no means a match for Matrox in the 2D image dept. (the difference is visible even at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 – I only have a 17”), it is probably the next, clearly better than 3dfx or S3 or Intel. Second, the stability of TNT/2-based products is amazing. I’ve never encountered one problem with either the TNT and TNT2. (I could not say the same about Matrox.) And while it’s true that nVidia releases drivers more slowly, that’s in virtue of the fact that they do not need to rush new drivers to the market so often. Third, nVidia knows how to choose a marketing target – they build products for gamers and gamers only. Not for graphics designers, CAD artists, or what else. And fourth, they do manage to release new products faster than the rest. While in itself this is not something necessarily good, it is certainly not bad as long as they (more or less) match their own hype, which they actually do. This being said, you cannot take from Matrox what properly belongs to Matrox – QUALITY. Do I choose quality over speed/relative stability? Anytime.

4. As a matter of fact I have accepted the decision to exchange the Max (my beloved Max) for a Marvel G200 PCI (Euro) with a TV Tuner and memory addon. It took a lot of brooding, but, honestly, what does the G400 offer over a G200: speed (lots of it), a few worthwhile gaming features (EMBM), and DualHead. While the DH is a genuine loss, I am not a hardcore or even a moderate gamer. And the G200 can meet moderate gaming needs. 2D is great, 3D still adequate (33fps in Expendable 640x480 guys!) and I finally got my TV without sacrificing a PCI or going through irksome problems (read RRG).

5. And a strange thing – did you know the Marvel G200 has 6ns SDRAM (mine at least, made by Hyundai). (The addon has 7ns SDRAM, though).

Livius

[Elvon]

I'm glad your happy Livius :-)

I got the figure of 6 months for 3d cards from my C.S. Prof at Edinburgh University when we discusted it at a tutorial.

I don't know where he got it, and frankly don't much care, it sounds about right (Refer to Tim's comments about increasing requirements of games).

Personally, I want my MAX to last about a year or more. I don't play games. Therefore the 3d speed was not the most important part of the G400.

But, if you bought it for it's ablity as a 3d accellerator, then after 6 months you may be disappointed. Probably a GPU would be need to run some of the more polygon intensive games. (have a look at the treemark demo if you think the Max will still be all right)

I hope this was not too long.

Glynn

[paulcs]

I actually see benefit in taking an existing technology, improving upon it, and then releasing it as a new product. There were issues with the TNT upon its release, I'm sure, that were long fixed when the TNT2 was released. The Voodoo3, admittedly not the most feature rich board in the world, installed for most people like a charm, and worked exactly as advertised, with performance benefits over an SLI rig that 3dfx actually downplayed.

If a Max II is released in January, based upon the G400 chipset, but with tangible performance benefits, I know I'd jump on it. Think about it: a faster Max with no driver issues. Sound like providence to me.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Smiff]

Paul it sounds good yes but why would a new bit of hardware (say a 0.18 micron higher clocked G400) not have driver issues? - in the case of the TNT/TNT2 they use (pretty much) the same driver

[paulcs]

I guess driver issues are always a possibility. But when Matrox shrunk the core on the G200, I didn't hear of any new driver issues. It's the same chip. Just smaller.

I'd suspect that in January, most of the existing driver issues with the G400 will be resolved, and again, we're talking about a board built with existing technology. Let's say, and this is purely hyperthetical, yields improve at NEC, and Matrox finds itself with chips that can run at 175 MHz. Like the Max, the mythical Max II should use the same (improved) drivers as the vanilla. This board, while probably not a worthwhile investment for Max owners, would represent a dramatic improvement over the G400 vanilla.

If your an nVidia user, and (pre-release lies aside), you pretty much know well in advance what they have up their sleeves, I think the trick is to ignore that first board, wait six months, and get yourself a GForce2. Or if you're currently residing in Matrox Fantasy Camp, downing tequilla shots with the Matrox Fairy, the G450 UltraMax.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[motub]

All right... I would have posted last night, but Netscape crashed, taking my answer with it... probably an omen, but I'm hardheaded.

Rags: I'm sure I'm going to repeat much of what you say, so I'm glad you were here if I couldn't be

sabertooth007 (Tim)... I can see that we have a root-level communications problem here... we seem to be speaking from fundamentally different points of view. It's hard to tell if this is the professional/user divide, or something else, so I will try this in very small words, and see if we can find some kind of common ground for a reasonable discussion.

Your post was long, so I'll just

Also don't forget the other options including USB. I have recently tested a USB TV/FM tuner, and it actually was pretty good.

