Buy GTS2 or wait for G800 ??

[Darin]

Jeff,
If it makes you feel any better... my first video card purchase was a Matrox Ultima 2+. 3d accelleration didn't even exist then. It didn't do well on games at all. But it had the fastest Windows graphics around. Price: $500+

Looks like we're coming full circle.

[Zyn]

Dionysis - Radeon does do EMBM, in its fullest.

Lets look at matrox for a second, even when their brand new products come out, they are still slower then the competition, G400Max never once beat out the UltraTNT2 in any benches, why would the g800 be any different ?

mj12- Even if you are not a gamer, why would anyone pay the same outrageous price for a non-gamer card? $250 for the Max when it came out, TNT2 was better performing, for a faster price.

The GeForce2 prices are simply ridiculous right now, but they are still the way to go for hardcore gamers, everyone remembers paying $600 for 2 voodoo2's 12mb, so whats the difference now.

Cleary, the GeForces these days runs circles around a G400Max, the GeForce2 will ass-rape the G450 in every way shape or form, EMBM is cool, but most *matrox* owners aren't big gamers, so why concern yourself anyways.

Nvidia, as said by PaulS, comes out with better drivers faster, in win2k this could be proved very worthy, as matrox has crap for their own g400 line right now, Im on a G400max and win2k, and the drivers suck ass.

I dont see any reason to wait for the g800, If I was even considering an upgrade, I say go Geforce2 all the way.

------------------
G400 on a G400

[Cloudy]

Hold yer horses there Zyn...
Check out www.aceshardware.com, you'll see a 12 video cards benchmark shootout and the G400 MAX did quite a nice job there considering his old age. It did kick some TNT2U ass and I don't know about you, but I really like the DH cause I can surf the net while playing a DVD in my living room tv (yes I have cables running all the way through the wall). I'v never seen such a good TV-out anywhere b4. The G400 is sufficient for my need right now, and if you read the comments in the benchmark, you'll find it's a cheaper and better solution to upgrade your CPU.

Maggi, asus wrote that they don't support dual coppermines, do you know anything about this bs ?

------------------
Cloudy
Asus P2B-DS, 2 x Celeron 400@75Mhz, 128Mb Ram, SB Live! Platinum,
2 x IBM 4.3Gb scsi,IBM 22GB IDE, Pioneer DVD ROM scsi, G400 32MB DH (Oc to 150/200).

[Cypro]

Maggy,

I can't find that UDMA setting!

Where is it?

Cypro

[Maggi]

Hi Guys !

Cloudy:

never heard of before and if you follow the link I posted earlier, you'll find a table which states clearly that an Asus P2B-DS supports Slot 1 Coppermines from rev 1.06 onwards ... and what's the main feature of their 'D' series ???

What rev is your board ?

Cypro:

RTFM ...

in the chipset features menu on the left hand side:

"IDE Ultra DMA MODE" is defaulted to 'Auto' ... set to 'disabled' and let it fly.


Cheerio,
Maggi

[Maggi]

uhm ... btw ... I am supposed to get a new working rig:

Asus P2B-D running two P3-600E ...

Machine is already running, but needs some more software installations before I can start abusing it ... I'll keep you posted !

Cheers,
Maggi

[Cloudy]

Maggi,

They've put "****" near the asus P2B-D and DS, "****" means no dual coppermine support yet...

------------------
Cloudy
Asus P2B-DS, 2 x Celeron 400@75Mhz, 128Mb Ram, SB Live! Platinum,
2 x IBM 4.3Gb scsi,IBM 22GB IDE, Pioneer DVD ROM scsi, G400 32MB DH (Oc to 150/200).

[Maggi]

better rub your eyes, m8 ...

true, they have ****, but the index states:

**** The P3B-1394, P2-99, P2B-D, P2B-DS,P2B-F, P2B-L, P2B-LS, P2B-S, and P2B-VM can be supported by Coppermine CPU in the later shipment of the same PCB version. Please contact with our reseller for detail information.

***** No Dual Coppermine CPU support yet

... see what I mean ???

count those stars again ...

[Maggi]

uhm ... btw, those 5 stars indicate no dual-coppermine-FCPGA support !!!

but there are also Slot 1 Cumines available ...

[Cloudy]

Alrighty then !!!
I think I do have a revision 1.06 at home, so I can go all the way to a dual 896Mhz (8x112) with my board !
This could be some real BeOS / Linux rockin machine !
Now I just neet to get some money...
Thanks Maggi.

------------------
Cloudy
Asus P2B-DS, 2 x Celeron 400@75Mhz, 128Mb Ram, SB Live! Platinum,
2 x IBM 4.3Gb scsi,IBM 22GB IDE, Pioneer DVD ROM scsi, G400 32MB DH (Oc to 150/200).

[Maggi]

Go !

[Corwin_Brute]

Zyn :
Who cares if the GeForce 2 GTS beats the G450 ? Certainly not Matrox nor the potential G450 buyers.
Let me try to explain this to you : these cards are not aimed at the same audience, right ? The G450 is a less expensive G400, whose aim is to offer a cheap DualHead solution. And every benchmark, test, and comparison will probably say that the G450 does DH better than the GeForce 2, which (although many FUD as floated around the Net) doesn't do it at all. If you can find retail G450 (which will be difficult), they will probably priced about half the price of the GF2.

You see, for most people out there, life does not revolve around Quake 3 benchmarks. Some people like having a cheap computer, some like to work with it, or play DVDs... Not everyone's PC is just a souped-up game console.

------------------
Corwin the Brute

[Pace]

Yes I agree Corwin. I've got a TNT2 just now but I want to 'upgrade' to a G400. May not seem unusual to us but to gamers they'll think it funny! I want DualHead (and better 2D at UXGA!). I'd still like to play Q3 at 2048x1536x32 though (with FSAA ). Maybe G800 will provide. With TripleHead too (or maybe Matrox don't want to compete with their own MMS boards).

Paul.

[dmerola]

I want G800!!!!!!!!

by

[MrPeanut]

Corwin... It's funny that you say: "You see, for most people out there, life does not revolve around Quake 3 benchmarks. Some people like having a cheap computer, some like to work with it, or play DVDs... Not everyone's PC is just a souped-up game console."

Then why do most people compare their G400's with games then business apps and such? You see the G400 is a great card for business use. But it falls flat on its face when it comes to gaming in todays times.. Maybe back then when the TNT2 chipset was out and about. But since the GeForce and the GeForce2 are now out. It is not even in the same ball park.

Maybe you don't compare your G400 with games. but most of the majority does. And well the person who started the thread like the GeForce2 GTS benchmarks.

By your first post: "A G400 is (I think) enough to wait for the G800" it is obviously you don't play in high resolution for games. I'm taking about 1280x1024x32-bit. With todays games and such. ex. Soldier of Fortune and NFS: Porsche. Playing at that resolution would probably be choppy on the G400 MAX. Especially if you didn't have a good CPU. We all know how CPU hungry the G400 is.

Ever heard of fill rates ? the GeForce 2 GTS has a nice 800mega fill rate to the G400 max with the 333mega fill rate.. When it comes to playing in high resolution. The G400 MAX chokes.. It's been seen in the benchmarks and well if you want a descent OGL experience stay away from Matrox. 47 fps @ 1024x768x32bit is not what i call good at todays standards...

So to the person who started the thread. Get a GeForce2 GTS. You'll probably be better off with it...

[This message has been edited by MrPeanut (edited 06 May 2000).]