It's hard being a Matrox fan, isn't it? I mean, you see all those new cards on the market sporting extraordinary performance figures and "revolutionary" technologies (TwinView, anyone?), and at the same time we, the core supporters of all things Matrox are stuck with the more-than-a-year-old G400 technology. Yeah sure we'll soon get the "G400 T&L" based cards (oops sorry I mean G450 :-) but it certainly isn't the technology leap we were expecting from Matrox, is it?
When the G400 was released last year, it blew away it's rivals at the time (TNT2, V3) performance-wise, whilst offering the visual quality we know and expect from a Matrox board. We know Matrox can lead the pack if they want to, so what's holding them up? I'm sick to the bone having every git with a GeForce SDR laughing at my face because I choose to support the company I've followed since the Mystique era, solely on a basis of TRUST for the product I will receive from them. Now I'm not sure I can trust Matrox enough to wait until the G800 is released, I mean who knows how well it will faire against the GeForce3 or the Voodoo6 or whatever.
Being hard pressed for an upgrade, I think I should go for a Voodoo5 for the time being (not much of a performer, but FSAA kicks ass - especially Nvidia's!). I'm sure I'm not the only fan Matrox has lost so far, and certainly not the last. Matrox may not have the mass of other graphics chip manufacturers, nor are they able to follow the six-month life cycle of graphics chips Nvidia has enforced on the consumer market, but they've got the cash (check out the U.S. campaign they're preparing for the G450 - eugh), they can shove it towards R&D instead of P.R. We know quality comes at a price and yes we're willing to pay more to get it, so what's the problem?
Sorry if I sound a bit bitter, it's hard making a transition after all these years...
------------------
Currently powered by:
P3 600EB@700, Matrox G400 32MB DH, QDI Advance 9, 128MB PC133 Goldstar
When the G400 was released last year, it blew away it's rivals at the time (TNT2, V3) performance-wise, whilst offering the visual quality we know and expect from a Matrox board. We know Matrox can lead the pack if they want to, so what's holding them up? I'm sick to the bone having every git with a GeForce SDR laughing at my face because I choose to support the company I've followed since the Mystique era, solely on a basis of TRUST for the product I will receive from them. Now I'm not sure I can trust Matrox enough to wait until the G800 is released, I mean who knows how well it will faire against the GeForce3 or the Voodoo6 or whatever.
Being hard pressed for an upgrade, I think I should go for a Voodoo5 for the time being (not much of a performer, but FSAA kicks ass - especially Nvidia's!). I'm sure I'm not the only fan Matrox has lost so far, and certainly not the last. Matrox may not have the mass of other graphics chip manufacturers, nor are they able to follow the six-month life cycle of graphics chips Nvidia has enforced on the consumer market, but they've got the cash (check out the U.S. campaign they're preparing for the G450 - eugh), they can shove it towards R&D instead of P.R. We know quality comes at a price and yes we're willing to pay more to get it, so what's the problem?
Sorry if I sound a bit bitter, it's hard making a transition after all these years...
------------------
Currently powered by:
P3 600EB@700, Matrox G400 32MB DH, QDI Advance 9, 128MB PC133 Goldstar
Comment