See? Common ground already... you must have missed my post of several links to USB tuners with prices and reviews ... (you're new here; that's a joke about my alter ego, "Lee Meriwether, Assistant Extraordinaire", who is fond of searching out links )

If you buy the Rainbow Runner you are putting yourself into a position in the future that when you upgrade, you will have to get another Matrox or the RRG won't work (and there is not guarantee that it will either or that Matrox will still be around

All right, I suppose I can accept this, I guess I can see the fact that I upgraded my video card doesn't mean I no longer want the TV-tuner and/or video capture capabilities... which is why I would probably get a USB device, and not a different internal card... because compatibility is a b*tch, and who's to say that "yesterday's technology" in terms of video capture is going to be any more useable than the RR-G??? You know how aggressive Voodoo cards are, and even Matrox cards are pretty choosy about the conditions under which they'll run... so you think that the Savage2000, or the GeForce Mach 2 is going to want some other card competing for it's "bells-and-whistles" space?? I wouldn't be so sure of that, if I were you... which of course, I'm not... My point is that at least we have seen the RR-G carry over one generation, there is at least some chance it might make it to the next, historically speaking.... but if one was concerned that it would not, I don't think that ANY internal card would be an acceptable solution.

And now we come to the heart of the matter:

I am not saying you have to upgrade every six months. But if you look at the current trend a card you bought six months ago is yesterdays technology now. Is the G200 a good card, yes and no. For most it still is a good choice, but in the long run, it is now surpassed by other chipsets. Not just for FPS (see comment below) but on features, reliability, compatability, and performance.

DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, TIM!!! The most common misconception I see made by new vistors to these forums is this: <u>Matrox users are looking for the same thing as, say, Nvidia users (or, heaven help us, 3dfx users), in a video card.</u> Quite obviously, we are <u>not</u>!!!

For pete's sake, do you think we don't know we don't have the fastest video card??? Or the most stable OpenGL performance? Or the most compatible drivers??? I bought my G200 last December-- and I'm a SS7/VIA user, so there's <u>nothing</u> you can tell me that I have not experienced myself or seen on my months on these forums. Ask any of the old timers, and you'll hear much the same... read a few months back and you'll see the theme emerge... What <u>we</u> care about is something else!!!

Naturally, for many of us, it's image quality... you may have been lurking during the time my .sig went from "G200, Wicked 3DV2" to ".. soon to be pulling that d*mn V2" to "finally! the PD drivers are good enough that I can ditch the V2, hurrah!!" Because I could finally play HL (Half-Life, if you're not a gamer) without it looking like a turd on toast...even if it was "slower" according to some benchmarks I could care less about.

The Matrox Defenders (or 'Army of the Church of M') call ourselves so, it seems, because we constantly combat this assumption that just because a "faster" chipset, or a "next-gen" feature (GPU or this new 3dfx thing) show up, <u>the reasons that we bought our GXXX card are no longer valid</u>, having been superceded by the "next great thing". This may be true of other video card users, but it does not seem to be true of Matrox users, in my experience.

Secondly, this 6 month thing is a crock (and I've heard it from others besides you) because it takes at <u>least</u> three months for[list=1][*]production to ramp up;[*]drivers to become stable (especially if new mobo chipsets are being released near the same time);[*]developers to implement new features in great enough numbers to make it worth one's while.[/list=a]

So now we're talking 9 months... and by that time, manufacturers are starting to drum up excitement for their next, even <u>greater</u> thing... so where are you then??? Saying "yesterday's technology" is like painting a sign on yourself saying "Please, lead my around by the nose, you sales and marketing machine, you...! Just take my money, I don't need it...!" After all, who <u>told</u> you it was "yesterday's technology"? Gee, the same people who sold it to you yesterday... and have something new (they claim) today... In NYC, we call that a "shell game"... and it's illegal...

It's not a game many Matrox users seem interested in playing. We're happy (at least I am) when good benchmark numbers or reviews come out... because it means that for once we can shut all these fps/3DMark junkies up, and get back to what we're more interested in... enjoying features which remain unduplicated by ANY of these supposedly superior cards, and the unparallelled image quality... and the fact that we don't have to blow $250-$300 every 6 months, that we could use on... oh, CPU upgrades, DVD's, games... like that.

Instead you need to make sure that your card can keep pace with the ever changing graphics market. So if you buy a card strictly due to brand loyalty and their cards don't keep in line with technology, you are wasting your money.

Well, naturally. But can someone tell me what has changed so much about Photoshop, or AutoCAD, or Director, that I need to "keep up" with? There is Q3, and UT of course... and someday there'll be Daiktana (we hope) and DN4Ever (we really hope) and maybe those I'll have to "keep up" with... but if I can't, it'll just have to wait till I'm ready to upgrade, <U>NOT</U> the other way around...!

Anyways, sorry to have gone on so long (longer than you, in fact... ). Probably I just don't get why you go to all the trouble to put "Matrox Solution Provider" in your title (and go through the process of being authorized to do that... that is an official designation, isn't it?), when you don't seem to think that Matrox is much of a solution at all... but then, maybe things in "the channel" are much different then they look from out here in user-land.

------------------
Holly

[This message has been edited by motub (edited 01 November 1999).]